How Google destroys spy satellites KH-12

50

The main elements of the reconnaissance satellite HEXAGON KH-9, including the aerial camera for cartographic surveying. (Photo by the National Directorate of Military Space Intelligence of the USA)

The National Earth Intelligence Agency, the NGA (National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, NGA) recently confessed to what everyone has long suspected, namely that it receives most of its satellite photos from commercial satellites. For the military, this was not a secret before. This is due to the fact that when the first commercial photo satellites appeared at the end of 1990, the US military became one of the first buyers and users of their declassified images. Photo commercial-class satellites gradually caught up with their military colleagues (who appeared in orbit in 1960's) and even received orders from the military itself. The greatest impetus to this process was the appearance in 2005 of the program year Google Earth. This easy-to-use web application revolutionized military intelligence. At first, the military did not like to admit this fact. Nevertheless, Google Earth presented a huge number of satellite photographs for viewing to everyone, and in a very convenient form to use, while making more information available to military professionals (as well as to terrorists, criminals and scientists). Military users instantly appreciate how great this new tool is.

For the US Department of Defense, the main problem with Google Earth was not the ease of use offered by the application, but the manner in which this application demonstrated the shortcomings of the NGA responsible for producing satellite photos, editing them, and supplying them to troops. The trouble was that the material coming to the troops was either not what was required, or it did not come when it was required. With the advent of Google Earth, it became clear how to provide satellite images of everyone and how it can be done with minimal difficulties.

How Google destroys spy satellites KH-12

The diagram shows the size of reconnaissance satellites and decades of their deployment. The far right is KH-11, it is slightly larger than KH-9, which was discontinued after a failed launch in 1986. The KH-11 spacecraft costs more than $ 2 billion, and two additional satellites ordered from Lockheed Martin after the failed Boeing program on Future Imaging Arcitecture cost more than $ 4 billion each. The advanced KH-11 is gradually being replaced by top-secret upgraded spacecraft. (Scheme of Giuseppe De Chiara, The Space Review)

NGA and other US government organizations prefer to keep all satellite images (and aerial photographs) in secret archives in case they suddenly contain some secret information that could interest the enemy. Google Earth has changed the rules of the game. Making the military change their decisions is always very difficult. Limited access to satellite photos is a known issue. Beginning in the 1980s (when large numbers of satellite images became available, often very quickly), generals and officers with access to “satellite images” often complained about the difficulties they faced when getting this material on hand or handing it officers and soldiers most in need of these pictures.

Despite the fact that tens of billions of dollars were spent on reconnaissance satellites since 1960's, US troops, as a rule, received "leftovers", and usually the information came in too late to be useful. Until now, "people from outer space" regularly demand from the US Congress more money to build more satellites and special systems for transmitting satellite images "to the troops". The promises were never fulfilled at all, or were never fulfilled on time. After the 1991 war in Kuwait, the generals gave angry testimony to Congress about the current situation in this area. "People from space" admitted their guilt and promised to improve if they receive enough funding. The money was transferred to them, but the troops did not receive anything.




Dayton, Ohio. 1 KH-7 Gambit Intelligence Satellite in the Cold War Gallery at the National Museum of the United States Air Force. (Photo by USAF)

When American troops gained access to Google Earth in 2005, they were able to see for themselves what they had lost before. Even worse, the software used in Google Earth was first developed for the NGA, but before using this useful tool, it was necessary to take care of security considerations and bureaucratic details. This was the main reason why using an interface like Google was impossible on such a large scale. While the troops were fighting, the NGA constantly insisted on how to work with secret documents.

Shortly after 2005, the US military presented the NGA Google Earth application, and Congress had to take note of this. Nevertheless, NGA officials turned out to be more accustomed to decision-making circles than the angry military, and this explains the still slow progress in this matter. At least, at the disposal of the US military was Google Earth, but, unfortunately, it was the enemy. However, over the next decade, the army was able to reorient itself to commercial satellite imaging providers, who, in turn, supplied more and more high-quality satellite imagery every year. Many of these new satellite images had higher resolution and were not available on Google Earth. Nevertheless, the American army could not afford to buy these images (as other commercial consumers can do) and provide the troops with instant access to them for the reason that commercial satellite photographs are not classified.


Dayton, Ohio. 3 KH-8 Gambit Intelligence Satellite in the Cold War Gallery at the National Museum of the United States Air Force. (Photo by USAF)

After some time, the NGA ceased to "sulk" and began working with a large number of unclassified satellite photos. It also encouraged NGA to make high-quality (high resolution and other improvements) satellite photographs more accessible to troops, or at least to military intelligence officers and specialists in detailed planning of military operations. It also forced other intelligence agencies to make their data (especially satellite electronic data) quickly accessible (often in real time) to the troops in need.

While Google Earth opened the gateways and provided the troops with instant access to satellite imagery, in the beginning, high-resolution satellite photographs very needed by the troops appeared. It all started in the 1960s with the advent of the first series of KH spy satellites (Key Hole, Keyhole). The first KH-1 satellite with a film camera appeared in 1959, but the first successful satellite appeared only in 1960. Thus, until the 1970s, satellites using photographic film were in service with the warring parties. KH satellites from the 1st to the 9th series sent the captured film for further processing (for high-resolution photographs) back to Earth in special capsules. The KH-9 reconnaissance satellite, which entered orbit in 1971, was not only the last of the satellites using photographic film, but the largest and most capable satellite. Its main design was used in subsequent satellites with digital cameras. KH-9 could cover large areas with a high (for that time) resolution of 0,6 meters. This was more than enough for recognition and counting. tanks, planes and even small ships. The nineteenth and outermost satellite KH-9 was launched into orbit in 1984. KH-9 was a 13-ton satellite with several cameras and 4 or 5 modules for returning captured film for its further processing and analysis. Satellites KN-9 received the name "Big Birds".




Dayton, Ohio. Currently on display at the National Air Force Museum, the Gambit 3 KH-8 is one of the three previously classified reconnaissance satellites. Three satellites were one of the most important intelligence systems in the United States from 1960 to 1980 and played an important role in winning the Cold War and maintaining US national security. (Photo by USAF)

The era of film satellites began to fade with the launch of the first KH-1976 satellite with a digital camera on board in 11. These satellites were large, weighing almost 15 tons, and digital cameras were able to get higher resolution images and broadcast them back to Earth. The resolution allowed identifying objects of 200 mm size from a height of 70 km. Digital cameras were more flexible than film cameras and eventually surpassed film cameras in all respects. The telescopic cameras of the KH-11 satellites operated on the similarity of high-resolution cameras. The image was formed continuously and transmitted to earth stations. To complete the process and produce photographs identical to those obtained using a conventional film camera, computers were used. This made it possible to observe a live picture, as well as the thermal radiation of various objects, and to evaluate the nature of these objects. KH-11 satellites often allow you to determine the type of metal from which an object is made.

All this is not cheap. These satellites cost more than $ 400 million each, and their service life is three or four years, depending on fuel consumption. In addition, it is necessary to use at least two satellites simultaneously to provide the required coverage and eliminate the need to change the satellite orbit too often. The last, fifteenth, KH-11, was put into orbit in 2011. Since the launch of the first of the five KN-11 "1 Block" in 1976, at least four KH-11 models have been created. Since the 1960-s, more than one hundred KH satellites have been launched.

The launch of the next-generation satellite, KH-12, was to be carried out in 1987. However, due to problems with the space shuttle (one of which exploded during launch), only the late KH-1987 was launched in October of 11. The launch of the KH-12 was postponed, despite some of the advantages it had over the KH-11. Along with the improvement of ground-based data processing equipment, the KH-12 was capable of real-time data transfer. This allowed live to follow the events on the big screen with high resolution. It also allowed the military headquarters and other users to obtain satellite information directly, bypassing the processing centers of the CIA or the NRA (National Intelligence Agency). Data from the most sensitive sensors still had to be studied by experts elsewhere. The KH-12 satellites should have generated even more enthusiasts among users of satellite intelligence. In fact, this was due to the deeply modernized KN-11. In fact, these satellites are called KH-12, but so far they are officially known as KH-11.


