8 ms·

I did not realize that the Keyhole line of spy sats had a resolution of 4" from 200 miles away! That tech is at least a decade old, so imagine what exists today

I did not realize that the Keyhole line of spy sats had a resolution of 4" from 200 miles away! That tech is at least a decade old, so imagine what exists today.

Afforess 6y ago
You don't have to imagine. Trump leaked a satellite photo from a spy satellite last year. Wired has a great piece on it: https://www.wired.com/story/trump-tweeted-a-sensitive-photo-internet-sleuths-decoded-it/ https://www.wired.com/story/trump-tweeted-a-sensitive-photo-...
- casefields 6y ago
  The president doesn't leak per se. He's the ultimate authority on classification, therefore by releasing top secret material he has declassified it.
  - NotSammyHagar 6y ago
    Trump disclosed something that he should not have done and wouldn't have done if he had a brain in his head. Not technically leaking is separate from something that did not help the country. It was a stupid action - of course not your point.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - flyinglizard 6y ago
      First, the picture was not released in full resolution. It was a photo of a print of a photo. Second, there is also value to letting your adversaries know what you are capable of. Just think of the hassle of hiding activities from a satellite like that - surely it takes a huge operational toll. No matter what, it sounds to me like releasing the picture is within the presidential oversight. He was not naming spies or anything.
    - oh_sigh 6y ago
      What was so stupid about the action? Do you know what, say, Iran or China knows about American satellites?
      - snypher 6y ago
        You seem to imply that the President is more aware of what information is available than the DOD. The DOD has never released non-degraded imagery. So it would seem stupid as it is contrary to standard security practice. Are you suggesting it was ok for this pic to be released, and why?
      - neotek 6y ago
        Yes, I know that they know the precise location and imaging capabilities of the classified USA 224 reconnaissance satellite, thanks to this boneheaded security leak by the President of the United States of America.
        oh_sigh 6y ago
        Orange man bad
kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
Atmospheric scattering puts a bound on the practical lower limit. It's not much less than 4".
- flyinglizard 6y ago
  Can that be overcome with computational photography?
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    I'm neither an astronomer nor an imaging expert, but I've read that ground-based telescopes use "lucky imaging" plus deformable mirrors to work around atmospheric distortion. Maybe something analogous works in the reverse direction.
    - de_watcher 6y ago
      For deformable mirrors they shine a control beam into the sky. A spy satellite would have to shine it downwards.
      - krisoft 6y ago
        Can you use a known object which is illuminated by the sun?
        rocqua 6y ago
        Given that people have called this 'wavefront based correction' I would guess you need light source where all photons are 'in phase' like a laser. The sun is not such a source. However, I do not know near enough about physics to say the above with any degree of confidence.
  - bobmoretti 6y ago
    No matter what you do, you still have to deal with diffraction [1], which means the resolution is inversely proportional to the aperture. I think the Trump/Iran release was estimated to be pretty close to the diffraction limit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#Explanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#Explanation
CalChris 6y ago
Estimates from the Trump Nahir leak are 10 cm which is about 4". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-224 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-224
samstave 6y ago
its more than 25 years old. I used to have a neighbor who lived across from me in 1997 who was a designer of spy satellites, and i used to ask him questions about capabilities as he washed hid car and would wash the window in one direction for affirmative, another for negative. he intimated they could literally read a license plate from orbit in 1997
- dylan604 6y ago
  Sure, but when you can count the dimples on a golf ball, I'll be impressed. I can't even do that on my HD tv
oppositelock 6y ago
Oh, it's better than that. I've worked with NRO imagery, since they needed private industry's help in building some of their digital light table visualization tools, and in the 1990's, I've seen ~2" imagery which was provided for development. It looked like modern aerial imagery, with the difference being that there were no bands of discontinuity from stitching multiple photo sweeps together. That was 22 years and I can only imagine what they've got now.

I did not realize that the Keyhole line of spy sats had a resolution of 4" from 200 miles away! That tech is at least a decade old, so imagine what exists today.

Afforess 6y ago

You don't have to imagine. Trump leaked a satellite photo from a spy satellite last year. Wired has a great piece on it: https://www.wired.com/story/trump-tweeted-a-sensitive-photo-internet-sleuths-decoded-it/ https://www.wired.com/story/trump-tweeted-a-sensitive-photo-...

casefields 6y ago
The president doesn't leak per se. He's the ultimate authority on classification, therefore by releasing top secret material he has declassified it.
- NotSammyHagar 6y ago
  Trump disclosed something that he should not have done and wouldn't have done if he had a brain in his head. Not technically leaking is separate from something that did not help the country. It was a stupid action - of course not your point.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - flyinglizard 6y ago
    First, the picture was not released in full resolution. It was a photo of a print of a photo. Second, there is also value to letting your adversaries know what you are capable of. Just think of the hassle of hiding activities from a satellite like that - surely it takes a huge operational toll. No matter what, it sounds to me like releasing the picture is within the presidential oversight. He was not naming spies or anything.
  - oh_sigh 6y ago
    What was so stupid about the action? Do you know what, say, Iran or China knows about American satellites?
    - snypher 6y ago
      You seem to imply that the President is more aware of what information is available than the DOD. The DOD has never released non-degraded imagery. So it would seem stupid as it is contrary to standard security practice. Are you suggesting it was ok for this pic to be released, and why?
    - neotek 6y ago
      Yes, I know that they know the precise location and imaging capabilities of the classified USA 224 reconnaissance satellite, thanks to this boneheaded security leak by the President of the United States of America.
      - oh_sigh 6y ago
        Orange man bad

kevin_thibedeau 6y ago

Atmospheric scattering puts a bound on the practical lower limit. It's not much less than 4".

flyinglizard 6y ago
Can that be overcome with computational photography?
- nitrogen 6y ago
  I'm neither an astronomer nor an imaging expert, but I've read that ground-based telescopes use "lucky imaging" plus deformable mirrors to work around atmospheric distortion. Maybe something analogous works in the reverse direction.
  - de_watcher 6y ago
    For deformable mirrors they shine a control beam into the sky. A spy satellite would have to shine it downwards.
    - krisoft 6y ago
      Can you use a known object which is illuminated by the sun?
      - rocqua 6y ago
        Given that people have called this 'wavefront based correction' I would guess you need light source where all photons are 'in phase' like a laser. The sun is not such a source. However, I do not know near enough about physics to say the above with any degree of confidence.
- bobmoretti 6y ago
  No matter what you do, you still have to deal with diffraction [1], which means the resolution is inversely proportional to the aperture. I think the Trump/Iran release was estimated to be pretty close to the diffraction limit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#Explanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#Explanation

CalChris 6y ago

Estimates from the Trump Nahir leak are 10 cm which is about 4". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-224 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-224

samstave 6y ago

its more than 25 years old. I used to have a neighbor who lived across from me in 1997 who was a designer of spy satellites, and i used to ask him questions about capabilities as he washed hid car and would wash the window in one direction for affirmative, another for negative. he intimated they could literally read a license plate from orbit in 1997

dylan604 6y ago
Sure, but when you can count the dimples on a golf ball, I'll be impressed. I can't even do that on my HD tv

oppositelock 6y ago

Oh, it's better than that. I've worked with NRO imagery, since they needed private industry's help in building some of their digital light table visualization tools, and in the 1990's, I've seen ~2" imagery which was provided for development. It looked like modern aerial imagery, with the difference being that there were no bands of discontinuity from stitching multiple photo sweeps together. That was 22 years and I can only imagine what they've got now.