271–280 of 390 posts
Screenshot for when it will have been deleted by Google https://i.imgur.com/toSC5a0.png .
The truth is the fact these planes exist and that there is a base nearby is public knowledge. Any country that cares already has its satellite imagery at much higher resoltion and realtime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's while probably really effective at its job, it's not really the most of anything. The B-1B for example is faster and can carry more ordinance.
B-1B is not as stealthy. B-2 Spirit is in a different league along with the F-117. Also I learned something new: It's not 'ordinance', but 'ordnance'[1]. Almost looks like a spelling mistake. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would be disappointing for them to remove it for basically no reason, especially considering you can see a B-2 parked on the tarmac ( https://www.google.com/maps/place/38%C2%B043'29.9%22N+93%C2%... ) in the nearby Whiteman AFB. The B-2 was first flown 32 years ago. Its existence is neither covert or secret, but often used to do flybys at freaking football games where thousands of recording devices are present and act…
Correct, but don't misunderestimate the power of knowledge. Let's assume that some adversary is out there keeping track of these planes, and knows that they can scan Google maps for the RGB artifact by the engines to locate them reliably and programmatically. Now Google maps becomes a repository for information that adversary may use to validate other information. Maybe this confirms the schedule for some training ex…
This makes me wonder. Obviously everyone in the world knows that USA operates a few dozen "stealth bombers" and has for the last couple decades, or so. Has any other country developed these kinds of aircrafts? Similarly, submarines. USA operates many stealth submarines as well. Does any other country operate stealth submarines? I'm aware that USA spends about 1 tril a year on military stuff but these just seems bizar…
That is an interesting point. Both China and Russia have stealth fighters, but not stealth bombers, from my understanding. China's Xian H-20 was to be announced this year. Russia's Tupolev PAK-DA is scheduled for 2028. I suspect that the need for stealth bombers is rather low: - If you want to carry large bomb payloads, ICBMs do the trick. - For smaller bomb payloads, they can fit in the fighters.
The aircraft seems to be a Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit. > The Northrop (later Northrop Grumman) B-2 Spirit, also known as the Stealth Bomber, is an American heavy strategic bomber, featuring low observable stealth technology designed for penetrating dense anti-aircraft defenses. Designed during the Cold War, it is a flying wing design with a crew of two.[1][3] The bomber is subsonic and can deploy both conventional a…
My father-in-law helped design the pilot seat for that. Unfortunately he was unable to make the transition to computer aided design. After the defense cutbacks in the 90s, he could only find minimum wage jobs for the rest of his working life.
The aircraft seems to be a Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit. > The Northrop (later Northrop Grumman) B-2 Spirit, also known as the Stealth Bomber, is an American heavy strategic bomber, featuring low observable stealth technology designed for penetrating dense anti-aircraft defenses. Designed during the Cold War, it is a flying wing design with a crew of two.[1][3] The bomber is subsonic and can deploy both conventional a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It actually works out to be pretty close. A satellite flying ~17k mph at 250 miles altitude would largely have the same angular displacement from the ground as a plane moving 400 mph at 31,000 feet. Most satellites fly in an easterly direction, so the question would ultimately be what the inclination of the orbit is relative to the direction of flight.
That's super interesting! I love this discussion. Would the satellite be that low though? 250 miles (400km) is still going to experience significant atmospheric drag. Fine for a cheap mass deployment like Starlink, but I'd expect an imaging satellite to be set up for a longer mission duration. Then again maybe the cost of additional mass for station-keeping is worth it for the imaging quality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Click the timestamp for the comment, then click "favorite", then set a reminder in your calendar to check your favorited comments (link in your profile).
Can Siri work with whats in your copy/paste cache?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's while probably really effective at its job, it's not really the most of anything. The B-1B for example is faster and can carry more ordinance.
It's effective enough to have bombed the shit out of a chinese embassy in '99. Look it up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.nro.gov/
What an awful picture of the NRO Director. Surely they have plenty of experience in photography in less than ideal conditions. So why have this photo as the first thing I can see on their website?