Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why can NASA not take HQ pics?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Uhm. Sorry for not answering, but I have been busy

    Some questions puffing up in my head

    1. Why are you guys talking about mirrors? Are there mirrors on sattelites? :blink:

    2. I have been busy for a couple of weeks and my topic is an off-topic about "three little pigs, santa claus ( we calling it "The christmas man"(translated to english) here "in the middle of nowere"), and spaceships :huh: .. Okay. lets come back to my topic, please?

    KH-13 is(?) a successor of KH-12, it was launched in 1999, resolution ~10 to 4 cm (but we don't know if such a satellite even exists...)
    3. ^^ so you say my dad lies to me :o . There is NO sattelite there can zoom so long down so you can see the license plades and people on the beach forexample? :(

    If there isent. I will make one .. (If I could :( )

    Comment


    • #17
      1. In this sense it's because of the physics of resolving power - ie, how big the mirror on the satellite needs to be to get high-resolution pictures. The more detail you want, the bigger the mirror has to be, but it's difficult to make large mirrors, which limits the possible resolution you can get.

      2. Uhhhhhh ok then :P

      3. 4cm is good enough to see people, but you wouldn't be able to make out license plates.
      Donate to support your community!
      Please donate if you can - every donation helps improve World Wind

      World Wind Central - FAQs, Hotspots, Wiki and more...READ before posting!


      Need to upload files? Use my free 50Mb uploader!
      Or, how about some web hosting or web design?

      Comment


      • #18
        But is there a sattelite in the space with a 4cm mirror?

        If there is, do NASA not own it?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by XSTREM@Jun 28 2005, 07:37 PM
          But is there a sattelite in the space with a 4cm mirror?

          If there is, do NASA not own it?
          We dont know... maybe there is and maybe not :unsure: It's Top Secret h34r:
          Who own it? - THEY? US Army? MiB? Who knows? :P

          BTW: 4 cm - it's the resolution, not size of the mirror
          Hot stuff: FAQ, forum search, DirectX, .NET, Video Card Compatibility list

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by m_k@Jun 28 2005, 10:03 AM
            We dont know... maybe there is and maybe not :unsure: It's Top Secret h34r:
            Who own it? - THEY? US Army? MiB? Who knows? :P

            BTW: 4 cm - it's the resolution, not size of the mirror

            *coff coff...

            I'd be more interested in interferometric sets done of different mountain ranges and volcanos. If I wanted to read the newspaper I'd just go buy a copy.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by m_k@Jun 28 2005, 08:03 PM
              We dont know... maybe there is and maybe not :unsure: It's Top Secret h34r:
              Ahh. You all know it, but you will not tell it to me :(

              haha..

              Anybody know if there will be taken more images of the earth in the near future? I mean NEW images, taken with a NEW sattelite .

              Comment


              • #22
                Sorry I missed this fascinating discussion! Atmospheric turbulence would probably make it impossible to ever read something as small as license plate numerals from space no matter the mirror size unless the system employed some intense adaptive optics technology. Assuming the plate's numeral size is 10cm tall, from a distance of 681km (the height of the Ikonos satellite as an example) you're talking about reading an area covering just 0.00000841° (0.031 arc-seconds). That's the absolute limit to merely resolve it as a blob of seperate color, not read it outright. To tell an 8 from a B or H would require another order of magnitude more detail and that is simply beyond modern fabrication capability to be placed in space.

                Comment


                • #23
                  <_<
                  [FONT=Impact][SIZE=7][COLOR=blue][QUOTE]
                  Code:
                  &#91;/CODE&#93;&#91;CODE&#93;
                  Code:
                  &#91;/CODE&#93;&#91;CODE&#93;
                  Originally posted by XSTREM,Jun 13 2005, 05:16 AM
                  Hi all pople

                  I know that WW is a NASA project (or not?) so why cant NASA take a sattelite and zoom down so you get HQ sattelite pictures on the hole earth, like EU forexample? I know that the army can zoom so long down, that you can see people on the beach, and see the cars numberplades (is that right spelt?). Why cant NASA effort that, when it stands for National American Space Academy? It is suppose to have all the greatest/best sattelites on the earth or space, whatever.

                  Hope you know what I am talking about :lol:

                  Greetings xstrem

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 5of0@Jun 13 2005, 05:54 PM
                    We call them license plates round hereabouts. I&#39;m always amazed when all these people from different countries know this complicated, messed up language English so well, and I barely have a hang of the semi-standard Spanish after 3 years...
                    izentite

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Sean Breazeal@Jul 19 2005, 11:21 PM
                      Sorry I missed this fascinating discussion&#33; Atmospheric turbulence would probably make it impossible to ever read something as small as license plate numerals from space no matter the mirror size unless the system employed some intense adaptive optics technology. Assuming the plate&#39;s numeral size is 10cm tall, from a distance of 681km (the height of the Ikonos satellite as an example) you&#39;re talking about reading an area covering just 0.00000841° (0.031 arc-seconds). That&#39;s the absolute limit to merely resolve it as a blob of seperate color, not read it outright. To tell an 8 from a B or H would require another order of magnitude more detail and that is simply beyond modern fabrication capability to be placed in space.
                      Atmospheric turbulence is a problem with exposures > 1/100 s. In astronomy, all pictures needs very long exposures. Only sun needs less. Poiting Hubble to the earth and you will have USGS ortho style pictures. KH12 is perhaps bigger than the great orbital telescope. And newer, and especially for earth viewes.

                      A 19000 kg military telescope orbiting at 270 kms give best results than a commercial 933 kg orbiting at 630 kms.

                      This is an image from Quickbird in last version of the site :

                      http://www.satimagingcorp.com/galler...rd-detail.html

                      But I saved this one, one year ago, and the specifications were completely different. The "1m limite for security" authorized by President Clinton, seems to be virtual and moving :

                      http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/4629/ho...ickbirdligh.jpg

                      I well remember the publicity on the site, with 60 cms, and 15 cms (&#33 available.
                      The picture was illustrating the second one. If somebody remember, or have links alive...

                      The entairtenment movies using geeks tools with 1mm resolution (sometimes better) make me laugh too.

                      But when we read technical datas about these keyholes, always under-estimated for security reasons, 5 or 3 cms resolution are not impossible. Do not forget that resolution was spectaculary increased for example on MGS orbiting Mars :
                      It was 5/7 meters specification. After, it was 2.

                      And recentely, a young ingeneer get a way to see Rovers&#39;s tracks &#33; The weels are 15 cms large &#33;&#33; His incredible little idea but complex technic use satellite rolling and smart little soft ajustment.
                      May be nothing impossible for 5cms or less with this KH12 38000 pounds monster...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by m_k View Post
                        Bad news :P

                        Ohh... there is another: Santa doesn't exist
                        :LOL: Noooo, don't tell me Santa doest exist !!!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X