Military satellite technology

[arkady]

I've been wondering how effective surveillance satellite technology have become nowadays. Is it actually possible to identify individuals from space ?<br /><br />If so, how effective would you guess such a system could be, as seen from a operational perspective ? Can an area be constantly surveyed, and what is the response time ?<br /><br /><br />(And no, I'm not planning a crime. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> Just been wondering, and haven't had much luck finding info on myself) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>

 

[yevaud]

Maybe barely, in a few circumstances. But the resolution will be several meters, no smaller. Optical depth of even a still atmosphere and using adaptive optics would see to that, I'd think. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[Boris_Badenov]

They can read a license plate from LEO & tell the difference between a cantaloupe & a grapefruit, but cannot keep a spot under continuous surveillance with just one satellite. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[arkady]

Hehe, wonder what a cantaloupe is. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />And I was imagining a network of satellites. No idea how many it'd take to get a reasonable response time. Haven't such a program been proposed ? I can imagine it would be difficult to make it secret however. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>

 

[qso1]

Boris1961:<br />They can read a license plate from LEO & tell the difference between a cantaloupe & a grapefruit, but cannot keep a spot under continuous surveillance with just one satellite.<br /><br />Me:<br />AFAIK, its never been confirmed that spysats can or cannot read lisense plates from orbit as that information is classified. One of the first images to be leaked out to the press was a KH-11 image of a Soviet shipyard but the image was nowhere near lisense plate reading resolution. This was an image released 20 plus years ago and even at that time the lisense plate reading story was floating around.<br /><br />However, I wouldn't doubt a lisense plate can be read from orbit, especially within recent years when we know from Google Earth images that the resolution of commercial satellites is pretty high which logic follows, milsats would be higher yet.<br /><br />And yes, a satellite in low orbit cannot do continuous surveillance of a specific location. It could in geosynch but the altitude would decrease the maximum resolution. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[propforce]

I wonder if Google Earth's satellite image would show someone sunbathing in her backyard, just a thought as I have this really nice looking neighbor..... <br /><br />It certainly would help if I can... ummm... read her license plate.... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[qso1]

I've looked at lots of free Google Earth stuff accessible from sightseebyspace.com and one of the things that I noticed is the absence of people in the images. I've seen cars, could even zoom on places like Europe and see cars driving on the opposite side of the road. The image resolution is not detailed enough to read lisense plates.<br /><br />I think the reason people do not show up might have to do with exposure times but cars on the road should be invisible for that reason so maybe they are there and too small to be imaged.<br /><br />As a side note of sorts, I even looked at the North Korea ICBM site and noticed no vehicles at all at or around the site. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"...wonder what a cantaloupe is."</font><br /><br />Assuming that was a serious question...Cantaloupe. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[arkady]

Haha, thanks Swampcat <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="yellow"> arkady Hehe, wonder what a cantaloupe is. </font><br /> Duhhhh<img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /><br />qso1<br /> I’ve seen a pic of this<img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /><br />propforce<br /> Maybe you would prefer seeing her cantaloupes<img src="/images/icons/blush.gif" /><br /> swampcat<br /> Thank you <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[qso1]

Now all we need is a rutabaga, or is it rubarb? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Checked the image at the link where the guy in the UK says he was imaged. I'm not so sure about that one because it was rather blurry and what were supposed to be the guys looked like rather squarish objects. But maybe since one of them said something about laying around, they were on lawn chairs.<br /><br />Another one had a guy casting a shadow which looked more like what I'd expect a person to look like. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="yellow"> "Now all we need is a rutabaga, or is it rubarb? "</font><br /> A rutabaga is a vegetable, like a really big turnip. A ruhbarb is a very tart relative of the ginger & tulip family, it mixes well with strawberries to make a sweet & tart pie filling. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

I haven't used Google Earth yet, but if you look at the area around Old Faithful in Yellowstone (specifically, the walkways near the main building) you can see what are definitely people. It took me a while to figure out what they were, but they definitely are people. You can't tell anything about them -- they're just tiny blobs. But they have to be people, based on where you see them. They're only on the pavement, they space about like pedestrians automatically do, and they're the right size. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Even with cutting-edge military and surveillance technologies, you won't get a hell of a lot better resolution than that. Perhaps (as I'd mentioned earlier) around 3 meters, give-or-take. Too many physical constraints to resolve images better. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[nyarlathotep]

<font color="yellow">I haven't used Google Earth yet, but if you look at the area around Old Faithful in Yellowstone (specifically, the walkways near the main building) you can see what are definitely people. It took me a while to figure out what they were, but they definitely are people.</font><br /><br />Those photographs were taken from a low flying aircraft.

 

[nexium]

What details can can be seen with the Hubble telescope pointed at Earth. It is unlikely the best military survalance can see details 1/4 as large. Neil

 

[webtaz99]

Hubble can point at Earth, but it won't produce good images. It was built with too long a focal length. Google this, its been discussed a billion times. <br /><br />The bottom line is:<br /><br />How good are military spy satellites? As good as Uncle Sam can afford. The problem with satellites is not resolution, but orbit. Things can be moved/hidden while no birds are overhead. That's why unmanned recon planes are a hot ticket right now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[mdodson]

You can buy imagery from the French at 1-meter resolution. <br /><br />A satellite in a low orbit is going 17,000+ mph. And you need extra fuel, and perhaps a special launch site to get an orbit that covers populous North American latitudes. The easy orbit from Canaveral gets you no higher than 28.5.<br />You need something like http://www.choppercam.net/ to check out your neighbor and her rutabagas.

 

[yevaud]

<i>You can buy imagery from the French at 1-meter resolution.</i><br /><br />True, but it's not good enough a resolution for military purposes. Commercial, yes. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[oscar1]

A cantaloupe? In South Africa we call it "spanspek"; that at least sounds as juicy as this sweet fruit is.

 

[larper]

But, "spek" is bacon. My mom used to use spek to refer to headcheese as well. (Assuming South African lingo derives from Dutch).<br /><br />Somehow, I don't see spanspek as being more descriptive of cantaloupe. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

CalliArcale:<br />I haven't used Google Earth yet, but if you look at the area around Old Faithful in Yellowstone (specifically, the walkways near the main building)<br /><br />Me:<br />That answers that question. I just picked spots where there were either nobody around, or I didn't recognize them. Another thing about the images. The Google images are one time deals, that is...shot once at some specific time and the same image is used until replaced with better ones. An example would be a suburb of London being imaged in 2002. One would have to know exactly where and when they were to know if they were...Googled.<br /><br />BTW, some of the images are made by aircraft and patched into the map. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[why06]

Hello this is my first time osting in a while and its good to be back to this forum,<br /><br />Looking at Google Earth I can see indidisual cars along the street...even people. Knowing that I bet millitary sattelites are much better...<br />...Kind of scary!<br />Also checkout my own site at http://www.freepowerboards.com/nettalk/nettalk.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[henryhallam]

All the high res Google Earth images are from aerial photography, not satellites.