"You do realize the size of individual scopes is not what makes the most progress..."
I ALREADY 'realized' that.
When will Sonhouse 'enlighten' me about the fact that telescopes on Earth are
constrained by atmospheric conditions when telescopes in space are not?
You still have something wrong here. Earth's atmosphere affects OPTICAL telescopes big time but the low frequencies, say 1mm wavelength, or larger, aren't as severely affected by atmospheric blobs. One effect that was measurable though, at 5 and 10 Ghz, on a microwave audio link, my transmitter system was called Microwave Troposcatter communications and there, if you put up a beam with a decent dish and aimed it say to the horizon for max range, there are atmospheric blobs of partially ionized air 'bubbles' floating around the troposphere and they can absorb or reflect the RF coming up from ground level
So Troposcatter communications used TWO separate dishes about 10 meters apart and shooting TWO identical signals up into the atmosphere. So at the other end there is also two dishes and because the average size of the partially ionized blobs are less than ten meters in diameter, like invisible balloons of small pockets of ionized air at around 30,000 meters or so up. So the signal from one dish alone would render a S/N ratio of basically zero to near perfect, randomly up and down.
But if two dishes are used like I said, one dish gets a signal through because the S/N ratio of one dish may fluctuate all over the place, if you have a signal combiner, one signal is up while the other is down so one or the other is up and thus you get near perfect communications in spite of the atmospheric blobs.
At other frequencies that is not so much of a problem but that is changing the angle of deflection of a signal from a dish spewing energy UP from the ground but from the other direction and more vertically oriented signals like a radio telescope it doesn't seem to be that much of a problem, maybe because the dish is a lot larger than the partially ionized blobs floating around.
There was an attempt to advance that art by using a single dish that used multiple frequencies where the two ends of the links would talk to each other, 'Chan 2 is good, chan 5 went down, and so forth, frequency hopping at a high enough rate that you also got near 100% signal due to the fact those blobs were also highly frequency dependent. But sat technology took over all that work and that technology died on the vine.
I imagine if you could replace the TRC 90 unit I worked on, replaced the dish with a 30 meter wide dish there would not be so much of a problem but of course that would not be so transportable. And of course all that stuff has been replaced with sat com decades ago so it is a moot point now. Stars just don't twinkle as much at RF frequencies as they do at light or IR or UV. And of course there is not that much UV able to penetrate the atmosphere so it is up to Hubble and the like to see that band of light and even trickier kinds of telescopes to focus x rays, the Russian Doll kind of scopes that just nudges the radiation into a bend using a LOT of smaller and smaller barrels that end up making a half ass attempt at a real focus. Not as good as optical scopes but you get to see a lot more high energy events.