The Lockheed Martin KH-9 reconnaissance satellites with the film being returned to Earth were in service with the new KH-11 for 10 years. Two large PTZ cameras are located in the stern of the vehicle next to the four lowered capsules with the film taken. A low-resolution camera is installed on the nose of the spacecraft where the fifth descent capsule with the film is located. (Photo by the National Directorate of Military Space Intelligence of the USA)

The number of photographic and electronic data has grown significantly faster than the ability of analysts to do something useful with them. In addition to the KH satellites, radar and electronic intelligence satellites also existed. There are also missile defense program satellites that use heat sensors to detect rocket launches.

Until now, there are no real KH-12 satellites (new design), and partly because commercial satellite images have become cheaper and more convenient for use for military purposes. Many of the features of the KH-12 were simply implemented on subsequent KH-11 models. This turned out to be cheaper than building a new KH-12 design, and required less paperwork. Thus, "people from space" are asking for less money to develop new spy satellites and spend more on creating a reserve of GPS satellites and communication satellites that can be quickly launched to replace losses in wartime. The US Department of Defense is already purchasing more commercial-grade satellites.

In 2007, the US Department of Defense agreed to spend 10 billion dollars to build two military spy satellites, similar to those already in orbit, and two more commercial-class satellites. The US DOD was forced to go for this uncharacteristically cautious behavior under the pressure of Congress. Politicians were outraged by the inability of the US Department of Defense to design and build a new generation of military spy satellites. For example, in 2005, the United States canceled the Future Imaging Architecture (FIA) program. This disaster cost the US government more than $ 10 billion when a poorly thought-out and unsuccessfully launched program to create a more powerful new generation of reconnaissance satellites failed. The two existing military spy satellites were simply replaced by similar constructions instead of the ambitious FIA program. In addition, the Pentagon purchased two commercial-class photo satellites for about $ 850 million each to replace what the US Department of Defense is currently spending on acquiring photographs of private companies. Both types of satellites are owned by the US Department of Defense.








Intelligence satellite HEXAGON KH-9 of the cold war era in the national museum of the USAF. (Photo by USAF)

The future information display system (Future Imagery Architecture, FIA) was to be a new generation of smaller and numerous spy satellites that could provide better target coverage and, thanks to a larger number of devices, reduce the possibility of an enemy destroying a group of US spy satellites. The KH satellites were to be decommissioned in the 2005 year, giving way to FIA satellites. Launched in 1998, the project was poorly designed and poorly managed. Looking back, we can safely say that the project was doomed from the very beginning due to the lack of necessary technical skills from the government and the choice of the subcontractor who offered the lowest price for the project (Boeing), but who did not have the relevant experience and ability to lead such a project. . After the cancellation of the FIA ​​in 2005, work was continued on individual new satellites. Thus, at the end of the 2013 of the year, there were two FIA Topaz radar satellites in orbit. KH satellites will last until the end of this decade in the form of KH-12. This is not a satellite of a new design, but a significantly improved and updated KH-11. The KH-12 satellites have always existed as an alias for the extreme version of the KH-11.

It has long been assumed that the US government simply relies on low-resolution images of commercial satellites (able to detect vehicles and buildings) to meet its satellite needs. However, military and intelligence agencies often need more “satellite time” than commercial companies can provide. In addition, the US government is committed to preserving sensitive information by possessing complete control over a pair of commercial-class satellites.

Two new commercial-class satellite owned by the state took on the task of tracking troop movements, finding bases and military operations in general. Two new military-grade high-resolution satellites are spy satellites of an improved version of existing models. They are used to obtain more detailed (able to detect an object smaller than an inch in size) photographs of what a commercial-class satellite has found (with a resolution of 30-45 cm).

US troops and military strategists are also big users of Google Earth, annoying people working on the program of military satellites. However, for many military needs, satellite photos of Google Earth are enough. Two commercial-class military reconnaissance satellites prevent the risk of information leaks (about the image that the military is interested in) and provide much more opportunities to work with low-resolution photographs.



