
Black Sky satellites return images just 58 hours after launch - ChuckMcM
https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/17/blackskys-latest-satellites-return-images-just-58-hours-after-spacex-launch/
======
outworlder
If things go well, we'll soon enter a new technological boom.

Like computers. I am surrounded by these things. Something like a smart watch
is only feasible after a drastic decrease in cost and massive increases in
capability. If you went back a few decades and suggested people would be
strapping supercomputers on their wrists, you'd likely be committed to an
institution. It would be unthinkable to devote the required amount of
resources to such a frivolous task.

A similar thing will happen with spacecraft. Right now, it is still expensive,
but SpaceX dragged down the price enormously. This is likely to decrease even
further, either due to competition, or with the likes of the Starship(how many
satellites could we fit on that monstrosity?).

This will enable entire new industries, both existing(satellites will become
commodities), and also ones we have no idea about - yet. Pretty sure some
"frivolous" tasks will pop up once this is cheap enough.

And that's only unmanned flights.

EDIT: I've found this amusing - that's in the direction of what I'm talking
about, we are just missing the "1-click launch":
[https://www.rocketlabusa.com/book-my-
launch/](https://www.rocketlabusa.com/book-my-launch/)

~~~
MauranKilom
The difference here is that space is a lot more international (and thus harder
to police) than your wrist.

We really want to avoid
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome),
and so far humanity has shown a pretty terrible track record when it comes to
exploiting earth's commodities or ensuring the prevention of long-term global
disasters...

Already we have astronomers being increasingly hindered by man-made objects
dashing through the field of view of ground-based telescopes.

~~~
cmehdy
Scott Manley made a good youtube video about just how much of the "basic"
stuff one can already see around the earth by recording the sky in a
360-degrees video from a deserted place[0]. The current trends in launches
with little thinking about the long run reminds me a bit of how we've
approached fossil fuels.. we're basically waiting to hit the wall hard before
re-thinking our approach.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJNGi-
bt9NM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJNGi-bt9NM)

~~~
vkou
You don't even need to be in a deserted place, with super-human vision to see
this! Just grab a pair of binoculars, go out on your roof, and look at the
sky.

I'm in the middle of a light-polluted city, and I can observe a satellite
transit directly overhead every minute or two.

~~~
progers7
See A Satellite Tonight
([https://james.darpinian.com/satellites](https://james.darpinian.com/satellites))
is a nice tool for finding these. I have a young kid and it's been fun heading
out at night and spotting these.

------
ChuckMcM
This is an interesting capability.

Since the very first spy satellites were placed into orbit, adversaries have
carefully tracked their orbits so that they could avoid exposure during an
overpass. This form of cat and mouse game has had various options thrown at
it, from satellites that can change their orbits, to "cover" satellites which
operate as one thing and provide surveillance capability in addition to their
"public" persona.

SpaceX threw up 2 satellites on a ship that was carrying 60 separate
satellites (the others being Starlink nodes). But it _could_ throw up 60 black
sky satellites if asked. Further it could do that fairly quickly[1] from time
to request to launch using a flight proven booster. Or perhaps 30 satellites
with their own booster engine to maximize the number of orbits they could
reach.

At some point continuous monitoring of a point on Earth becomes simply a
question of cost. That can be kind of game changing from a geopolitical
perspective.

[1] Where quickly here is anywhere from 10 to 60 days depending on whether or
not a company like black sky could have the upper stage on hand with the
delivery system.

~~~
ricardobeat
Planet Labs already has full coverage of the Earth, and with the latest SkySat
(another 3 launched earlier today) they will have the ability to image the
same point on earth 12x a day.

I think it's very unlikely that the USA and maybe others _don 't_ have this
capability already.

~~~
garmaine
The USA does not. The NRO does not operate large fleets of small satellites.
They have just a few big ones. The optics are way better though.

~~~
natcombs
>> optics are way better though

That was going to be my question. Doesn’t the NRO need big optical lenses for
their missions? Are there any “telescopic” advancements that can fit into
small sats that can meet their mission objectives?

