Slashdot Mirror


Google Earth Uncovers Secret UK Nuke Base

thefickler writes "Gone are the days when governments could easily hide top secret bases. These days it's a weekend pastime to see who can find top secret facilities using Google Earth. Now it's the UK government's turn to be outraged after a secret facility was revealed by a British tabloid. The facility is said to be located in Faslane on the River Clyde in Scotland. This nuclear base was previously blurred out by the request of the British Government. However, with the latest update provided via Google Earth, many of the blurred out locations were accidentally revealed." Update: 3/08 at 14:24 by SS: Multiple readers have pointed out that the issue here is not the location of the base — it's simply that details of buildings and objects within the base (such as the location of a pair of nuclear submarines) are accidentally visible after the UK government specifically requested they be blurred out.

54 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. "Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by EWAdams · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oooh... like that huge bottle-green and cream building with all the satellite dishes on top was invisible to the tens of thousands of commuters who pass by it on the railroad every day.

    Everybody knows where these things are anyway. The newspapers are just having a slow day, so let's take another whack at technology/Google/the Internet.

    --
    I piss off bigots.
    1. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by legirons · · Score: 5, Funny

      Back when that building was used in the Bond film, HIGNFY reported: "MI6 were concerned the film might reveal the location of... one of London's most distinctive landmarks"

    2. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Stuart+Gibson · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry, but the UK has never been that big on keeping their secret nuclear bunkers very secret: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mimram/122464288/

      --
      It's all fun and games until a 200' robot dinosaur shows up and trashes Neo-Tokyo... Again
    3. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Funny

      And according to the Sun, Google Earth "even reveals the longitude and latitude of ... Faslane, Scotland"! Without Google's help, terrorists would have needed access to an Ordnance Survey map of Argyll and pocket calculators to ascertain this esoteric information!

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    4. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Cally · · Score: 2, Informative

      Apparently there's some sort of big round building in Cheltenham, too. (Yes, El Reg had this story a week ago.) Everyone knew about that one even when Ordnance Survey maps showed blank white space there; nowadays, it's shown on the local road signs. Hey, it looks like an old-fashioned mainframe tape-drive! To be fair, everyone knows where the MI6 HQ in Vauxhall is, but the MI5 building is less well-known, mainly because it looks no different than many other buildings in the area.

      --
      "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    5. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by JCWDenton · · Score: 2, Informative

      Following your link I found they've posted pictures of their headquarters on their website http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/thames-house-image-gallery.html . You'd think any civilian taking pictures of the building would subsequently be subjected to a little chat with the law but there's no problem when they show it on their site in all it's glory from various angles...

    6. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Skeptical1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't shoot till you see the blur in their eyes !-) Target the blur! Aye Cappin!

    7. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And who in their right mind thinks that a foreign nation doesn't already know the existence, location and layout of various bases around the world?

      Some bribes or joint ventures later and information exceeding the information available at Google Earth is widespread.

      Blurring a satellite or air photo today is just a giveaway since two different distributions never have the same blurring and that tells others that this is a site of interest.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    8. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the gov't is pissed off about is that you can see 2 nuclear subs docked ... scroll up to the top of the bay, zoom in.

      Sure, foreign governments probably already have assets on the ground keeping watch of the ebb and flow of traffic, but it's nice to have visible confirmation (you can confirm the date of the pictures by using shadows - every day, the shadows will be slightly different as the sun appears to trace a slightly different arc in the sky).

    9. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Baron+of+Blue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Come on, at least give the boys at the Kremlin the chance to earn their wages. Scroll up to the top indeed!

      --
      The sentiments expressed above are not necessarily that of the author at all. There, fixed it for me.
    10. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only adversaries targeted or threatened by nuclear subs have their own satellite imagery.

    11. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by 1u3hr · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sure, foreign governments probably already have assets on the ground keeping watch of the ebb and flow of traffic

      Any foreign government with an interest in this information HAS IT'S OWN SURVEILLANCE SATELLITES. They are not going to use Google, which can be months out of date, when they can get real time images. Even Iran has the capacity to launch these now. And anyone else can just pay a small fee to one of several commercial satellite surveillance services, not all of which are beholden to the UK government.

