3 ms·
I think as regards point 2., we can definitely tell that the quality has been degraded. I don't believe for a moment that the best video feed to come off of a m
by noodlesUK 4y ago
I think as regards point 2., we can definitely tell that the quality has been degraded. I don't believe for a moment that the best video feed to come off of a multimillion dollar surveillance drone is rivalled by an iPhone 3GS. I expect that this is a degraded or auxiliary video feed. The cutout seemed rather analog to me which is a bit interesting.
I don't think it's public knowledge how reapers get their video to the ground station (It supports satellite uplink, but I don't know if that's the only mode of operation).
I do generally agree that the video looks consistent with the idea that the drone was either damaged by the fuel or actually hit.
- gpderetta 4y agoI thought that US military purposefully severely degrades videos before releasing them, probably to hide capabilities. This is in fact surprisingly high quality.
- wil421 4y agoIf you remember Trump tweeted a photo of Iran and twitter sleuths were all over it and calculated its capabilities. Navy pilots who witnessed the UFOs said they saw much better quality video at the time of the incident.
- dogma1138 4y agoThe feed likely wasn’t from the primary sensor, UAVs have engineering and TOAL cameras that are far lower quality than their primary sensor electro optic package. Also I believe the drone itself was configured for a SIGINT/SAR mission so it would have an SAR pod and a bunch of antennas instead of an electro optic sensor payload.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]