~~~
chiph
In 2012 the NRO turned over two satellites to NASA [0] for research purposes.
The scientists who have examined them (they have not been launched yet)
described them as being better than Hubble even though they are comparable in
size (designed to fit in the Shuttle bay). Given the unlimited funds available
to them, I expect they're a decade ahead of industry.

The NRO is probably going for larger lenses in future satellites to increase
their field of view. Could they use a series of smaller sats orbiting in a
cluster to form a virtual lens, much like the multiple mirror telescope in
Arizona [1]? Maybe.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_National_Reconnaissance_O...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_National_Reconnaissance_Office_space_telescope_donation_to_NASA)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMT_Observatory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMT_Observatory)

~~~
walrus01
To clarify what they turned over were lens and optics assemblies that are a
sort of cousin to the hubble space telescope's structural body and lens, not
whole satellites. No power systems, no control electronics, no batteries, no
comm systems, etc.

------
noodlesUK
I think it’s funny that people are surprised by this. It’s not new technology
really, the defence sector has had taskable satellite imagery for decades,
it’s just a matter of the cost coming down to the point where it’s feasible
commercially. That is super cool though. There are a lot of applications for
space based real-time imagery that could be tremendously more useful to the
majority of society than tracking bad guys.

~~~
tpmx
A random example of a useful application: realtime forest fire detection. In
e.g. Sweden during the summer months people are still paid (well, compensated
for their expenses) to fly around in Cessnas looking for smoke plumes.

Imagine being able to dispatch a helicopter to drown out a typical forest fire
within 10 minutes of the fire starting while it's still small. That's a game
changer.

~~~
mschuster91
> Imagine being able to dispatch a helicopter to drown out a typical forest
> fire within 10 minutes of the fire starting while it's still small. That's a
> game changer.

And not necessarily a good one. Many forest ecosystems depend on somewhat
regular fires to "clean out" debris. The problem however is that "thanks" to
climate change leading to drier forests, what once used to be a fire that only
consumed fallen off leaves etc. while leaving the big trees unharmed now burns
intense and long enough to actually damage the big trees.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

~~~
namibj
Sounds like you need to wait for the big trees to still be wet enough, but the
leaves dried up, and then light a fire to have it burn while you're keeping an
eye on it and know it won't burn down your nice forest.

------
nippoo
What, exactly, used to be so difficult about this? Do new satellites take time
to train their orbits, or test systems, or otherwise commission when they're
in the air? What technological changes have happened recently to make this
feasible?

~~~
garmaine
Yes. All of the above.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Pretty much. However the biggest change is the capability per kilogram that
can be packed into a satellite now. Today a 3U cubesat weighing roughly 20kg
can take thousands of images, process them locally to manage for weather
effects and orbital skew, and then transmit them to a single ground station
several times a day.

The first spy satellites weighed tons and literally dropped film canisters
back into space to re-enter and be recovered by aircraft or helicopters which
would then take the film to a laboratory to be developed[1]. Typically, a
satellite would take a few weeks to both stabilize in the environment in
space, calibrate its optics, take some test photos for analysis, re-calibrate
based on those results, and then be ready to go.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_(satellite)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_\(satellite\))

------
Cactus2018
larger image link

[https://techcrunch.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/08/image-f-3....](https://techcrunch.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/08/image-f-3.png)

~~~
762236
They are detecting velocity vectors for moving vehicles.

~~~
adinb
Private/Commercial JSTARS?

------
BooneJS
The night sky, for those that can see the Milky Way, is going to look like
Wall•E soon, right? Gone are the days of Iridium flares.

------
asldkjaslkdj
I do not look forward to the time where something akin to Google Maps starts
to approach real-time (yeah I realize the government can more or less do this,
but I'm happy with being obscure enough to not catch their gaze)

