Superresolution techniques require pretty good source data to start with, and that source data usually needs slight offsets between each frame (dithering.) Without a tracking mount, you will see field rotation in the corners of the frames, and that will greatly diminish your ability to align and stack, let alone apply superresolution. Distortion mapping can be done to correct distortion among frames, however that is algorithmically complex, and I only know of one software package that really does that well.

Your looking to surmount a number of very high hurdles to produce "superresolution wide field" astrophotography without a mount. You could get significantly better results, and actually make the concept viable, if you just add a tracking mount. That would eliminate most problems (assuming no landscape was visible in the field). For superresolution ("drizzling", as it's usually called in the astro world) to be effective, you need to dither between each sub frame, and you need LOTS of sub frames. To gain an increase in resolution, at the cost of noise, you can drizzle 20-30 sub frames of the same region of sky, and that would improve resolution. Drizzling works in such a way that it trades off the noise reduction you get with straight stacking to improve resolution. To get both resolution enhancement and noise reduction via stacking, you need more on the order of 200 sub frames...of the same region of sky.

Now, if you are looking to do a high resolution, low noise panoramic view of the night sky (milky way), then your probably looking at getting multiple panels of overlapping regions of the sky, with about 200 sub frames each. If you want a four panel panorama, you're looking at 800 sub frames. Assuming you're going with 30 second subs, that would be nearly 7 hours of total exposure time. Ultra wide panoramas like this usually require a few extra panels to plug in the holes that occur as the panels are distortion corrected (warped) to fit properly with each other...so instead of four panels, you might actually need seven, which extends the exposure time into the 12 hour range, so multiple nights.

Drizzling can certainly improve the detail of a final image, but it is really not actually all that necessary in the end. With a tracking mount, you can get away with only using one frame per panel in a mosaic if you have dark skies (which are usually necessary for milky way imaging.) Drizzling is usually more effective for wide field DSO (which is much narrower than your average milky way image). With a medium-wide focal length of 50mm to 250mm, one frame per panel, and an effective tracking mount, you can get some very nice results: