raggie33
*the raggedier*
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2003
- Messages
- 13,561
there talking about this plane on discovry chanel get this at 60,000 feet it can read the writeing on a book on the ground and if i heard it corect that book can even be in a building
global hawk is to darn cool
- Thread starter raggie33
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
jtice
Flashaholic
Rag,
Yea I saw that show last night also. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I never see any images that can proove that though, always look like they get really fuzzy at the end, and are not near good enough to read a book.
We have satilites that can do that though.
Global Hawk is a very cool plane, they are even talking about strapping a bomb to the bottom of them now. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif
Personally, I like that F-22 /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Yea I saw that show last night also. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I never see any images that can proove that though, always look like they get really fuzzy at the end, and are not near good enough to read a book.
We have satilites that can do that though.
Global Hawk is a very cool plane, they are even talking about strapping a bomb to the bottom of them now. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif
Personally, I like that F-22 /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Kitchener
Newly Enlightened
More platform fun: It's Good To Be King. Check the custom pier.
Sub_Umbra
Flashlight Enthusiast
[ QUOTE ]
jtice said:
I never see any images that can proove that though, always look like they get really fuzzy at the end, and are not near good enough to read a book.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Gov probably won't release anything like that without fuzzing it up first.
In the '60s-'70s whenever the Gov had a Sat or SR71 pic with info that they wanted to give away or publicize they would actually go to the trouble of overflying the target AGAIN and reshooting the pic from a platform that was not so sensitive, like a U2, and then fuzz that image down before releasing it.
To my knowledge, with very few exceptions, the only sat pics that have really been declassified are from CORONA, which were taken way back in 1960. That will give you an idea of how closley held the actual resolutions / capabilities of our recon cameras are -- regardless of the platform.
jtice said:
I never see any images that can proove that though, always look like they get really fuzzy at the end, and are not near good enough to read a book.
[/ QUOTE ]
The Gov probably won't release anything like that without fuzzing it up first.
In the '60s-'70s whenever the Gov had a Sat or SR71 pic with info that they wanted to give away or publicize they would actually go to the trouble of overflying the target AGAIN and reshooting the pic from a platform that was not so sensitive, like a U2, and then fuzz that image down before releasing it.
To my knowledge, with very few exceptions, the only sat pics that have really been declassified are from CORONA, which were taken way back in 1960. That will give you an idea of how closley held the actual resolutions / capabilities of our recon cameras are -- regardless of the platform.
The_LED_Museum
*Retired*
I believe in 1969, a camera on an orbiting satellite could take pictures with enough resolution to read the time on a German general's wristwatch.
KC2IXE
Flashaholic*
Actual resolutions are in inches - it's fairly easy to calculate the Rayleigh limit - which is the BEST you can do
Min Resolvable angle (radians) = 1.22*Wavelength (in Meters)*D of aperture (in Meters)
Let's put it this way - your not going to read a watch - a license plate laying on the floor? Maybe
Min Resolvable angle (radians) = 1.22*Wavelength (in Meters)*D of aperture (in Meters)
Let's put it this way - your not going to read a watch - a license plate laying on the floor? Maybe
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
More EV fires after salt water flooding
- Latest: mrfixitman
-
