
What a tweet tells us about spy satellites [video] - Browun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=JRLVFn9z0Gc
======
runlevel1
How it was tracked back to USA 224:
[https://github.com/cbassa/satellite_analysis/blob/master/nah...](https://github.com/cbassa/satellite_analysis/blob/master/nahid1_launch_failure_analysis.ipynb)

~~~
makomk
The really astounding part of all this is that hobbyists have been monitoring
the exact orbits of all the US spy satellites for years. They know exactly
where they're overhead and when. That kind of capability used to be something
that only a handful of states had, and now people just do it from their homes
and post it to the internet.

~~~
nexuist
"Who watches the watchers?"

Civilian space nerds!

~~~
smudgymcscmudge
“but who watched them?”

CIA, and we’ve gone full circle.

------
iamshs
That image is absolutely bonkers, the more I look at it, the more I admire the
satellite's creators.

Also, the analysis around the image is fantastic. The data and methods that
they used to calculate the height of the satellite, timing of picture etc. it
is a treat to see for someone sitting and seeing this unfold on the sides. I
remembered this article [1], of Indian Anti-Satellite Test, India claimed
satellite was hit on downwards trajectory, and then released the footage with
no telemetry redactions. Analysis of that footage showed that missile hit the
satellite on the way up and not downwards. Same with North Korean Missile
launches, any time any imagery is released or test happens, so many insights
come in. OSINT community is seriously amazing. I hope more such 'leaks' occur.

[1] - [https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/why-indias-asat-test-was-
rec...](https://thediplomat.com/2019/05/why-indias-asat-test-was-reckless/)

~~~
velox_io
That picture is bounced off a 2.4m mirror from nearly 400km away, calling it
flawless would be an understatement!

The image has also been heavily compressed (after it was annotated), so we're
looking at a very poor version of it. So yeah, bonkers is probably the best
term to describe it.

------
minitoar
Scott Manley has a lot of great content. He also does Let’s Play of Kerbal
Space Program which is how I initially came to know of him. His videos on
rocketry and Space Stuff are basically how I keep up to date.

~~~
mhh__
The man is a legend. Really knowledgeable but fun at the same time.

He's also a DJ, I believe.

~~~
minitoar
Hence his username on many platforms “DJSnM”.

------
fareesh
From what I understand, it was already well known that the USA could take
satellite photos of things, except not at the level of quality/detail as the
one shown in this image.

Is that a distinction without a difference?

I suppose in theory now that this information is out there regarding
capabilities, you know this for sure, but would you have guessed the
capability is _not_ there if you were making a decision that factored it in?

My guess is you would assume that this capability exists.

If I wanted to be really good, I would assume 10x this capability exists.

~~~
gruez
>My guess is you would assume that this capability exists.

>If I wanted to be really good, I would assume 10x this capability exists.

The video says that the quality was already at the limit that 2.4m mirrors can
achieve. The fact that the spy satellites had 2.4m mirrors was already known
(from hubble design documents).

So basically if you were the baddies and were preparing for the worst case
scenario (as you should), you were covered. If you got lazy and didn't, it was
a wake-up call.

------
inetsee
Two things I got from the video:

1) The videos of the launches are scary, especially the launches with the "A"
rockets, and the fireball surrounding the rocket at the beginning of the
launch.

2) It's a shame the patch with the Klingon text never made it out into the
wild.

~~~
jobigoud
What I got from the video is that we have hundreds of Hubbles around the Earth
but only one of them is pointed outwards at the stars.

~~~
garmaine
Yeah. A couple of years ago the NRO discovered they had a couple more sitting
in a warehouse they forgot about, and gifted them to NASA. Sadly they still
haven’t been launched due to NASA nonsense. But still.. the intelligence
agencies had two extra Hubble’s they didn’t know what to do with.

------
anonymousiam
Nothing our enemies did not already know.

~~~
Phlarp
China and Russia sure, Israel perhaps. Turkey? Probably? Pakistan maybe? What
about Libya, Iran, or North Korea?

Everybody knows the specifics now, and even the less well funded adversarial
agencies will have a much firmer idea of just how good the adaptive optics of
KH-11 are.

~~~
assblaster
It doesn't matter, the level of detail is so good that no camouflage can hide
your secrets.

This tweet says: we can see anything we want to see. We know when you're
lying, don't even try.

------
enriquto
any link to the tweet itself? I cannot watch the video

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I believe this is the tweet from Trump:

[https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/11674933719732551...](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1167493371973255170?s=20)

------
api
What Trump leaked about billion dollar spy satellites...

------
hirundo
The good news is that there is a redacted area in the image, so Trump probably
didn't just snap and post ... evidence of some limit to the impulsiveness of
the commander in chief.

~~~
pcbro141
The black box on the top left? I'm assuming that's just redacting the
classification level, which was surely Top Secret.

~~~
asmithmd1
The interesting thing about the black box is that it is square to the frame of
the image and slightly skew to the text boxes in the original intelligence
product. This indicates the image posted is not simply a camera phone snap
posted directly to Twitter, the image was edited before it was posted

~~~
antonioevans
...are you assuming that there isn't someone at Twitter who monitors
Presidential Posts before they go out. I assume there must be.

~~~
justforyou
Twitter can't keep it's CEO's account secure, and does not review his posts.

I doubt they do anything special for the POTUS aside from exempting his
account from the platform's rules.

~~~
mistermann
Which rules is he exempt from?

~~~
judge2020
All of them:

[https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/publicint...](https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/publicinterest.html)
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20295754](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20295754))

> there are certain cases where it may be in the public’s interest to have
> access to certain Tweets, even if they would otherwise be in violation of
> our rules. On the rare occasions when this happens, we'll place a notice – a
> screen you have to click or tap through before you see the Tweet – to
> provide additional context and clarity. We’ll also take steps to make sure
> the Tweet is not algorithmically elevated on our service

~~~
mistermann
Thanks.

The actual text (not POTUS specific):

Who does this apply to?

We will only consider applying this notice on Tweets from accounts that meet
the following criteria. The account must:

\- Be or represent a government/elected official, be running for public
office, or be considered for a government position (i.e., next in line,
awaiting confirmation, named successor to an appointed position);

\- Have more than 100,000 followers;

\- Be verified.

------
pcunite
I hold the understanding that its possible to view a license plate from space.
I suggest you keep to that view in mind as well.

~~~
benburleson
This is anecdotal, and no idea how real it is, but my dad flew reconnaissance
for the USAF in the 70s and claimed to have the capability to read license
plates way back then from very high altitude (no idea what qualified as very
high altitude, but assumed they were not easily detected from the ground).

~~~
drivebycomment
Let's do some napkin math. A quick websearch suggests spy sats orbit around
200-800km, while U2 flies at 20km.

Let's say you can use the same camera system on both. Then 10cm resolution at
200km orbit means 1cm at 20km, which would be enough to read a license plate.

~~~
Phlarp
You can't put a 2.4m mirror on a U2.