      Of course, TFA talks about "terrorists" targeting the subs with rockets. Right. Could terrorists get that kind of weapon into the UK and close to a nuclear weapons installation? I find it hard to believe. But there is an infinite number of soft targets they could hit with greater hope of doing damage and less risk.

    12. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by pbhj · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course, TFA talks about "terrorists" targeting the subs with rockets. Right. Could terrorists get that kind of weapon into the UK and close to a nuclear weapons installation?

      They've got the weapons, they don't need to get them into the UK, there's a sea route past Arran, looks like there's a torpedoe net around the subs but I'm sure a shoulder mounted SAM would do enough damage to put them out of action for a while.

      I think I'd have asked that the subs be duplicated a few hundred times around the coast line instead. Now that's a deterrent!

    13. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by jc42 · · Score: 3, Informative

      And who in their right mind thinks that a foreign nation doesn't already know the existence, location and layout of various bases around the world?

      It reminds me of the story (reported in various tech journals but not so much in the MSM) back in the 1970s about the US DoD funding a study by some university people of what could be learned about US military sites and activity from public sources like newspapers, libraries, etc. The story was that a couple of profs (i.e., their grad students) spent a year perusing such public information sources, wrote up their report, sent it in - and with a few days, it was classified Top Secret.

      When I read that, I did wonder how many offers of employment the profs (and their grad students) got from various foreign governments. It seemed to me that it could become a viable career path for a small number of people. But I never read any followups.

      Now I wonder how much you could learn by just googling for the information. And if you sent your summary report to the DoD, how quickly would it get classified?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    14. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Afghanistan is currently in no danger of a strategic nuclear attack, which is obviously the main reason countries which have them go to some lengths to make sure their nuclear sub fleet is concealed

      Wrong. The day you have to actually launch a strategic nuclear attack is the day that your nuclear submarine fleets' actual purpose - which is to be enough of a threat to retaliate in the event of such an attack (see Mutually Assured Destruction) - is over. The submarine fleet will have failed in its' primary goal, which is to be a credible enough threat to PREVENT a nuclear attack.

      The nuclear submarine fleet's second purpose is to protect the rest of the naval fleet, allies, and shipping, both by being the "joker in the hole" against other forces, and against other subs.

      The third purpose is, as I've mentioned elsewhere, to do stand-off attacks via cruise missiles, which they (UK submarines) HAVE launched against targets in Afghanistan.

    15. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by Brianech · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thats just a cover, keep scrolling up and you'll notice a whole field of crop circles!!!! Thats what was really supposed to be blurred out. If you think about it, a nuclear submarine dock is the perfect cover for an alien landing zone... Im getting images of the Men in Black all over again.

    16. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by i_b_don · · Score: 2, Funny

      You should read TFA... they're asking google to blur real life as well.

      d

      --
      all language nazi's will burne in heil!
    17. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The point is, nuclear subs are not a terror target. They're protected by the world's strongest security. An attack would probably fail to do any damage. If you had that firepower, and wanted to make a statement, you'd blow up the Houses of Parliament, or Buckingham Palace; not a military base out in the wilds of Scotland where news coverage will be restricted.

    18. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It doesn't matter if the data is months behind - its usefulness in this case is to confirm what ground-based assets have already told you. If they told you that, at that date, 2 subs were there, and you now know there were 4, you have some housecleaning to do. If, on the other hand, they were accurate with their intel, you have one more data point in terms of their reliability.

      In this game, NO information is useless in the right hands.

      here are plenty of surface ships much more capable of supporting a conventional attack.

      And as I pointed out (with links elsewhere in this thread), the UK has already used their nuclear subs to launch cruise missle attacks against targets in Afghanistan. Please don't confuse "primary purpose" with "only purpose." Subs make a better launch platform than surface ships - you can move them into the area without alerting your target, you have to send a sub in to support the surface fleet anyway, and your target hopefully won't be able to positively identify just who is launching the attack, so they don't know who to attack in return. You could even do false flag attacks, allowing some "duds" to fall into their hands implicating a 3rd party, since they have no surface sightings to put the lie to it ...

    19. Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" by SnowZero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't matter if the data is months behind - its usefulness in this case is to confirm what ground-based assets have already told you. If they told you that, at that date,

      Except that you often don't know the date, since the maps are a patchwork of satellite imagery. If you check the maps (or other people's comments), you'll see that these subs are visible from public roads. If you can get pictures of something on the ground, old satellite imagery doesn't really add much information.

