3 ms·
There's always some dude on TV bragging, but I'd be skeptical. https://www.quora.com/How-powerful-are-the-cameras-on-modern-spy-satellites/answers/33871816 htt
by Nitramp 8y ago
There's always some dude on TV bragging, but I'd be skeptical.
https://www.quora.com/How-powerful-are-the-cameras-on-modern-spy-satellites/answers/33871816 https://www.quora.com/How-powerful-are-the-cameras-on-modern...
TL;DR is that satellites have a 9 cm resolution at best. That's not enough to see a golf ball (4 cm diameter), and far away from discovering a producer's imprint on it.
With drones you can get an order of magnitude better, but that's still only barely enough to find said golf ball, and not enough to read fine print.
- mhh__ 8y agoWho said it has to a be a satellite?
- robotresearcher 8y agojjeaff did. > He was explaining that the satellite maps provided to the public
- genericid 8y ago> compared to what the government is able to see. That does not imply satellite maps.
- robotresearcher 8y agoI guess you can read it that way if you try. But neither I or the other commenter got that meaning.
- genericid 8y ago> if you try Please refrain from baseless accusations. Thank you.
- jjeaff 8y agoProbably right. But my guess is that the actual ability of current satellite photography is highly classified.
- rurban 8y agoThese pictures are from 3D flyovers, not satellite. They usually flyover every year, mostly municipial, not by country.