4 ms·
It should be a relatively simple problem of mechanics and optics. How big would the spy camera have to be to capture that level of detail? Assuming say, a budge
by iwwr 15y ago
It should be a relatively simple problem of mechanics and optics. How big would the spy camera have to be to capture that level of detail? Assuming say, a budget of $500mil to 1bn per satellite.
- projectileboy 15y ago...and atmospheric distortion. That's a much harder problem, although there have been innovations there, as well - some of which have been applied by astronomers to improve the imagery of ground-based telescopes (e.g., digitally processing images based on the observed distortion of a reference image, such as a simple laser from a geosynchronous orbit captured at the same moment).
- arethuza 15y agoSomeone does a calculation in this discussion: http://www.natscience.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/physics/10830/Maximum-resolution-of-spy-satellites http://www.natscience.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/physics/10830/Maxim... That suggests that the max resolution from 850km (which does appear to be the relevant height) of a 4m as 10cm. So for 1mm resolution, which would be about right to resolve the time an a watch, you'd need at least a 400m mirror, probably much larger. So $1 billion wouldn't be anything like enough. [Apologies to anyone who actually knows about optics.]
- patrickgzill 15y agoISTR that the SR71 spyplane had large optics that had to loaded by a sled / fork truck and was capable of excellent resolution. See http://www.wvi.com/~sr71webmaster/sr_sensors_pg1.htm http://www.wvi.com/~sr71webmaster/sr_sensors_pg1.htm for example.