Shargin photographs North America -- why?

From ISS On-Orbit Status, October 17: "Yuri Shargin used the Nikon D1 camera
with f800 lens on his first session of observation and imaging of selected
targets for the Russian Environmental Protection Service as part of the Ekon
(KPT-3) experiment, today performing photography of the North American
continent."


Uh, my awkward question is this: what interest does a Russian environmental
protection experiment have in high-res surface imaging of North America
(read: United States)? Since it's a Russian experiment, I presume this means
that NASA will never see the images. Does this activity possibly have
anything to do with the recent severe shortage of Russian military
reconnaissance capability (nine months without ANY reccesat in orbit, just
recently alleviated)? I could be totally over-reacting here -- after all,
Anatoliy Perminov, head of Russia's Federal Space Agency, promised that
Shargin would not be doing any military-related activities on ISS, and since
Perminov was until recently Shargin's boss (he's the former head of the
Russian 'Space Forces', and a military officer himself), this also provides
a certain level of credibility to the assertion.

On 2004-10-18, Jim Oberg wrote:
From ISS On-Orbit Status, October 17: "Yuri Shargin used the Nikon D1 camera
with f800 lens on his first session of observation and imaging of selected
targets for the Russian Environmental Protection Service as part of the Ekon
(KPT-3) experiment, today performing photography of the North American
continent."

Uh, my awkward question is this: what interest does a Russian environmental
protection experiment have in high-res surface imaging of North America
(read: United States)?

Usual disclaimers about what I know apply.

Firstly, it could be a planetary-scale job; you wouldn't expect that to
be using high-res surface imagery, though.

(What sort of images are you looking at with a camera like that?)

Secondly, and possibly more plausibly: the US is more densely populated
than Russia, and has substantially more funding for environmental
activity; so any particular pollution incident in the US (or Canada, to
a lesser degree) is more likely to have been studied on the ground than
in Russia, no?

If your work involves orbital photography of sites in Russia,
photographing similar sites elsewhere where groundwork has already been
done makes sense for calibration purposes, I suppose...


Googling, I get this:
http://www.energia.ru/english/energi...eophis-08.html

"... to assess ecological effects of the industrial activities on the
territory of the RF and foreign countries."

with the summary on
http://www.energia.ru/english/energi.../geophis.shtml

being "Experimental investigations to assess possible utilization of ISS
RS for ecological survey of industrial areas."

Some old status reports:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=13741
"...today taking Nikon D1 (800 mm lens) pictures of the city of
Sevastopol."

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=13744
"... pictures of oil spills at the city of Eisk and the city of
Novorossiysk, Georgia"

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=11441
"... still photography of the Pacific Ocean (after yesterday's target of
the Atlantic)"

These were the only ones I could find that listed actual observation
targets, FWIW.

--
-Andrew Gray

Excellent and very helpful, and plausible. thanks!!!



"Andrew Gray" wrote in
These were the only ones I could find that listed actual observation
targets, FWIW.
\

Jim Oberg wrote:

Uh, my awkward question is this: what interest does a Russian
environmental protection experiment have in high-res surface imaging of
North America (read: United States)? Since it's a Russian experiment, I
presume this means that NASA will never see the images. Does this activity
possibly have anything to do with the recent severe shortage of Russian
military reconnaissance capability (nine months without ANY reccesat in
orbit, just recently alleviated)? I could be totally over-reacting here --

Brief googling suggests that ISS photography runs up to about 5m
resolution. Further googling suggests that Russia could buy 2.5m
imagery from spotimage.fr, and possibly even higher resolution
images from elsewhere. (I'm assuming that the US gum'nt has some
sort of export controls over very high res imagery).

Still, it's an amusing thought...
"Hey Leroy, give me a hand with this camera will you?"
"Sure thing Yuri, what are you doing?"
"Well, we got no recon. birds at the moment so we need to update
the targetting for our ICBMs."
"Okay, just so long as you help me tomorrow when I do that SIGINT
experiment as we overfly Moscow."

--
"There /is/ a problem with security in public buildings:
Batman got into Buckingham Palace, and
Bush got into the White House" - Tony Benn.

Andrew Gray wrote:
On 2004-10-18, Jim Oberg wrote:
From ISS On-Orbit Status, October 17: "Yuri Shargin used the Nikon D1 camera
with f800 lens on his first session of observation and imaging of selected
targets for the Russian Environmental Protection Service as part of the Ekon
(KPT-3) experiment, today performing photography of the North American
continent."

Uh, my awkward question is this: what interest does a Russian environmental
protection experiment have in high-res surface imaging of North America
(read: United States)?
[...]
(What sort of images are you looking at with a camera like that?)

