Slashdot Mirror
French Threat To ID Secret US Satellites
SkiifGeek brings to our attention a story that ran on space.com a few months back but didn't get much wider notice at the time. "The French have identified numerous objects in orbit that do not appear in the ephemeris data reported by the US Space Surveillance Network. Now, the US claims that if it doesn't appear in the ephemeris data, then it doesn't exist. The French insist that at least some of the objects they have found boast solar arrays. Therefore it seems that the French have found secret US satellites. While they don't plan to release the information publicly, they do intend to use it as leverage to get the US to suppress reporting of sensitive French satellites in their published ephemeris."
Shouldn't that be "French Threaten to ID Secret US Satellites"?
They are hoping they are US satellites and not Chinese[insert evil empire name] satellites.
Well, they do have nukes...
Bot Assisted Blogging
I personally know the CEO of a company who is in charge of the positioning and random stuff of several US satellites. They don't keep the existence of "secret satellites" a secret, they just don't tell anyone what the satellites do. They don't have to hide their very existence as long as no one knows what they are for... it would be pointless and a waste of secretiveness.
If they're really there, it's an empty threat. If the French can see them then so can anyone else with a telescope. It's likely everyone else of consequence already knows about them.
freedom fries all over again?
geek page at KY speaks
Therefore it seems that the French have found secret US satellites.
If they're referring to the moon, that's been ours for a while (finders keepers), and it's not exactly a secret. unless you're referring to man-made satellites only?
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Numerous communications satellites have been lost over the years. Others may be a secret alien monitoring network...
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Wow, and the French though that your fat American fingers would never be able to crank out predictable trolls about their military with such speed :-P Clearly they underestimated you. Kudos.
After spending the last 20 odd year's playing Metal of Honor ; and thus being suitably "trained"
the American infantry will drop into Normandy, make a big mess of the coast and head for Berlin at high speed; reaching the operational "goal" in less than 24 hours as they can just take the train instead of grunting it out by foot.
The French will barely notice ; but the Germans will wonder why Checkpoint Charlie was rebuild overnight.Berlin disco's will put on a "retro" 40's theme.
The European Union will then spend the next six months debating who will pay for the environmental damage done to the French coast and whether or not the shrimp industry qualifies for subsidies.
Surely the wise course of action would be to deny the existence of all secret US satellites plus a smattering of somebody elses's satellites, too. Just to stir up the entropy pool a bit.
If you can't even win in Iraq, :-)
You wouldn't win over France
Eventually, this troll will be worthy of an Insightful moderation. That will be the day I leave slashdot.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
So shooting a laser beam to blind something non-existent shouldn't be a problem. If you can knock this non-existent "thing" from the sky even better, now it would "doubly" not exist!
First, this was from June, and second, I recall seeing this out here earlier.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
One New republic. Twice invaded and saved by France. For sale to the highest bidding oil company
**Life is too short to be serious**
Jesus Christ - no wonder people hate Americans. Thanks for that, people - I'm embarrassed to say where I'm from these days. Bunch of jingoist jerks.
Poor means hoping the toothache goes away.
The US has had the Ground Based-Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance system since the early 1980s. GEODSS is an automated sky search telescope system. Multiple sites with multiple 40-inch telescopes search the sky automatically every night, looking for anything that isn't in the catalogues. GEODSS will even detect dark objects that occult stars. Everybody has automated astronomy now, but it started with GEODSS, around 1980.
GEODSS has an unusual feature for a telescope - illumination. The system can use one of the telescopes at a site to aim a laser light source, while the other telescope looks at the target with the imager. This allows a good look at low-orbit satellites.
The original test installation for GEODSS, at White Sands, NM, is now used by MIT to look for near-Earth objects. They've found 1622 so far. It wouldn't hurt to have more systems working on that problem. A French version of GEODSS would be a win for everyone.
Very easily winnable. The Iraqis aren't wearing berets.
First consideration: It is a fairly involved and expensive process to catalogue these objects. Maybe some crazy EE guy could mess with them with a ground based laser for an affordable $20k or whatever (I honestly don't know the feasibility of that) but having to go back and classify near-earth space objects on top of that would probably push it being the range of feasability for any small scale endeavor.