The KH-9 Hexagon heavy reconnaissance satellite is presented at the exhibition of the National Aerospace Museum of the Stephen Udvar-Hazy Center after it was declassified on September 17 of 2011. Larger than the school bus (18 meters in length) and with a starting weight of 13 tons, XHUMX KH-20 Hexagon satellites were launched by the National Intelligence Agency in the period between 9 and 1971. (Photo by Roger Gulmette (Roger Guillemette) SPACE.com)

The leaders of the military satellite system are increasingly concerned about the needs of wartime, and this explains the request for spare GPS satellites and communication satellites. Compared to reconnaissance satellites, they are relatively cheap and most in demand in the event of the transfer of hostilities to near-earth orbit and the destruction of some American satellites. There is also growing concern about space debris in orbit, which are small fragments of old satellites and spent rockets and an increased risk of damage to or destruction of satellites by this debris.

Meanwhile, KH-12 is a thing of the past, since the last upgraded KH-11 was put into orbit in 2013.
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    2 March 2015 06: 19
    interesting with the development of holography (after all, they draw with water vapor lasers) can a satellite be fooled? Or it’s like we’ve worked on blinding satellites
    1. +10
      2 March 2015 07: 10
      Too complicated, easier to fool with inflatable weapons:


      From the satellite it looks like a real one, even heating in the engine area is simulated, so that even in the thermal range it seems real.
      1. +6
        2 March 2015 07: 16
        Well, so we can blow the cities laughing
      2. +7
        2 March 2015 07: 57
        Quote: crazyrom
        Too complicated, easier to fool with inflatable weapons:

        In addition, it is necessary to simulate the operation of the radar and missile guidance stations. And here you can't do with inflatable models alone. Currently, all the coordinates of the positions of the long-range air defense systems S-300P and S-300V are known to our "potential partners". It is understood that during the "special period" they must be removed from the attack and relocated to reserve positions.
        In a satellite image of Google Earth, the position of the S-400 air defense system in the Elektrostal area.
        1. +2
          2 March 2015 15: 11
          Quote: Bongo
          S-300V are known to our "potential partners".

          Why are they afraid of the coordinates of the positions of the military air defense they know, the location is yes, but it's a little different.
          1. +2
            3 March 2015 02: 43
            Quote: PSih2097
            Why are they afraid of the coordinates of the positions of the military air defense they know, the location is yes, but it's a little different.

            And with what fright did the S-400 become "military air defense"? Confused nothing?
            1. +2
              3 March 2015 04: 28
              Quote: Bongo
              Why are they afraid of the coordinates of the positions of the military air defense they know, the location is yes, but it's a little different.

              However, at present, due to the shortage of S-300P (the old S-300PTs are almost all decommissioned, and the S-300PS are to be written off or overhauled in the near future), military air defense missile systems "Buk" and S-300V have begun to be involved in combat duty.
              Here, for example, a satellite image of the C-300B positions near Birobidzhan in the JAO. The complex is in position on an ongoing basis.
        2. +3
          2 March 2015 21: 53
          Quote: Bongo
          In a satellite image of Google Earth, the position of the S-400 air defense system in the Elektrostal area.

          In a satellite image of Google Earth, the strategic missile carrier station in Engels.
          1. +1
            3 March 2015 02: 44
            Quote: Bayonet
            In a satellite image of Google Earth, the strategic missile carrier station in Engels.

            I remember, he himself laid out wink For example here:
            http://topwar.ru/39929-rossiyskie-strategicheskie-yadernye-sily-i-sredstva-pro-n
            a-snimkah-google-earth.html
      3. 0
        3 March 2015 02: 47
        By the way, corner reflectors are also added to inflatable models. so that they also look realistic in radio waves.
        1. +1
          3 March 2015 02: 49
          Quote: HitMaster
          By the way, corner reflectors are also added to inflatable models. so that they also look realistic in radio waves.

