|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. \ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"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? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
what if a comet were to hit north america and destroy it? | meat n potatoes | Policy | 34 | July 17th 04 04:36 PM |
what if a comet were to hit north america and destroy it? | meat n potatoes | Astronomy Misc | 39 | July 17th 04 04:36 PM |
No Moon, Mars, or Space in the State of the Union Speech [was Audio of Bush's Speech] | GCGassaway | Space Shuttle | 1 | January 22nd 04 12:22 PM |
North Dakota Found To Be Harboring Nuclear Missiles | Rusty B | History | 159 | November 17th 03 03:31 PM |