      And as I pointed out (with links elsewhere in this thread), the UK has already used their nuclear subs to launch cruise missle attacks against targets in Afghanistan. Please don't confuse "primary purpose" with "only purpose." ... Subs make a better launch platform than surface ships - you can move them into the area without alerting your target,

      This is really grasping for straws. Afghanistan is 400 miles from the nearest ocean, and US planes can already fly around that country, so you could just drop a bomb on something. Cruise missiles also aren't that helpful against recent Taliban/etc activity; They now know they need to be completely hidden or always moving. Static bases outside of cities went away in 2001.

      You could even do false flag attacks, allowing some "duds" to fall into their hands implicating a 3rd party, since they have no surface sightings to put the lie to it

      Wasn't that a James Bond movie plot? NATO cruise missiles are pretty distinctive, and the launch systems are very incompatible. If you were going to modify something to shoot Chinese or Russian missiles, it'd be a hell of a lot easier to do it with a surface ship, where much of the stuff is bolted on in a modular style. Subs by necessity are highly compact, integrated, and relatively inflexible as a result.

      Now, before you come up with a new claim, please answer this: If the UK government cared about hostile people seeing these subs, why didn't they build a roof over the dock, or put up walls blocking the view from publicly accessible roads? If you aren't afraid of nations that can afford satellites, buy imagery, or from nations that can get a spy to drive down a public road, then clearly you don't value protecting something all that much.

  2. I used google search by celardore · · Score: 5, Funny

    I came up with a secret nuclear bunker, too. link

  3. Blurred out by request by Baron_Yam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

    If they ask to have it Photoshopped into non-existence then you know you've got really hot property!

    1. Re:Blurred out by request by qbzzt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

      Not if the government is smart enough to request enough blurs, with some of them being duds.

      Besides, it's really hard to hide the existence of a facility in a densely populated area such as South England. The best you can hope for is to hide some of the internal details.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    2. Re:Blurred out by request by impaledsunset · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess it wasn't that secret after all... Anyone with access to the original pictures could discover the base, and as you mention the people at Google were given at least a huge hint that it is lying there.

      I wouldn't call anything secret is a whole bunch of people with no connection to the base in question that have the information to find it. Sure, with more eyes looking something hidden might become easily uncovered, I guess that's part of the reason they requested the blurring, but once they made that hint, the millions of eyes are no longer necessary.

      This means that the location wasn't hidden well enough from people that must not know where it is, Google just 'uncovered' it to the rest of us. Not a big deal.

    3. Re:Blurred out by request by CarpetShark · · Score: 2, Funny

      Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

      Perhaps, but Google also know the enforcement people's browsing habits, so no enforcement will be done.

  4. What about the enemies? by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do the enemy nations also blur their secret bases at the request of the british government?

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    1. Re:What about the enemies? by poena.dare · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most nations can't afford the 18,558,720 pixel wide brush required.

  5. I NEVER KNEW IT WAS THERE! by ed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now all the mystery of the road signs, American Service personnel, people mentioning it in the media and the submarines sailing up and down the Clyde is solved.

    WHO KNEW!!!!!

    1. Re:I NEVER KNEW IT WAS THERE! by couchslug · · Score: 5, Funny

      "the submarines sailing up and down the Clyde"

      That certainly shoots down the "very large manatees" cover story.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  6. Bad summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    SPOILER ALERT: Faslane is not a "secret" facility. It's the level and quality of imagery that's the problem. Good old /. editing at its finest, I had to actually check for a second that it wasn't actually another kdawson...in any case this "news" is at least a week old.

  7. The actual article in The Sun by while(true) · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:The actual article in The Sun by legirons · · Score: 2, Informative

      As usual, El Reg has useful commentary

    2. Re:The actual article in The Sun by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Funny

      And in a related news article, The Sun reports that Google Earth's new ocean-floor imagery reveals the location of the lost city of Atlantis on the ocean floor west of the Canary Islands. A photo of Patrick Duffy is used as an illustration, and a reaction commentary by none other than Plato accompanies the story. You can't make shit like this up... because The Sun does it for you.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  8. Public secrets by onion2k · · Score: 5, Funny

    The places the government publicise that they want to keep secret aren't actually secret at all. They're a façade. Then there's the somewhat secret stuff that the government denies exists. The real secret stuff is the stuff the government never mentions.

