Live data from Hacker News

Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

npr.org

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Answered here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12695808

Another question of course is that since it was impossible to load the cameras with new film, how much film did they carry when deployed? After using it all the camera was useless. A modern digital camera would have been really valuable for these purposes. BTW were those Corona satellites guidable, or did they just fly wherever they flew and operators could ask them to photograph what was under? A useful way to decom…

> Another question of course is that since it was impossible to load the cameras with new film, how much film did they carry when deployed? After using it all the camera was useless.

That's why both the US and Russians experimented with military space stations (US MOL, Soviet Almaz), so they could both resupply the cameras with more film, and in emergencies develop it directly in space and radio down scans of them.

However, both eventually figured out how do automate the latter and eventually developed fully digital cameras, rendering manned surveillance stations obsolete. The US never launched any, and the Soviet program was cancelled after three stations (that were masked as Salyuts).

> BTW were those Corona satellites guidable, or did they just fly wherever they flew and operators could ask them to photograph what was under?

Satellite orbits are largely fixed – changing your orbital plane is the single most expensive manoeuvre you can do, and too expensive in practice. (Even if we wanted to, we couldn't tilt the ISS' orbit by more than a degree or two, and if we did, Soyuz rockets couldn't reach it any more.)

That's why we instead just launch a whole lot of satellites that focus on different areas.

> A useful way to decommission a satellite that is about to run out of its film storage would have been to guide it to a trajectory where it can take more accurate pictures from a lower position

Even just lowering your orbit is expensive, fuel-wise, but the more important problem: The lower you go, the faster you are. This means lower exposure times and less image quality, not more.

Additionally, as far as I can tell, the film buckets were really dumb and used solid boosters hand-tuned to their original orbit. Launching them from a different trajectory would likely make them burn up during re-entry.

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#72
post #57

Anyone know what's nearby there at about (32.92669, -111.922201)[0]? It looks like some sort of strip mine a few hundred feet to the north, so I assume it's related, but was just curious what it is. It looks like a painting! [0] http://maps.apple.com/maps?ll=32.926699,-111.822201&spn=0.00...

http://googlesightseeing.com/2005/10/casa-grande-copper-mine...

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#73
post #60

The Corona project. A/K/A the KeyHole satellites. If my count is right, 135 satellite launches, though not all were successful. Fun fact: this was the early 1960s. CCD technology and IP transmission bitrates were a bit primitive[1], so the film cameras would eject capsules after they'd been shot, which would re-enter the atmosphere and be recovered, most through mid-air retrieval. The project was active from 1959 to…

KEYHOLE the compartmentalization for all satellite sourced intelligence products, not a specific program (like CORONA, CRYSTAL, TOPAZ, etc)

Thanks. I was curious about that as I'd heard the term used and was almost certain the context was more recent than the Corona project (1972 end date).

I'm also curious about Keyhole and the project, similarly named, which become Google Earth.

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#74
post #20
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found two: 32.807001, -111.722184 and 32.791790, -111.705250 I'd like to find more to see the 'grid' mentioned in the article.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1IudNrZA1xnpWjK...

I added a few more : https://drive.google.com/open?id=15z8VmPCAGRXwaQ9yxkAGfr2cug...

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#75
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently visited the Chinese ones. It tools a good day or so of driving off road (after two weeks of driving to get into the area) to reach them. Totally in the middle of nowhere, and quite amazing to see.

Awesome! Did you by any chance blog about your trip (with photos)?

Ironically, they all came out blurry...

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#76
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USSR "trolled" the US by painting windows on top of a plane or helicopter while it was under development. I can't remember the exact one will have a look around.

I'm sure I've also read about this, but can't find any links at the moment. The art of Maskirovka [1] (deception and camouflage) is still part of Russian military doctrine. Interestingly, the US also does something similar with planes like the A-10, which has a 'fake cockpit' painted on its underside, so that it is hard to determine the orientation of the aircraft visually. This is actually patented [2] and has been…

According to wiki the one I was thinking of was the Ka-50

> The single-seat configuration was considered undesirable by NATO. The first two Ka-50 prototypes had false windows painted on them.[19] The "windows" evidently worked, as the first western reports of the aircraft were wildly inaccurate, to the point of some analysts even concluding its primary mission was as an air superiority aircraft for hunting and killing NATO attack helicopters.[20]

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#77
post #45

Also interesting are the resolution targets, using sets of black and white bars at varying widths in both X any X orientation, to determine the spatial resolution i.e. how high frequency a component could still be imaged separately as lines, similar to TV test cards. These are discussed in various blogs [1][2] with some amazing picures. I think these were for both satellite imaging and spy-plane (U2 and SR-71 plus le…

Those tri-bar patterns are fascinating. I'd imagine that American surveillance equipment would be able to discern all but the smallest couple of squares. They'd easily be able to read registration numbers on aircraft, probably almost be able to discern specific small arms (e.g. count the number of RPGs and AK-47s sitting on some tarmac somewhere). Amazing.

I don't think that even LEO Spy Satellites have that resolving power. Of course, that information would be classified. Does any HN reader know what a reasonable guess at their resolving power would be? I would love to know.

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#78
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those tri-bar patterns are fascinating. I'd imagine that American surveillance equipment would be able to discern all but the smallest couple of squares. They'd easily be able to read registration numbers on aircraft, probably almost be able to discern specific small arms (e.g. count the number of RPGs and AK-47s sitting on some tarmac somewhere). Amazing.

I don't think that even LEO Spy Satellites have that resolving power. Of course, that information would be classified. Does any HN reader know what a reasonable guess at their resolving power would be? I would love to know.

Commercial satellite imagery is available at 0.25m resolution these days, so assuming an order of magnitude better that gives around 2.5cm resolving power, or one inch. I think I've heard about 5cm quoted somewhere, as well. So, maybe just good enough to detect the difference between small-arms, and certainly enough to read identification markings on an aircraft, or to determine the name of the newspaper, but not to read its headlines.

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#79
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KEYHOLE the compartmentalization for all satellite sourced intelligence products, not a specific program (like CORONA, CRYSTAL, TOPAZ, etc)

Thanks. I was curious about that as I'd heard the term used and was almost certain the context was more recent than the Corona project (1972 end date). I'm also curious about Keyhole and the project, similarly named, which become Google Earth.

The name of Keyhole, Inc was an homage. They employed some former NRO folks, and received NRO funding by way of In-Q-Tel.

Re: Decades-Old Mystery Put to Rest: Why Are There X's in the Desert?

#80
post #78
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that even LEO Spy Satellites have that resolving power. Of course, that information would be classified. Does any HN reader know what a reasonable guess at their resolving power would be? I would love to know.

Commercial satellite imagery is available at 0.25m resolution these days, so assuming an order of magnitude better that gives around 2.5cm resolving power, or one inch. I think I've heard about 5cm quoted somewhere, as well. So, maybe just good enough to detect the difference between small-arms, and certainly enough to read identification markings on an aircraft, or to determine the name of the newspaper, but not to…

I wonder what the real limit is for resolution, due to the distortion of the atmosphere.

I guess that by taking multiple photos in quick succession from slightly different points you could reconstruct a clearer image. It's not my field at all though, so I may just be randomly guessing.

Post reply on HN