3 ms·

https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58290 https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58290 lays out some evidence that Kodak built similar mirrors for the KH-11 spy satell

https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58290 https://space.stackexchange.com/a/58290 lays out some evidence that Kodak built similar mirrors for the KH-11 spy satellites, while Perkin-Elmer was selected for Hubble (and had built smaller mirrors for other spy satellites).

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
I can’t speak specifically for keyhole, but I know that Kodak definitely worked on spy satellites. My father worked there and on them.
- aidenn0 4y ago
  Early spy satelites even used film; I remember reading about one design that took a film picture, developed, and then used a CCD to scan it and send it back to earth, which is a bit mind boggling to me.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    The ones my father worked on used film, too. But I do not think they were developed in space. All I know is a canister was dropped and intercepted (caught) by a passing jet. I don’t see why it would be developed or scanned in space. Just drop the can of exposed film and develop on the ground. Scanners in the 60s? Film chemistry in space? Why?
    - aidenn0 4y ago
      Maybe I'm misremembering the spy satellites using this (keeping the images secret is harder is you transmit them), but Lunar Orbiter 5 worked this way, so we had the technology in the 60's [edit] The lunar Orbiter used an adapted E-1 camera from SAMOS. The E-2 and (canceled) E-3 also used the semi-dry development process and photomultiplier readout method.
      - rektide 4y ago
        It would be interesting to know about the scan out piece here. The idea makes sense to me, generally, in that film is high res, high speed, can have a fadt shutter. Given where digital computers & imaging were, the idea of turning digitization into a batch slow process decoupled from capture makes all the sense in the world.
    - justsomehnguy 4y ago
      > Just drop the can of exposed film and develop on the ground. Scanners in the 60s? Film chemistry in space? Why? Can't say about recon sats but there are two reasons: a) you need things fast b) you can't drop it - you are too far As sibling points out Lunar Orbiter used this and IMMSMV - some Soviet space probes (Venus?) too. > Scanners in the 60s? In the late 60s - just fine. Don't forget, TV existed back then already.
      - aidenn0 4y ago
        > In the late 60s - just fine. Don't forget, TV existed back then already. E-1 SAMOS launched in 1960. I was wrong about it using a CCD though, it used a photomultiplier.
  - kraussvonespy 4y ago
    https://www.damninteresting.com/faxes-from-the-far-side/ https://www.damninteresting.com/faxes-from-the-far-side/

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago

I can’t speak specifically for keyhole, but I know that Kodak definitely worked on spy satellites. My father worked there and on them.

aidenn0 4y ago
Early spy satelites even used film; I remember reading about one design that took a film picture, developed, and then used a CCD to scan it and send it back to earth, which is a bit mind boggling to me.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  The ones my father worked on used film, too. But I do not think they were developed in space. All I know is a canister was dropped and intercepted (caught) by a passing jet. I don’t see why it would be developed or scanned in space. Just drop the can of exposed film and develop on the ground. Scanners in the 60s? Film chemistry in space? Why?
  - aidenn0 4y ago
    Maybe I'm misremembering the spy satellites using this (keeping the images secret is harder is you transmit them), but Lunar Orbiter 5 worked this way, so we had the technology in the 60's [edit] The lunar Orbiter used an adapted E-1 camera from SAMOS. The E-2 and (canceled) E-3 also used the semi-dry development process and photomultiplier readout method.
    - rektide 4y ago
      It would be interesting to know about the scan out piece here. The idea makes sense to me, generally, in that film is high res, high speed, can have a fadt shutter. Given where digital computers & imaging were, the idea of turning digitization into a batch slow process decoupled from capture makes all the sense in the world.
  - justsomehnguy 4y ago
    > Just drop the can of exposed film and develop on the ground. Scanners in the 60s? Film chemistry in space? Why? Can't say about recon sats but there are two reasons: a) you need things fast b) you can't drop it - you are too far As sibling points out Lunar Orbiter used this and IMMSMV - some Soviet space probes (Venus?) too. > Scanners in the 60s? In the late 60s - just fine. Don't forget, TV existed back then already.
    - aidenn0 4y ago
      > In the late 60s - just fine. Don't forget, TV existed back then already. E-1 SAMOS launched in 1960. I was wrong about it using a CCD though, it used a photomultiplier.
- kraussvonespy 4y ago
  https://www.damninteresting.com/faxes-from-the-far-side/ https://www.damninteresting.com/faxes-from-the-far-side/