And, another *big part* of defense/offense is simply making it more expensive to engage youl. This is the definition of why defense is always more difficult than offense--the defender has to defend every avenue of attack, the aggressor need only choose the most favorable to themselves. Sure, it might be possible for any modern nation to invest a few billion to making the identifications, and that might nullify the advantage you would have otherwise, but getting them to spend the money is itself an advantage. Even countries that starve their citizens to pay for missiles (ala, north korea) only have limited budgets. The thinner you can spread them, the better off *you* are.
Second consideration: In as much as identifying satellites is a statistical process, i.e., "We've looked at 70% of the objects in the sky, and have identified +/- 20% of those which are satellites " then sharing data is always beneficient in giving you more certain results. This is relevant not only because it means you get more satellites, but especially because the satellites you do get are more defintie to be representative of the whole. If you were going to organize some strategic strike against America's defense satellites, you'd want to get all of them. Otherwise you might waste a bunch of money to get the tactical advantage of taking out the satellites and America will just be like "Whoops, they got some of our satellites, time to change to the backups. Cool, our network is fully functional again. Let's go nuke whoever did that."
Third consideration: I don't think the location of all the 'public' satellites are disclosed. The French are able to identify which are secret satellites because we told them the ones that weren't. Anyone who didn't know that could certainly identify satellite objects in the sky, but they would be unable to distinguish between commercial GPS satellites and secret military missile-commanding GPS satellites.
Now, I don't really know how much any of those come into effect on their own, but my point is that just because it is possible for someone else to gain knowledge without your disclosing it does not mean that it doesn't make a difference whether you simply disclose it or make them work to figure it out.
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
If I recall correctly, the US didn't know where or when Pakistan (or was it India?) was about to detonate its first test nuke because the satellites didn't see the materials being moved in or out of the expected sites. They didn't see it because the Pakistanis (or Indians) were keeping track of satellites and not moving anything when there were unknown ones overhead. It's quite easy to do; it just requires a lot of manpower (which there is plenty of in the subcontinent)
vik
"I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
So they will be airlifted by Ospreys half of which will crash killing half the invasion force.
Wow. You really think half of the Ospreys won't crash?
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
There's a number of useful things you can know about a satellite, just knowing it's orbit.
* If it's geostationary, it's designed to look at or communicate with whatever is right underneath it. It's also unlikely to be a photorecon satellite, because your km-per-pixel sucks from 36,000 km away.
* If it's in a polar orbit, it's probably designed to look at big swathes of the Earth as the latter rotates under it. Polar orbits are too expensive otherwise.
* If it's in a low orbit with just enough inclination to get up to your latitude -- why, that sounds like it might be a photorecon satellite designed with you in mind...
* In which case, if you know when it's over you, and when it's not, then you have a rough idea of when you're in the crosshairs. That can be handy.
I don't necessarily disagree that the main way you keep your capabilities secret is to keep what the satellites do secret. But it probably helps, at least a little bit, to keep the existence and orbit of the thing secret, too.
I think you miss the point of my extremely short and to the point post... If they want to publish "We have found satellites in orbits x, y, and z..." then, so what. It's not affecting our tactics (much). We can continue to deny they exist, if that's our plan. They can continue to expend money and effort trying to identify them.
I'm not concerned about amateur efforts to identify the satellites, they're irrelevant.
Any country of consequence, who would be capable of affecting our satellites in orbit, is likely to be doing mapping of their sky; and, as a result will have some statistics on what's there. The French publishing the additional data doesn't matter in that it remains true that no one knows to whom the satellites belong and what their capabilities are. Granted, the extra data points might be useful to another country; but, as I've said, I'm certain they are already mapping what's in their sky anyway.
"Pardon Moi, but does your secret satellite fire lasers?"
"No, it certainly does not."
"Oh...good. Then I'll just be orbiting this small camera platform over here next to it and...."ZZZzzzZZzzZzzzzzzZZZZZZZzzaaaaaaappppppppppppPPPPPPPP!!!!!!
"I thought you said your secret satellite doesn't fire lasers!!??"
"That's not my secret satellite..."
I'd hate to know how you'd feel if you were French and actually had to live with the knowledge that not only did your country surrender to Germany without a fight...
:) ).
At least I could seek comfort in the knowledge that the US, in all its world-dominating glory, wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for my country. (plus, can you really expect France to take care of the Germans every time?)
BTW, if your country was invaded, you would be cowering behind those "jingoist jerks", you hypocrite.
Somehow I reeally doubt it, for some crazy reason the "jingoist jerks" are never the first ones to line up to grab a rifle and defend the country. Go figure.