          Of course, this adds realism, but missile guidance stations and surveillance radars must also "shine" themselves.
          1. 0
            3 March 2015 23: 25
            in Yugoslavia, ordinary microwave ovens coped with this task perfectly. cheap and angry! )
            1. +1
              4 March 2015 00: 36
              Quote: HitMaster
              in Yugoslavia, ordinary microwave ovens coped with this task perfectly. cheap and angry! )

              As for "fine" - this is certainly an exaggeration ... Special imitators are many times more effective.
    2. +1
      2 March 2015 07: 47
      Quote: bmv04636
      Or it’s like we’ve worked on blinding satellites

      yes, flashed once very long ago. Either in the press I read, or in the book, something that supposedly the American astronauts complained from the shuttle that someone was blinding cameras on the territory of the USSR. winked
      1. +1
        3 March 2015 02: 50
        Yes, no, these guys indulged in a laser pointer! )
    3. +5
      2 March 2015 12: 08
      Quote: bmv04636
      with the development of holography (after all, they draw with water vapor lasers) can a satellite be fooled?

      ...not. There is also the RTR spacecraft, and especially the radar, which build three-dimensional images.

      Article and author "+" for a detailed discussion of the topic.
      Only there is a question for the author about "The resolution made it possible to identify objects 200 mm in size from a height of 70 km."
      Met earlier in other materials. But, opticians are very critical of the possibility of achieving such a resolution. Imagine what it takes: an ideal atmosphere and also ideal conditions for shooting ...
      1. +3
        2 March 2015 13: 17
        Quote: Rus2012
        opticians are very critical of the possibility of achieving such a resolution. Imagine what it takes: an ideal atmosphere and also ideal conditions for shooting ...

        This is in the presence of one picture.
        If several images are available, then it is possible to numerically level out the contribution of a non-ideal atmosphere.
      2. +2
        2 March 2015 15: 06
        And yet. Especially if there are several shots from close angles. Noise and interference are filtered out. The technology has been worked out for a long time. For example, in astronomy, they take pictures of super-weak objects and objects with a small angular size.
      3. +1
        2 March 2015 17: 35
        In 2014, a message appeared in the press about the discovery of several new species of animals, the largest species, smaller than a cat, if I’m not mistaken in Australia, but this is all the lyrics, and the prose is this, their companion opened - a spy, a thermal imager spotted a source, But the program could not identify. As a result, zoologists - a shock!
      4. 0
        3 March 2015 20: 23
        It's about the size of an item per pixel.
  2. 0
    2 March 2015 07: 30
    In the last photo of a heavy satellite in the side walls of the window or portholes. For what? Is it also an orbital car?
    wassat
    1. -1
      2 March 2015 08: 09
      Quote: abrakadabre
      In the last photo of a heavy satellite in the side walls of the window or portholes. For what? Is it also an orbital car?
      wassat

      Where? wink
      1. +2
        2 March 2015 14: 59
        As where? Have you, dear, banned images from the article? The latest picture in the article:

        hi
        1. +1
          2 March 2015 18: 34
          Quote: abrakadabre
          As where?

          At the museum exhibit? Duc there and mammoth in the context can be seen. Does this mean that in nature there are mammoths in the context? wink
          1. +4
            2 March 2015 20: 15
            Quote: professor
            At the museum exhibit?

            He was like that in life.


            due to the technology of shooting (KH-7 shooting modes: stereo, side pair, continuous (continuous), tilted) and Os.
            the optical system "Gambits" occupied practically the entire volume of the satellite, and was not concentrated in the camera.






            1. +2
              2 March 2015 20: 21
              Quote: opus
              He was like that in life.

              What is "this"? This is how it was before launch.

              It's about "in the side walls of the window or portholes" ...
              1. +3
                2 March 2015 21: 40
                Quote: professor
                That's what it was like before launch.

                It is without TK of a casing, on assembly

                KH-9 Hexagon during assembly by Lockheed

                He was like a wagon in life

                This is not a "cover" that would not be pawing with your hands (pawing and gathering dust is the most important thing, and not heat protection, which stabilizes the geometric parameters for the STILL CAMERA)


                only the "nose" differs, where the descent capsule is separated
                Quote: professor
                It's about "in the side walls of the window or portholes" ...

                orientation and horizontal sensors, branded HEXAGON ThermalControl, may be an option from Perkin-Elmer-Itek FULCRUM (M) with sub-sensors.

                outer shell: cocoons-polished aluminum
  3. -2
    2 March 2015 07: 55
    Now, it seems to me, it is worth focusing on the rapidly deployed group of short-lived small-sized satellites. To launch a constellation of such satellites into orbit, they worked there for a month or two and burned down. Moreover, the satellites can be completed for the necessary tasks: communication, reconnaissance, target designation ...
    1. +8
      2 March 2015 08: 08
      Quote: Zomanus
      Now, it seems to me, it is worth focusing on the rapidly deployed group of short-lived small-sized satellites.