Hmmmm. Nikon D1 + f800 lens...hi res photos? Is this the same setup
that takes pix of *80%* of Hurricane Jeanne?

And is f800 the lens opening, or the focal length, or just a model
designation? the first choice seems unlikely, based on my experience
with cameras -- a pinhole would be bigger! -- but the notation fits
that better than focal length. 35mm cameras would use something like
an f2.8 50mm lens for the "normal" lens -- that closest approaching
the human eye in percieving most scenes, ignoring the "digital zoom"
effect of the human brain, a f5.6 200mm lens would be a big tele (big
as in limits of convenient handheld), and fsomething 800mm lenses
would be tripod mounted birdwatching teles. IIRC, the D1 is intended
to use approximately the same lens selection as a pro-grade 35mm film
camera.

/dps

(dave schneider) wrote in message . com...

Hmmmm. Nikon D1 + f800 lens...hi res photos? Is this the same setup
that takes pix of *80%* of Hurricane Jeanne?

The same camera, not the same lens. The Hurricane pics were taken
with fairly wide angle lenses.

With the 800mm lens (I'm not sure if f800 is a proper designation, but
the Ekon program is described as using an 800mm lens, and ISS has
everything from 800mm to 28mm), you can distinguish large buildings
and many roads. I recall one of the crews reporting that how much
detail you get with the big lenses depends on the skill of the
photographer, because they have to move to compensate for orbital
motion. This is a big telephoto lens, which on earth would require a
tripod.

Here is an example:
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseop/photo.pl?mission=ISS007&roll=E&frame=17864
You have to may have to request to get the full res image (this is an
automatic process, it shows up on FTP a few minutes later, and stays
around for a while.)

The ftp link is:
ftp://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ESC_large_ISS007_ISS007-E-17864.JPG
The above is the SF bay area. Ships, buildings, and roads are clearly
visible.

Compare to the 28mm of the same area:
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/sseop/photo.pl?mission=ISS007&roll=E&frame=16685&QueryRe sultsFile=10981648103860.tsv&server=1
That looks a lot more like the hurricane pics.

I strongly encourage browsing the eol.jsc.nasa.gov site, there is some
really cool stuff there. Nothing like checking out your hometown or
favorite landmarks from orbit.

"Clark" wrote
Google "open skies" and let your suspicions die a quiet death.

So, if the Russians WERE using the ISS for military rece photos,
you're saying we have no business knowing or caring about it?

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...
So, if the Russians WERE using the ISS for military rece photos,
you're saying we have no business knowing or caring about it?

Jim, what kind of resolution do they get? If it's more than 1 metre, then
they can buy all the pickies they need from commercial sources with less
risk of creating an international incident.


--
Alan Erskine
We can get people to the Moon in five years,
not the fifteen GWB proposes.
Give NASA a real challenge

"Clark" wrote in message
Now where on earth would you get the idea that I said any such thing?
All I did was point out that the US is providing surveillance flights
over
the US to countries which were formerly closely associated with Russia. In
short, there is no need for Russia to rely on rather simple photo methods
at
nearly 200 miles range when they can readily get much better recon both in
terms of resolution and quality.

Good point, let's pursue it -- and thanks for responding. Will get back on
this.

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message ...
From ISS On-Orbit Status, October 17: "Yuri Shargin used the Nikon D1 camera
with f800 lens on his first session of observation and imaging of selected
targets for the Russian Environmental Protection Service as part of the Ekon
(KPT-3) experiment, today performing photography of the North American
continent."


Uh, my awkward question is this: what interest does a Russian environmental
protection experiment have in high-res surface imaging of North America
(read: United States)? Since it's a Russian experiment, I presume this means
that NASA will never see the images. Does this activity possibly have
anything to do with the recent severe shortage of Russian military
reconnaissance capability (nine months without ANY reccesat in orbit, just
recently alleviated)? I could be totally over-reacting here -- after all,
Anatoliy Perminov, head of Russia's Federal Space Agency, promised that
Shargin would not be doing any military-related activities on ISS, and since
Perminov was until recently Shargin's boss (he's the former head of the
Russian 'Space Forces', and a military officer himself), this also provides
a certain level of credibility to the assertion.

Don't forget there is also Project Open Skies that allows pretty much
unrestricted aircraft photographic overflights of the U.S., Russia and
25 other countries due to a 1992 treaty.

Open Skies flights
http://www.state.gov/t/ac/rls/33190.htm

OC-135 Open Skies
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/oc-135.htm

Project Open Skies aircraft fact sheet
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factshe...sID=120&page=1

Project Open Skies aircraft fact sheet
http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclop...135_open_skies

Defense Threat Reduction Agency
http://www.dtra.mil/about/media/hist...ies/tabcon.cfm



- Rusty Barton