Slashdot Mirror
Google Maps Shows Chinese Nuclear Sub Prototype
mytrip writes "An image of what could be one of China's new nuclear ballistic missile submarines is available on the Google Maps and Google Earth satellite-image site, a defense blogger claimed Tuesday. The satellite picture was discovered by Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project for the Federation of American Scientists, and announced Tuesday on his blog. Kristensen believes the picture, taken by the Quickbird satellite late last year, reveals China's new Jin-class, or Type 094, nuclear ballistic missile sub. The new sub class is approximately 35 feet longer than its predecessor, the Xia-class, also known as Type 092, according to two images Kristensen compares on the blog. The Jin-class sub has an extended midsection that houses 12 missile tubes and part of the reactor compartment, Kristensen explains."
...but the article doesn't seem to have an actual link to the map. It's here.
This was on Drudge Report last week... Slashdot's new moniker:
"all the news that was fit to print yesterday"
-rt
how quiet will this boat be submerged? SSBN's are the chickens of the sea - they run away from the slightest noise in order to stay undetected; the attack boats like to trail them in order to kill them if needed. Unless these new ones are extra quiet they'll be less a strategic threat than a symbol of power. They could, for example, be used to try to forestall a US response to move against the Republic of China, depending how credible the US viewed such a threat. For China, it means they've added a new threat to many of their neighbors - it could get a bit busy with Russian, Taiwanese, and Japanese subs and ASW forces looking to track them.
That said, I'd love to be on the first boat to track one...
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
And of course a british submarine did sink an Argentinian navy ship (the ARA Gral. Belgrano, I think). This really paralyzed the navy and played a central role in the Argentinian defeat in the Malvinas war.
However, I suspect it was the fact that one of the subs actually sank a ship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_General_Belgrano ) that really drove the point home.
The speed of sound in air is ~760mph.
The speed of sound in water is ~3,355mph.
What was that you were saying? Something about blathering about things you don't know about?
Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/29/18
Quote: "A city man is charged with violating state wiretap laws by recording a detective on his home security camera"
Quick searching turned up a few other cases:
http://wcbstv.com/keefe/local_blogentry_251081231
Quote: "Before releasing Lee, the police allegedly told him he needed a permit to photograph on New York City streets."
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=13834
Quote: "Cruz said police told him that he broke a new law that prohibits people from taking pictures of police with cell phones."
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
Yes the Belgrano was the first warship that was sunk during the Falklands war... by wire guided torpedoes from a UK sub. After that though it was the Argentine's turn to sink a coupe of UK ships (destroyer Sheffield and some transports) with their daredevil low level attacks and sea skimming Exocet anti-ship cruise missiles.
In other words, Americans, right? ;)
*duck*, *run*, disclaimer: I am one and can make that joke ;)
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I've seen a satellite taken picture of a man reading newspaper at the east germany streetcorner and you can read recognize paper, headlines and pictureframes so that you know then what date that picture was taken.
I'm pretty sure you haven't. You may have seen such a picture taken from a plane, but not from a satellite.
Except for the conspiracy about NASA, it's all plausible. I've worked with them; it's way too easy too attribute the Hubble stuff to general ineptness. No conspiracy required.
Also note, your 10m mirror doesn't get you 1cm resolution just because you use a high res sensor -- the diffraction limited resolution is ~1.22*wavelength*distance/diameter, or 2.56cm at 700nm (red) (again, 300km). It's down toward 1cm in the blue, though. And one other nit -- two mirrors isn't enough; that only gives you good resolution in one dimension. You'd need at least 3 to get both dimensions, which you definitely want.
To be fair to the French they did give us ( the British ) the full specs of the Exocet and suggested methods of countering them and also didn't sell the Argentines the next version of them.