3 ms·
Depending on wavelength, if you've got a ~meter aperture for taking pictures and you're 200km away, you should be able to see ~10cm details. But one got as clo
by Robotbeat 7y ago
Depending on wavelength, if you've got a ~meter aperture for taking pictures and you're 200km away, you should be able to see ~10cm details.
But one got as close as 20km (in which case, 1cm details...): https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1223420130576818176 https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1223420130576818176
- monadic2 7y agoSurely at that resolution atmospheric noise would dominate, even at 20km (which is crazy close for a satellite, right? There’s non negligible atmospheric drag at that height).
- 0xTJ 7y agoAssuming that there's even 1% as much atmosphere up there, 20km is like 200m, making some very rough assumptions that I'm not sure are substantiated. If you've got a big camera, you can make out a huge amount of detail. At 20km, with the advanced technology that you'd assume is on this thing, they'd be able to see a lot.
- aaron695 7y ago> Assuming that there's even 1% as much atmosphere up there I think it's way less than .00000000001% ~0%
- wcoenen 7y ago> atmospheric noise would dominate, even at 20km 20 km distance between the satellites, not 20 km altitude! Those satellites actually have an elliptical orbit with an altitude between 276 km and 1010 km.
- Robotbeat 7y agoHuh, why are you downvoted? This is absolutely correct. There's effectively no atmosphere up there for optical purposes.