3 ms·

Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite myste

Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite mysteriously broke apart

fnands 23d ago
Yaogan-50 for anyone asking. Interesting. A bit conspiratorial, but hey. It would be a major provocation if so
- willy_k 23d ago
  As an aside - the word conspiratorial has become polluted. If you accept the premise that governments and their military and intelligence agencies aren’t 100% transparent, which is true, then the above comment is simply speculative.
- AnimalMuppet 23d ago
  A major provocation? "Oh, you deny using your satellites to supply them with imaging? All right, then it wasn't us who blew up your spy satellite that wasn't supplying imaging." That is, China's in a bit of an awkward position to complain very much.
  - rl3 23d ago
    Problems start when their complaints take the form of using their own deniable capability against U.S. satellites. I've a feeling our satellites are far more expensive and advanced than theirs. Nobody wants a space tit-for-tat that can escalate dramatically.
    - nomel 22d ago
      So, what solution do you have in mind, if China supplies military support to an adversary? Politely ask them to stop? Let them continue? Seems not so trivial to me, especially since everyone has satellites up there for this purpose, and there's a good chance China would do the same.
      - FabCH 22d ago
        Politely ask them to stop seems like a great idea to try first before you actively attack a space capable nuclear superpower!
        nomel 22d ago
        If they did supply images, to supporting the attacks, that did or even didn't result in the death of soldiers, then they were first to commit an act of aggression towards a nuclear superpower. This is a measured response to that act of aggression. Asking politely, in that context, doesn't necessarily make sense, especially when you can just burn a few hundred million of their dollars to demonstrate why they shouldn't do that. I think China would have done the same, but with the usual gaslighting [1]. [1] https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-space/ https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-...
        FabCH 22d ago
        There is a meaningful difference between „providing information to a country currently being attacked“ and „blowing stuff up in orbit“. One is significantly more risk to the rest of the world than other.
        nomel 21d ago
        Don't be naive. If a blind man is asking you where to aim his gun, are you responsible for the death or is the blind man pulling the trigger? In the context of war, BOTH of you are, and both are valid military targets, just as a spotter is, directing a sniper, on the battlefield, because the intention of both of you is to cause death.
        rl3 20d ago
        >Don't be naive. You do realize that since the advent of image reconnaissance satellites, imagery has been used to support the wider geopolitical objectives of whoever owns the satellites doing the reconnaissance, up to and including sharing intelligence with geopolitical allies? In other words: the point of contention here is a tale old as time, and when caught one power usually just registers diplomatic complaints against the other power. Rather than, you know, kick off WW3 by messing with space assets between two nuclear powers. I'd also like to note that the Soviets literally provided a massive amount of logistical support to North Vietnam. In the Korean War, their own pilots even squared off against Americans. The United States returned the favor when they invaded Afghanistan, our logistical and intelligence support killing scores of Soviets. At no point did either power decide to start blowing up each other's satellites. It's 2026, Iran I'm sure has a myriad of ways of acquiring imagery via commercial satellite providers. Let alone other intel modalities. The notion that a giant KC-135 sitting on a tarmac somewhere being otherwise safe were it not for the Chinese sharing intelligence is laughable. Reads more like incompetent threat assessment and regional asset positioning.
