Thread

1. walrus01 · 1790727565 · focus · HN ↗

   I'd be more astonished if there isn't something superior to the SR71 (likely unmanned) that has been flying around at night from facilities like Groom Lake for years. Look at how long the RQ180 was flying around in semi-public and known about before it became seen in daylight by plane spotters in Greece. And a long time before that there were public relations approved photos of the Lockheed Martin Polecat.

   There were a series of extremely public quotations from senior DoD officially recently about how they plan to aggressively retire the Global Hawk program (which is a mostly non stealth aircraft), reading between the lines it's because they have something much better.

   edit: for those who haven&#x27;t seen the RQ180: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?client=firefox-b-d&amp;q=RQ180+greece" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?client=firefox-b-d&amp;q=RQ180+gre...

   edit 2 (apologies for the X link): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;MechDesignxyz&#x2F;status&#x2F;2041281689838584193" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;x.com&#x2F;MechDesignxyz&#x2F;status&#x2F;2041281689838584193

   1. hilsdev · 1790727775 · focus · HN ↗

      I suspect everything comparable of late has been orbital, which begs the question what is it they’re worried about with orbital? Satellite warfare is already accelerating if the rumors are true, is it that this is untouchable still? Is there some new camera sensor where eliminating that extra atmospheric diffraction or slowing down (lol) is needed?

      1. walrus01 · 1790727944 · focus · HN ↗

         I am sure that the orbital capabilities are also vastly improved from what the public has ever seen. But I think there&#x27;s likely a high degree of tactical value in having something that can keep station over a certain active conflict area (as an RQ180 can, maybe flying in a racetrack pattern at altitude, with sensors aimed down).

         If you&#x27;ve ever seen the publicly released videos and audio of an RQ9 operator in communication with ground units watching the activity of a group of men&#x2F;vehicles on the ground, in live real time, something like that.

         As compared to periodic revisits by LEO orbit satellites that don&#x27;t maintain persistent live coverage, or the extreme distance and data acquisition problem that aiming sensors in geostationary orbit at a 10x10km target area might pose.

         1. Demiurge · 1790730404 · focus · HN ↗

            There are satellites in geostationary orbit that have realtime live feed and agile pointing capability. However, besides the SAR, RGB style observations are limited by clouds, and also you can’t switch out the sensors on a whim. Airborne platforms are always more flexible and cheaper for certain missions.

            1. adastra22 · 1790731526 · focus · HN ↗

               I think you are confused. Spy satellites do not use geostationary orbits.

               1. Demiurge · 1790734916 · focus · HN ↗

                  Why do you think I am confused? Is this a form of internet condenscension, or are you able to diagnose my mental state based a single comment? No, I don&#x27;t think I&#x27;m confused.

                  1. adastra22 · 1790809341 · focus · HN ↗

                     Because GEO is about 100x further than LEO, which means the signal is about 10,000x weaker. Also the risk to geo communications from having multiple birds in the same slot is huge and treaty violating. Why put that risk and insane demand when you can still get global coverage from a dozen or so birds in high polar orbits?

                     Nobody does what you are saying, because physics, which leads me to believe that you are confused.

                     1. walrus01 · 1790812844 · focus · HN ↗

                        If you think the US doesn&#x27;t have a plethora of DoD things in geostationary orbit you would be extremely, terribly wrong. In addition to well known programs like AEHF, WGS for two way military satcom purposes, a person with an amateur grade telescope can literally spot the satellite that keeps station near an existing commercial Thuraya satellite:

                        <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;USA-202" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;USA-202

                        <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;space.skyrocket.de&#x2F;doc_sdat&#x2F;thuraya-2.htm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;space.skyrocket.de&#x2F;doc_sdat&#x2F;thuraya-2.htm

                        <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;space.skyrocket.de&#x2F;doc_sdat&#x2F;thuraya-4.htm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;space.skyrocket.de&#x2F;doc_sdat&#x2F;thuraya-4.htm

                        1. adastra22 · 1790826000 · focus · HN ↗

                           Those are geosat communications, not surveillance. Surveillance is not happening in GEO.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.