Sure. But since it doesnt make sense as a power source, the amount of shade is also irrelevant.
well, you writers have complete discretion on all matters of course
Collectively you have already taken 50km jump sails billowing above the JS into 1km sails hanging below, generally if not exclusively
Writers have basically turned JS on their heads once already
So nothing would stop you guys from hypothetically re-revising the rules and say moving the proximity points closer to the star
If anyone actually cares about numbers let me know, but it turns out that the general pattern of increasing recharge times... For decreasing stellar mass...
Is
qualitatively consistent 100%...
With the JS always residing as close to the star as it can get on 0.1G
If JS always "anchored" at the local 0.1G limit, at a point as "proximate" to the star as they could hover against at 0.1G
All of the qualitative features of the canon recharge table would be preserved
And you could harvest oodles more energy, during your ~1 week of recharging -- in fact the increase in energy capture would just about be equivalent to and exactly enough offset the 50:1 sail diameter reduction from proto canon to current canon, so you could argue you had a sort of justification
Such that the BTU would be much more realistic, and the canon depiction of stern straight starwards with a star shade stellar shield would make perfect sense to boot (as well as the implied rugged construction of the sails)
Nothing stops you guys from writing this into "DS&JS II", everyone just loves the visuals, so you have the power to tweak the numbers again for sake of realism and scientific accuracy
Of course nothing makes you make such updates either :)