  - lossolo 23d ago
    China is not Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela or some other third world country that the US has fought in over the past few decades. You can't just destroy one of their satellites for free. And I can bet the US didn't do it, because that would be a major escalation, especially now that Xi is coming to the US and there are rumors that the US wants a deal.
    - chinathrow 22d ago
      So it broke apart by itself?
      - lossolo 22d ago
        "The European Space Agency estimates that there have been more than 660 explosions, collisions, or anomalous events resulting in fragmentation. As it stands, there are currently more than 1.5 million space debris objects in Earth orbit. It’s not clear what may have caused the Yaogan-50 (02) satellite to break apart, but it may have been a propulsion or battery failure, or it may have itself collided with another object or space debris."
        willy_k 22d ago
        That doesn’t mean anything. “Sometimes satellites hit things or have problems and blow up. Maybe it hit something and had a problem”. Edit: Its a perfectly valid response to the question that was asked.
    - boc 22d ago
      So China's brand new recon satellite that was placed specifically in orbit over Iran just happened to self-destruct weeks after China was accused of giving Iran high-res satellite imagery that was used to kill American soldiers? And the US just publicly told everyone they have weapons in space? Hell of a coincidence.
- aaron695 22d ago
  [dead]
hn_submit 23d ago
I thought the Russians were supplying them with HiRes imagery. I've not heard of any Russian optical or radar satellite breaking up.
dhx 23d ago
Wouldn't it be possible to confirm who may be supplying imagery by taking some IRGC supplied imagery such as [1] and figure out which satellite(s) were overhead at the time and capable of taking the image? It may not be particularly straightforward to do so--but seems theoretically possible with: - Consideration of time-of-day/azimuth of overhead satellite based on shadows and perspective. - Comparison to other imagery of the same location checking for portable objects (such as vehicles) and keeping track of when they appear and disappear, and whether they're present in the imagery being analysed. - Consideration of cloud coverage and weather conditions to rule out unwanted satellite passes. Then write up a report and publish it, making it a believable and concrete finding instead of a finding that otherwise may just be perceived to be speculation/vibes. [1] https://soaratlas.com/maps/asia-jordan-strike-at-u-s-aircraft-shelter-muwaffaq-al-salti-air-base-jul-16th-2026-142020 https://soaratlas.com/maps/asia-jordan-strike-at-u-s-aircraf...
- 3eb7988a1663 23d ago
  That's exactly how it was revealed that a high quality image intentionally leaked by Trump came from a satellite and not an overhead plane. Press article: https://www.livescience.com/secret-classified-satellite-trump-tweet.html https://www.livescience.com/secret-classified-satellite-trum... Blog write up: https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2019/09/image-from-trump-tweet-identified-as.html https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2019/09/image-from-trump-tw...
CodeWriter23 22d ago
It's really not interesting at all. The US Destroyed that satellite to stop that information flow.
- missedthecue 22d ago
  China has more intelligence/imaging satellites in space than the US does. I don't think it will stop the information flow.
  - CodeWriter23 22d ago
    And all they have to do is move them into position to gather intel on the Iran region to have them destroyed as well.
    - missedthecue 21d ago
      You think the US will destroy 230 Chinese intelligence satellites? LOL
      - CodeWriter23 21d ago
        The DEW announcement is the message "we destroyed your satellite, Xi"

Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite mysteriously broke apart

fnands 23d ago

Yaogan-50 for anyone asking. Interesting. A bit conspiratorial, but hey. It would be a major provocation if so

willy_k 23d ago
As an aside - the word conspiratorial has become polluted. If you accept the premise that governments and their military and intelligence agencies aren’t 100% transparent, which is true, then the above comment is simply speculative.
AnimalMuppet 23d ago
A major provocation? "Oh, you deny using your satellites to supply them with imaging? All right, then it wasn't us who blew up your spy satellite that wasn't supplying imaging." That is, China's in a bit of an awkward position to complain very much.
- rl3 23d ago
  Problems start when their complaints take the form of using their own deniable capability against U.S. satellites. I've a feeling our satellites are far more expensive and advanced than theirs. Nobody wants a space tit-for-tat that can escalate dramatically.
  - nomel 22d ago
    So, what solution do you have in mind, if China supplies military support to an adversary? Politely ask them to stop? Let them continue? Seems not so trivial to me, especially since everyone has satellites up there for this purpose, and there's a good chance China would do the same.
    - FabCH 22d ago
      Politely ask them to stop seems like a great idea to try first before you actively attack a space capable nuclear superpower!
      - nomel 22d ago
        If they did supply images, to supporting the attacks, that did or even didn't result in the death of soldiers, then they were first to commit an act of aggression towards a nuclear superpower. This is a measured response to that act of aggression. Asking politely, in that context, doesn't necessarily make sense, especially when you can just burn a few hundred million of their dollars to demonstrate why they shouldn't do that. I think China would have done the same, but with the usual gaslighting [1]. [1] https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-space/ https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-...
        FabCH 22d ago
        There is a meaningful difference between „providing information to a country currently being attacked“ and „blowing stuff up in orbit“. One is significantly more risk to the rest of the world than other.
        nomel 21d ago
        Don't be naive. If a blind man is asking you where to aim his gun, are you responsible for the death or is the blind man pulling the trigger? In the context of war, BOTH of you are, and both are valid military targets, just as a spotter is, directing a sniper, on the battlefield, because the intention of both of you is to cause death.
        rl3 20d ago
        >Don't be naive. You do realize that since the advent of image reconnaissance satellites, imagery has been used to support the wider geopolitical objectives of whoever owns the satellites doing the reconnaissance, up to and including sharing intelligence with geopolitical allies? In other words: the point of contention here is a tale old as time, and when caught one power usually just registers diplomatic complaints against the other power. Rather than, you know, kick off WW3 by messing with space assets between two nuclear powers. I'd also like to note that the Soviets literally provided a massive amount of logistical support to North Vietnam. In the Korean War, their own pilots even squared off against Americans. The United States returned the favor when they invaded Afghanistan, our logistical and intelligence support killing scores of Soviets. At no point did either power decide to start blowing up each other's satellites. It's 2026, Iran I'm sure has a myriad of ways of acquiring imagery via commercial satellite providers. Let alone other intel modalities. The notion that a giant KC-135 sitting on a tarmac somewhere being otherwise safe were it not for the Chinese sharing intelligence is laughable. Reads more like incompetent threat assessment and regional asset positioning.
- lossolo 23d ago
  China is not Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela or some other third world country that the US has fought in over the past few decades. You can't just destroy one of their satellites for free. And I can bet the US didn't do it, because that would be a major escalation, especially now that Xi is coming to the US and there are rumors that the US wants a deal.
  - chinathrow 22d ago
    So it broke apart by itself?
    - lossolo 22d ago
      "The European Space Agency estimates that there have been more than 660 explosions, collisions, or anomalous events resulting in fragmentation. As it stands, there are currently more than 1.5 million space debris objects in Earth orbit. It’s not clear what may have caused the Yaogan-50 (02) satellite to break apart, but it may have been a propulsion or battery failure, or it may have itself collided with another object or space debris."
      - willy_k 22d ago
        That doesn’t mean anything. “Sometimes satellites hit things or have problems and blow up. Maybe it hit something and had a problem”. Edit: Its a perfectly valid response to the question that was asked.
  - boc 22d ago
    So China's brand new recon satellite that was placed specifically in orbit over Iran just happened to self-destruct weeks after China was accused of giving Iran high-res satellite imagery that was used to kill American soldiers? And the US just publicly told everyone they have weapons in space? Hell of a coincidence.
aaron695 22d ago
[dead]

hn_submit 23d ago

I thought the Russians were supplying them with HiRes imagery. I've not heard of any Russian optical or radar satellite breaking up.

dhx 23d ago

Wouldn't it be possible to confirm who may be supplying imagery by taking some IRGC supplied imagery such as [1] and figure out which satellite(s) were overhead at the time and capable of taking the image? It may not be particularly straightforward to do so--but seems theoretically possible with: - Consideration of time-of-day/azimuth of overhead satellite based on shadows and perspective. - Comparison to other imagery of the same location checking for portable objects (such as vehicles) and keeping track of when they appear and disappear, and whether they're present in the imagery being analysed. - Consideration of cloud coverage and weather conditions to rule out unwanted satellite passes. Then write up a report and publish it, making it a believable and concrete finding instead of a finding that otherwise may just be perceived to be speculation/vibes. [1] https://soaratlas.com/maps/asia-jordan-strike-at-u-s-aircraft-shelter-muwaffaq-al-salti-air-base-jul-16th-2026-142020 https://soaratlas.com/maps/asia-jordan-strike-at-u-s-aircraf...

3eb7988a1663 23d ago
That's exactly how it was revealed that a high quality image intentionally leaked by Trump came from a satellite and not an overhead plane. Press article: https://www.livescience.com/secret-classified-satellite-trump-tweet.html https://www.livescience.com/secret-classified-satellite-trum... Blog write up: https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2019/09/image-from-trump-tweet-identified-as.html https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2019/09/image-from-trump-tw...

CodeWriter23 22d ago

It's really not interesting at all. The US Destroyed that satellite to stop that information flow.

missedthecue 22d ago
China has more intelligence/imaging satellites in space than the US does. I don't think it will stop the information flow.
- CodeWriter23 22d ago
  And all they have to do is move them into position to gather intel on the Iran region to have them destroyed as well.
  - missedthecue 21d ago
    You think the US will destroy 230 Chinese intelligence satellites? LOL
    - CodeWriter23 21d ago
      The DEW announcement is the message "we destroyed your satellite, Xi"