4 ms·

Does the image not look like a printed tarp laid over the hangar? I think it is simple deception

by sethammons 5y ago

twobitshifter 5y ago
Agreed, from this vantage point you couldn’t tell the difference.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Agreed, from this vantage point you couldn’t tell the difference. I mean, you could, because if it was an opaque tarp rather than “uncovered skeleton” like the article claims, it would have a solid shadow visible somewhere when the sun isn't nearly directly behind the satellite, but the “skeletal” beams would not have a shadow on the ground, because you wouldn't see the ground through the tarp. But, that's exactly how this looks, so...
runjake 5y ago
Could be, but the shadows and taxiway lines line up perfectly. That would require constant shifting of props to maintain for 3 full days (this is 101 stuff for GEOINT folks). It's also important to keep in mind that spy sats get far better resolution than this publicly-released image would lead you to believe.
- dharmab 5y ago
  It's also important to note that these images aren't from spy sats, they're from Planet Labs PBC's imaging. Disclaimer: I am a Planet Labs employee.
MontagFTB 5y ago
The shadow cast by the tarp suggests it's opaque, not transparent (or even translucent, really.) Combined with the horizontal lines across "plane", it all suggests a weather-beaten opaque tarp that's been painted to conceal its contents and confuse any overhead photographers.
- eightails 5y ago
  And there's also the fact that the other possibility seems so unlikely: why would you store a sensitive experimental aircraft under a transparent tarp? I can't think of any reason to do so. An opaque painted tarp seems much more likely.
- abliefern 5y ago
  This is addressed in the article. This could be a standardized military hangar with the back wall put in but no roof tarp installed
kilroy123 5y ago
That was my first guess. Its not like we don't mess with our adversaries. Why did I think this? Because that's what I would do if I worked there and could.
Semiapies 5y ago
Missed opportunity to portray something disk-shaped, if so.
beerandt 5y ago
No- there would be a solid shadow down the right side of the structure (look at the right side of the bigger hanger in the zoomed out image). The simple explanation for the shadow is that they left the solid end (wall) of the structure up. (They're often made of a different material like aluminum, or are otherwise more difficult to disassemble due to doors or other things mounted to a semi-permanent wall.) (ETA: If you look closely at the very top of the shadow, it appears to be a fabric/tarp wall that is sagging slightly at the peak and not attached at the very top of the arch. You can see the shadow of that portion of exposed arch/ frame pretty clearly above it.) Having the painted-on jet shadow match the actual time of day shadow I suppose is doable if they wanted to deceive a specific satellite passing overhead at a known time, but I doubt it, since it got seen multiple times over at least 3 days.

Does the image not look like a printed tarp laid over the hangar? I think it is simple deception

twobitshifter 5y ago

Agreed, from this vantage point you couldn’t tell the difference.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Agreed, from this vantage point you couldn’t tell the difference. I mean, you could, because if it was an opaque tarp rather than “uncovered skeleton” like the article claims, it would have a solid shadow visible somewhere when the sun isn't nearly directly behind the satellite, but the “skeletal” beams would not have a shadow on the ground, because you wouldn't see the ground through the tarp. But, that's exactly how this looks, so...

runjake 5y ago

Could be, but the shadows and taxiway lines line up perfectly. That would require constant shifting of props to maintain for 3 full days (this is 101 stuff for GEOINT folks). It's also important to keep in mind that spy sats get far better resolution than this publicly-released image would lead you to believe.

dharmab 5y ago
It's also important to note that these images aren't from spy sats, they're from Planet Labs PBC's imaging. Disclaimer: I am a Planet Labs employee.

MontagFTB 5y ago

The shadow cast by the tarp suggests it's opaque, not transparent (or even translucent, really.) Combined with the horizontal lines across "plane", it all suggests a weather-beaten opaque tarp that's been painted to conceal its contents and confuse any overhead photographers.

eightails 5y ago
And there's also the fact that the other possibility seems so unlikely: why would you store a sensitive experimental aircraft under a transparent tarp? I can't think of any reason to do so. An opaque painted tarp seems much more likely.
abliefern 5y ago
This is addressed in the article. This could be a standardized military hangar with the back wall put in but no roof tarp installed

kilroy123 5y ago

That was my first guess. Its not like we don't mess with our adversaries. Why did I think this? Because that's what I would do if I worked there and could.

Semiapies 5y ago

Missed opportunity to portray something disk-shaped, if so.

beerandt 5y ago

No- there would be a solid shadow down the right side of the structure (look at the right side of the bigger hanger in the zoomed out image). The simple explanation for the shadow is that they left the solid end (wall) of the structure up. (They're often made of a different material like aluminum, or are otherwise more difficult to disassemble due to doors or other things mounted to a semi-permanent wall.) (ETA: If you look closely at the very top of the shadow, it appears to be a fabric/tarp wall that is sagging slightly at the peak and not attached at the very top of the arch. You can see the shadow of that portion of exposed arch/ frame pretty clearly above it.) Having the painted-on jet shadow match the actual time of day shadow I suppose is doable if they wanted to deceive a specific satellite passing overhead at a known time, but I doubt it, since it got seen multiple times over at least 3 days.