3 ms·

Sure any single one but there are many companies, some with hundreds of satellites in orbit at any given time who will point it where ever if you pay them enou

Sure any single one but there are many companies, some with hundreds of satellites in orbit at any given time who will point it where ever if you pay them enough Which is why you get things like this https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/05/satellite-firm-planet-labs-to-indefinitely-withhold-iran-war-images.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/05/satellite-firm-planet-labs-t... An aircraft carrier is not that fast, if you see it once you know roughly what radius of circle it is going to be in for a while (ignoring the fact that they are likely going somewhere for a reason its not their job is to say out of sight) edit: aha that company literally lists it on their website https://www.planet.com/industries/maritime/ https://www.planet.com/industries/maritime/

wredcoll 6mo ago
This is literally the point: it's easy to tell them to point a satellite at beirut and get pictures every 3 hours or whatever, it's much more difficult to tell them to point at a location in the middle of the pacific ocean... because you don't know the location in the first place. Beirut doesn't move around a lot. Carriers do. While there are a lot of satellites pointing at the earth at any one moment, this isn't some kind of Hollywood super screen showing a real time image of the entire pacific. You just see whatever small patch the satellite happens to be pointing at. And again, ignoring the part where america would probably start shooting down satellites.
- shmeeed 6mo ago
  >because you don't know the location in the first place Do you seriously think China doesn't track US carrier movements?
  - wredcoll 6mo ago
    Do you seriously think the US Navy doesn't avoid Chinese tracking? What kind of a question is that? Like, there's probably a magazine that lists the cruising destinations of most of the carriers, what ports they're going to stop at next, etc, because, you know, they're not at war and trying to maintain secrecy.
    - Jensson 6mo ago
      > Do you seriously think the US Navy doesn't avoid Chinese tracking? How would they avoid having a Chinese satellite continuously track their movement? They have the capability to do that, there is nothing USA can do about it except shoot down all the Chinese satelites. https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/china-three-satellites-track-us-warships-pentagon-end-of-naval-stealth/ https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/china-three-satellites-tr...
    - shmeeed 6mo ago
      US carrier groups probably pose the #1 strategic threat to the PRC in the Pacific. You can safely assume they throw whatever resources are necessary at the task of knowing their whereabouts. I mean, you can try all you want, but there's limits to hiding a fleet of ships on the open sea. They are huge, emit immense heat signatures, and produce miles-long wakes while moving. As long as there are satellites overhead, they will be able to find them. I suspect we might be talking past one another because we have different degrees of precision in mind: I'm not saying the Chinese could have a missile target lock on a carrier whenever they wanted, much less in wartime. Far from it. But I highly doubt you can reposition a carrier group without them catching wind of it within hours.
      - wredcoll 6mo ago
        This is the sort of arms race that is going to change every year. I just read an article that claimed that China has launched a system of satellites that use non-visual means to track ships in the pacific (via.. emissions or radar or something?) and china can certainly afford to put a bunch of them in orbit. It's not impossible to track a carrier group via satellites, but it's not trivial either, you can't just, like, open up your windows gui and click on a satellite and click the button that says "follow this carrier" because like satellites orbit and fly around the earth and the ships can alter course when you don't have eyes on them and so on and so forth. And yeah, as you point out, there's a big difference between having a satellite picture showing a probable carrier group at X and Y coordinates and being able to actually strike the thing.
        6mo ago

wredcoll 6mo ago

This is literally the point: it's easy to tell them to point a satellite at beirut and get pictures every 3 hours or whatever, it's much more difficult to tell them to point at a location in the middle of the pacific ocean... because you don't know the location in the first place. Beirut doesn't move around a lot. Carriers do. While there are a lot of satellites pointing at the earth at any one moment, this isn't some kind of Hollywood super screen showing a real time image of the entire pacific. You just see whatever small patch the satellite happens to be pointing at. And again, ignoring the part where america would probably start shooting down satellites.

shmeeed 6mo ago
>because you don't know the location in the first place Do you seriously think China doesn't track US carrier movements?
- wredcoll 6mo ago
  Do you seriously think the US Navy doesn't avoid Chinese tracking? What kind of a question is that? Like, there's probably a magazine that lists the cruising destinations of most of the carriers, what ports they're going to stop at next, etc, because, you know, they're not at war and trying to maintain secrecy.
  - Jensson 6mo ago
    > Do you seriously think the US Navy doesn't avoid Chinese tracking? How would they avoid having a Chinese satellite continuously track their movement? They have the capability to do that, there is nothing USA can do about it except shoot down all the Chinese satelites. https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/china-three-satellites-track-us-warships-pentagon-end-of-naval-stealth/ https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/china-three-satellites-tr...
  - shmeeed 6mo ago
    US carrier groups probably pose the #1 strategic threat to the PRC in the Pacific. You can safely assume they throw whatever resources are necessary at the task of knowing their whereabouts. I mean, you can try all you want, but there's limits to hiding a fleet of ships on the open sea. They are huge, emit immense heat signatures, and produce miles-long wakes while moving. As long as there are satellites overhead, they will be able to find them. I suspect we might be talking past one another because we have different degrees of precision in mind: I'm not saying the Chinese could have a missile target lock on a carrier whenever they wanted, much less in wartime. Far from it. But I highly doubt you can reposition a carrier group without them catching wind of it within hours.
    - wredcoll 6mo ago
      This is the sort of arms race that is going to change every year. I just read an article that claimed that China has launched a system of satellites that use non-visual means to track ships in the pacific (via.. emissions or radar or something?) and china can certainly afford to put a bunch of them in orbit. It's not impossible to track a carrier group via satellites, but it's not trivial either, you can't just, like, open up your windows gui and click on a satellite and click the button that says "follow this carrier" because like satellites orbit and fly around the earth and the ships can alter course when you don't have eyes on them and so on and so forth. And yeah, as you point out, there's a big difference between having a satellite picture showing a probable carrier group at X and Y coordinates and being able to actually strike the thing.
      - 6mo ago