      Microsatellites are already in orbit, with long-lived ones. The next step is satellite clusters.
      They will lively watch the process of inflating tanks while rubbing their hands ... bully
      1. +4
        2 March 2015 08: 26
        Oleg, good afternoon! This publication has something in common with what I wrote earlier. If interested - you can see.
        http://topwar.ru/33322-google-earth-razoblachitel-voennyh-sekretov.html
        http://topwar.ru/34400-rossiyskiy-voennyy-potencial-na-sputnikovyh-snimkah-googl
        e-earth.html
        http://topwar.ru/34600-sledy-voyny-na-sputnikovyh-snimkah-google-earth.html
        http://topwar.ru/39929-rossiyskie-strategicheskie-yadernye-sily-i-sredstva-pro-n
        a-snimkah-google-earth.html
        1. +1
          2 March 2015 08: 29
          hi
          In this publication, I do not like the performance characteristics of modern satellites, I do not believe it. request

          PS
          Live links not working?
          1. +1
            2 March 2015 09: 44
            Quote: professor
            Live links not working?

            Unfortunately, it turns out to be inserted only in the publication, but not in the comment. request
          2. +5
            2 March 2015 13: 00
            if so everything is super duper, then where are the pictures of our weapons allegedly in the DPR and LPR, where are the shots of the downed Boeing and the lost Boeing of Malaysian Airlines.
            1. +3
              2 March 2015 14: 11
              Quote: bmv04636
              if so everything is super duper, then where are the pictures of our weapons allegedly in the DPR and LPR, where are the shots of the downed Boeing and the lost Boeing of Malaysian Airlines.

              The place of the crash of a downed Boeing:
            2. +1
              2 March 2015 15: 21
              where are the shots of the downed Boeing and the lost Boeing of Malaysian Airlines.


              The problem is not in the pictures, but in the amount of information provided, when all (I emphasize) information is collected and processed, then by this time it will lose relevance (this does not apply to Boeing, this story is different), and the second is not 100% coverage of the surface and hardly when it will be (everything rests on financing).
      2. +2
        2 March 2015 09: 52
        so you can inflate them in the hangar and put a cyclist or a moped inside a cyclist, he will himself leave the hangar or out of the forest into the fog ... "accidental" explosion of an old satellite can greatly thin out satellites and clusters.
      3. 0
        2 March 2015 12: 17
        Quote: professor
        They will lively watch the process of inflating tanks while rubbing their hands ...