Point is, constantly bragging about something that other people did 50 years ago gets tiresome pretty quickly (besides, I'm Russian, so let's not get into the whole "Who won WWII" thing
sic transit gloria mundi
The gung-ho type we don't mind, they are consistent and wear their beliefs on their sleeve. They are honest and straightforward.
HAHAHAHAHA!
The current crop of jingoists are a bunch of cowards who think war is fine and dandy, as long as it's other people doing the dying. Damn near every top pro-war politician and commentator who was of age to serve during Vietnam found some way to stay out of uniform, and their kids aren't in any hurry to sign up for Iraq either. Oh, how "honest and straightforward" of them!
It's this new, smug, "I'm ashamed of my country" kind of American that I cannot stand
When your country does something wrong -- and when your country is a democracy, in which the leaders are theoretically responsible to the people -- it is good and right to be ashamed. Being ashamed isn't enough, of course; you should also do something to change it. Which, in the civilized world, includes bitching loudly and publicly. The idea that we should keep our mouths shut except to parrot platitudes of support for our Glorious Leaders is repulsive.
I'd hate to know how you'd feel if you were French and actually had to live with the knowledge that not only did your country surrender to Germany without a fight
If you really think France surrendered "without a fight" I'd recommend reading some more history. They were beaten, on the battlefield, by an army which could easily have done the same thing to any other country -- yes, including both the US and Australia -- that had the misfortune to be right next door to Germany at the time. And, in fact, did. The Wehrmacht in its heyday was unstoppable, and it took the Allies years (and a whole hell of a lot of lives) to swamp it in a war of attrition.
BTW, if your country was invaded, you would be cowering behind those "jingoist jerks", you hypocrite.
I served for ten years (two years reserve, eight years active duty, including Desert Storm) and I'm pretty sure that even as a fat old guy with a bum leg, I could still step up and defend US soil if I had to. The "rah rah USA" crowd would be screaming, crying, and pissing their pants.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Don't fuck with the French: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USS_Stark.jpg
I think you are missing the point entirely. No one is interested in this information so they can 'affect' the hardware. The crux of the issue is that if the French start publishing live orbital telemetry on spy satellites then it will be damn easy for any interested party to 'hide' as the satellite passes over.
Moreover, changes in the telemetry will tell the 'bad guys' when the US is interested in something and hence they will have a better sense if their activities have aroused US suspicion.
I'd wager that even the Taliban could muster the internet access and math skills to figure this out given up to date telemetry.
]{
Considering recent history, they probably suspect the worst case scenario for exposing a U.S. spy satellite is a pardon.
Darth --
Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
I'm not ashamed of my country having a lot of power. And I'm not ashamed of my country using it- if you have power, you've got a responsibility to use it. With great power comes great responsibility, as Stan Lee said. I say, if a carefully planned, well thought out military intervention is the best option (not that war is ever a great option, but sometimes it is better than not going to war) then, well, bombs away.
What I'm deeply ashamed of is the shitty job we've done in using it. Bullying our allies, running secret prisons, detentions without trial, torturing people to death, losing much of the headway we made in Afghanistan, and making Iraq into a place so terrifyingly bloody that people actually long for the days when it was merely ruled by a psychopathic dictator... the past few years have been shameful. Anyone who could look at what we've done in the past few years and feel any sort of pride is either deeply in denial or a sociopath. I have no problem with America using its power to advance its own interests and improve the world, but we haven't been doing either.
I dunno... None have ever tried.
[Not a Troll, just a man with cheap jokes]
The problem is that the US regularly writes about the French secret satellites, and the French want that to stop.
Thus the French are saying, "if you don't keep ours secret, then we will not keep yours secret." A sort of quid pro quo negotiation tactic.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Dude I wish I had mod points...
Your attitude is what brought America into WW2. America did not go gungho into WW2. It took America a LONG time... But when it did, it did with a mission and attitude! That is why people keep saying, "oh in WW2 we did such and such..."
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
I'll see your cheap joke and raise you one:
:-D
Why do the French plant trees beside the road?
So the Germans can march in the shade.
--
BMO
karma to burn baaaybe, karma to burn...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_the_Marne
You dont have to be an analretentive nitpicker to be a tester.... But it helps
Excepting the fact that France fought on their own soil, while the Pacific Theater was, for the most part a war in neutral territory. I don't recall American cities invaded, their resources taken, nor their industry shelled. The European Theater was an entirely different scenario.
One attack on Pearl Harbour, some abortive amusement in the Aleutians, and some silliness involving balloons was all the USA suffered at home.
Honestly, Europe would have defeated Germany had the US not got involved at all, attrition and the turning points in Russia and over Britain assured that pretty much. The only difference would been how much of Europe spoke Russian.
The US war in the Pacific was not a moral war. It was totally provoked by the US. If not what were US Air force and Army pilots doing flying Chinese air force planes and bombing Japanese bases long before Pearl Harbor and why did the US cut off oil supplies to Japan in time of war. Japan had a commercial agreement with the US but the US stopped selling them oil when they needed it most - when they were at war with China. Not only did they stop selling oil they put a blockade preventing oil supplies from Indonesia to come through to Japan. How would US react if Iran blocked the straits of Hormuz during the start of the Gulf war campaign? It would be considered an act of war. The pacific war was basically saying - its ok for white men to have colonies but not ok for yellow men to have colonies.
**Life is too short to be serious**
as an Australian, I am totally ashamed that you are also an Australian.
you talk about ANZUS, our top politicians (Howard and Downer) don't even have a clear idea of what our obligations are towards that treaty. But then, that was probably just Downer being Downer.
I believe when the GP said "bullying allies" he didn't mean bullying every single person in the allied country. You being a single case doesn't count, and you being safely in some backwater country town probably precludes you from facing that anyway.
Did you see the news where Australia spent some $240 million on this little conference in Sydney, and Bush wasn't even sure what country he was in and which conference he was attending? That's how much he cares about his best international ally.
If you have ever spent just a little time outside of Australia, you will know that Howard has pretty much used up all of the goodwill non-US foreigners used to have towards Australians. Now, Australians are treated as if we are second-class US citizens.
Give the camera a good mooning?
-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
then the US surely won't mind a few missile tests in the general direction of those holes in the sky?
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Wow. You really think half of the Ospreys won't crash? I hear they have a highway mode built into half of them by now so half seems about right.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
http://www.onera.fr/photos/instexp/graves.php
http://www.onera.fr/dprs/graves/index.php
It also appears that a big, big part of the systems is invisible: a real time calculator, the size of which is unknown. But it may guzzle some Watts in my opinion....
As for the political aspects of the affair, well... It is certainly very unelegant from the US space authorities to publicize European spy satellites trajectories, and we cannot get accustomed to the sheer amount of unelegance that has flown eastward to Britanny since 2003.
Next, I doubt amateurs could do what Graves does, especially since trajectories can change, thanks to usefull thrusters. Graves is apparently a real time system...
And by the way, would it detect incomming balistic missiles too? That may be useful for the likes of Aster.
We French are generally too ambitious when it comes to weapon systems (not enough money for so many lethal ideas...), but we provide some amusing toys, indeed. I always wondered what were the real possibilities of this ship (http://www.netmarine.net/bat/divers/monge/photos.htm), for instance...
Last but not least: thanks to all Americans that are now bashing French haters, we have heard enough, your support is appreciated. I hope Sarkozy will not be the fool he pretends to be. :-)
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
Seti@Home, which is supposed to help finding extra-terrestrial life, is typically a project able to map the satellites. I wonder if they publish their discoveries ?
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
"I fart in your general direction!"
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
did anyone ask how did they identify them as US? was it a big tag that said "Made in USA"?
there are several states that do this... china, russia, the US... how can they tell?
If no one will admit to owning them, then they're useful for the Chinese (or anyone else) as targets in antisatellite weapons tests. Other than the resulting debris, they'd be doing everyone a favor.
Indeed, the Soviets used to do this routinely. When they knew American spy satellites were overhead, they'd get out big earthmoving equipment and dig strange holes in the ground, move large draped loads back and forth, et cetera. All the kinds of things they'd do if they were building a missile silo, or some other major military installation.
By doing this all over the place, they forced the Americans to spread out their intelligence resources covering all kinds of bogus chaff, thus increasing the chance that some real military work would slip in beneath the radar, so to speak.
They're being French wasn't reason enough?
*ducks and runs*
Except that it didn't sink, one of the missiles failed to work properly, and it was still Iraq who launched the attack anyway.
The point isn't who the French sells their weapons to (which is every thug and terrorist with a pocketbook), it's whether or not they have the capability to use them for themselves. Yes, they're real good at machine gunning groups of unarmed protestors, but militaries tend to fight back...
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them