        ... well, to ensure continuous monitoring of a given area, at least 100 spacecraft built in a certain way are required. Then, no one will prohibit the production of active interference, up to the output-damage of the optics.
  4. +1
    2 March 2015 09: 45
    Mankurt couldn’t insert in his article a phrase about the US victory over the USSR in the Cold War thanks to these satellites.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. 0
    2 March 2015 10: 25
    I’m somehow missing the topic of space lately, but here is an article about enemy satellites. The article is interesting, but explain to me how the satellite can be extreme? The last one in the series, but not the last one.
    1. +5
      2 March 2015 15: 16
      This is a modern major fashion, born of superstition: the word "extreme" replaces the usual "last". It seems like "the last" is the last in life, before death. And after the "extreme" you can more than once ...
      It would be funny if it were not used so often. It would be with such speed and stickiness that normal education and erudition spread like all these superstitions sucked from the finger. And well, if from a finger ...
      negative
  7. 0
    2 March 2015 11: 17
    fun
    we can clone google earth to the last shot
    replace retouched pictures with your own
    in general, a good base
    What for?
    well, very comfortable
    but you need to make sure in case of disconnection
    1. The comment was deleted.
  8. +4
    2 March 2015 12: 20
    The troops in the field do not need photographs, but maps with grids and landmarks, artillery cannot work from photographs, they need topographic location and heights. Satellite photos are only needed by the headquarters to assess the enemy. Therefore, no "base" in reserve makes sense, the command staff need the latest data, and even better, live broadcast from orbit.
    The only thing else for which photos may be needed is for cartographers to adjust maps once every couple of years. Or if the staff’s ears were flashed and the troops didn’t provide maps, then of course you can print googlers on the printer, but this is a force majeure for which the chief of staff must be removed.
    1. +2
      2 March 2015 15: 21
      The troops in the field need not photographs but maps with a grid and landmarks, artillery on photographs will not work, topographic reference and heights are needed.
      So Google gives both a binding, and heights. Another question is to whom it issues correctly and with what accuracy. And to whom with an error and specially introduced inaccuracy.
  9. 0
    2 March 2015 14: 32
    KN-11 is very similar to Hubble)
    1. -1
      2 March 2015 18: 40
      Quote: Turanchox
      about photos will not work, you need topographic location and heights. Only headquarters needs satellite photos to evaluate

      Not surprising. They used similar technologies.
      1. +5
        2 March 2015 21: 13
        Quote: professor
        They used similar technologies.

        What they have in common is that the launch vehicles were launched into orbit, and both satellites
        George Goddard’s method (drawing the film through the camera along a thin vertical slit at the same speed as the speed of the camera relative to the object) was not used on the Hubble Space Telescope. It is understandable. Not the Earth’s surface shot X.



        WFPC (2) - made by Jet Propulsion Laboratory, not "Eastman Kodak"
        The WFPC had 8 CCDs and a KH-7 ("keyhole") camera had a nine-inch wide film.
        COSTAR on Gambit was not.
        Hubble does not have a returnable capsule, the Hubble data is first stored in the on-board drives (reel tape recorders, were replaced by solid-state drives). Then, through the TDRSS communication satellite system located in the geostationary orbit, the data is transmitted to the Goddard Center, online t.s.
        Gambit Capsules Hooked

        from C-119J aircraft (then C-130 Hercules)

        =======================
        The common thing is still likely that due to the jamb of PerkinElmer,Kodak is the same made a backup telescope mirror

        ... but it remained on the earth
        1. -3
          2 March 2015 21: 50
          Quote: opus
          What they have in common is that the launch vehicles were launched into orbit, and both satellites

          In 2011, the NRA proposed to transfer to NASA two optical systems remaining from spy satellites on which the mirrors are suspiciously similar to those used on the Hable:
          Two large optical telescope assemblies bequeathed to NASA by the US National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) were built for a satellite imaging program that was canceled in 2005 due to lengthy delays and massive cost overruns, according to multiple sources.

          NRO donates spare telescopes to NASA
          The donated telescopes are almost identical to the Hubble Space Telescope

          PS
          It is believed to resemble the Hubble Space Telescope in size and shape, as the satellites were shipped in similar containers. Furthermore, a NASA history of the Hubble, in discussing the reasons for switching from a 3-meter main mirror to a 2.4-meter design, states: "In addition, changing to a 2.4-meter mirror would lessen fabrication costs by using manufacturing technologies developed for military spy satellites. " A CIA history states that the primary mirror on the first KH-11s measured 2.34 meters, but sizes increased in later versions. NRO led the development of a computer controlled mirror polishing technique, which was subsequently also used for the polishing of the primary mirror of the Hubble Space Telescope.
          1. +5
            2 March 2015 22: 51
            Quote: professor
            mirrors are suspiciously similar to those used on the Hub:

            This is ridiculous
            "Viewing port" - Gambit's porthole.

            Lens for KH-7, KH-8 and KH-9 cameras

            optical system "Gambits" (with dimensions in feet)


            ==============
            Hubble space telescope








            A. The observatory is probably the same with photo intelligence?


            1. -3
              3 March 2015 10: 05
              Quote: opus
              This is ridiculous

              Me and those whose links I posted didn’t make me laugh at all. request
              1. +5
                3 March 2015 10: 49
                Quote: professor
                and those whose links

                People who write these pearls:
                gap of the spatio-temporal continuum (1998 for KN-11 and 1978 for Hubble)
                -historical failure (then referred to OAO-2, Large Space Telescop or something)
                -logical failure (for photo-engraving from 200-400km heights, the Earth's surface, completely different orientations, mirrors, tricks, exposures, angles are needed
                resolution, diffraction effects, etc.than for mapping the surface of Pluto and Eris or exploring the Orion Nebula)
                -film (albeit with sperforation, empty moving at a speed of displacement of the photographed surface), this is not a CCD matrix.

                Quote: professor
                this did not make laugh at all.

                Well, if you don’t see the difference between binoculars and a telescope, then there’s nothing to help
                1. 0
                  3 March 2015 20: 36
                  Well, a person just translated an article, he does not understand the issue at all. How did he know that Hubble could not focus on the Earth even from its orbit, not to mention the orbits of the hexagons. And what for two and a half meters of a mirror for work on the ground. Generally ...
                  1. +1
                    4 March 2015 01: 07
                    Quote: Absurdidat
                    And what for two and a half meters of a mirror for working on the ground

                    I’ll correct a bit: 2,4 m is rather big even according to terrestrial concepts — there are already telescopes with mirrors up to 10 m in diameter (for example, Keck1 and Keck2).

                    Due to the fact that the diameter was reduced from 3,0 to 2,4, they saved (at those prices) 200 000 000,00 $ (at current prices around 800 mln.d.USA)
                    The universe through the eyes of the Hubble telescope
                  2. -1
                    4 March 2015 08: 18
                    Quote: Absurdidat
                    How did he know that Hubble could not focus on the Earth even from its orbit, not to mention the orbits of the hexagons.

                    ... and where did I write that someone is trying to focus on Earth with the Hubl? fool
  10. +1
    2 March 2015 15: 33
    Quote: denk20
    I’m somehow missing the topic of space lately, but here is an article about enemy satellites. The article is interesting, but explain to me how the satellite can be extreme? The last one in the series, but not the last one.


    Quote: abrakadabre
    This is a modern major fashion, born of superstition: the word "extreme" replaces the usual "last". It seems like "the last" is the last in life, before death. And after the "extreme" you can more than once ...
    It would be funny if it were not used so often. It would be with such speed and stickiness that normal education and erudition spread like all these superstitions sucked from the finger. And well, if from a finger ...
    negative


    2 denk20 and abrakadabre.
    In aviation, you must not have served? Then they would know that aviators never say "last" flight, but say "last". And the "major" fashion has nothing to do with it.
    1. +3
      2 March 2015 18: 43
      Quote: Cosmos-1869
      In aviation, they should not have served?

      My father, a career officer of the Air Force, disaccustomed me to use the word "last" in such situations, and then personally in the service of the Navy they continued to disaccustom me ...
  11. 0
    2 March 2015 16: 57
    Quote: bmv04636
    interesting with the development of holography (after all, they draw with water vapor lasers) can a satellite be fooled? Or it’s like we’ve worked on blinding satellites

    It will be more realistic to write or draw from a satellite in the clouds ... for propaganda purposes.
  12. 0
    2 March 2015 19: 21
    The caption to the photo is embarrassing: "... and played an important role in the victory in the Cold War ...". In my opinion, even if they won the Cold War (although there are great doubts that it is over), it is clearly not with their beautiful weapons.
    1. +2
      2 March 2015 21: 55
      Quote: ReutovIvan
      , then obviously not with its beautiful weapons.

      Gambit 1 KH-7, Gambit 3 KH-8 and Hexagon KH-9, were among the most important US photo reconnaissance systems used from the 1960s to the 1980s, and played a critical role in winning the Cold War and maintaining US national security/ played the most important role in winning the Cold War and maintaining US national security /

      Plesetsk, R-7 family launch pad, photo of the Gambit-1 4030 missions (July 1966, left) and 4038 (June 1967, right)


      Sary-Shagan, Balkhash-9, radar early warning system "Dniester".