    Never heard the government mention their lunar base with telescopes that can see through the roofs of buildings and spy on you on the toilet? That's pretty much proof they've got one, but it's a secret!

  9. so secret they have their own public website! by julian67 · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faslane "Her Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde is one of three UK operating bases for the Royal Navy (the others being HMNB Devonport and HMNB Portsmouth). It is the service's headquarters in Scotland and is best known as the home of the United Kingdom's Trident-armed nuclear submarine force." This place has been notorious/famous for decades. Whoever wrote this "news" story is a fucking idiot and recycling on /. is fucking dumb too. Some of the other "top secret" places featured in the story feature regularly in documentaries, fiction, news reports and so on. Some of them are so secret that they have their own public website complete with pictures and a contact us button :-) http://www.sis.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html Well done Timothy, well up to your usual standard (rubbish).

    1. Re:so secret they have their own public website! by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Funny

      Two words: kdawson

      I'm not sure which one makes you look like more of an idiot--the fact that "kdawson" isn't two words, or the fact that the story was posted by timothy.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:so secret they have their own public website! by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe he meant two syllables?

  10. Under cover. by Bazman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ooh, like the Russians never knew there was a submarine base at Faslane before...

    Since Sputnik went up, governments have known that secret locations wouldn't be secret for long. And if the Russians can photograph it, they can sell the photos to terrorists. Google will get them sometime after.

    If governments want to do stuff in secret they know they have to do it undercover. There's a big covered dock right next to the two obvious submarines on the Faslane google maps imagery. That's where the secret stuff happens. Until we get Google Thermal Imagery Earth, of course.

    Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

    1. Re:Under cover. by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

      I could probably tell you that those are the Top Secret military pancake storage facilities, but then you would have to be blurred out on google maps too.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  11. OK, where to begin. by Samschnooks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some of the other locations revealed are MI6â(TM)s London offices, Britainâ(TM)s nuclear crisis HQ and the SAS training facility. Apparently the UK Government is worried that terrorists could potentially launch missile attacks to those target areas with the exact coordinates readily available on the Internet.

    So, the UK Government is actually saying, "Oops! You got us! That's exactly what they are! As matter of act, those buildings are exactly what you think they are and then some! What what! Cheers!"

    Could these buildings be not very important and the UK gov is making them seem more important to distract everyone from the real targets? I don't see anything that makes that facility ultra secure like you'd expect for someplace that is that sensitive. Look how close it is to the highway (A814)? Here in the States, there'd be a HUGE driveway or access road so that someone couldn't just park at the side and lob a mortar shell over or what have you.

    A tabloid said this? A PRINTED tabloid that will do anything to increase circulation; especially in this economy?!?

    I could go on but I'm sick of typing.

    1. Re:OK, where to begin. by u38cg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, Faslane really is a nuclear base. You can tell because you get the Nth degree when you visit, unlike any other UK base where a plausible excuse and some form of ID gets you in. But don't ask about the one over the hill, which *also* stores nukes and you hear very little about ;)

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  12. WTF? Hidden? by Lars+T. · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNB_Clyde Everybody already knew where the base is, there are public roads surrounding it, the Wikipedia article even as an aerial photo of it. So unless they are worried that terrorists start using GPS guided "smart" weaponry (but of course conventionally armed, because for nuclear they knew enough already) instead of just flying a plane packed with explosives into it, why the hell are they outraged exactly?

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    1. Re:WTF? Hidden? by legirons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For more info, read the 4-part series on secret bases:

      http://homepage.ntlworld.com/alan-turnbull/secret.htm

  13. Well since big brother can be watching us... by 3seas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .....so can us little brothers be watching big brother... No double standards here.

    Of the 6 plus billion people on this planet, it is some fraction of 1% that messes things up for the rest of us.
    Its about time we start watching them..

    1. Re:Well since big brother can be watching us... by jelizondo · · Score: 2, Funny

      .....so can us little brothers be watching big brother... No double standards here.

      Of the 6 plus billion people on this planet, it is some fraction of 1% that messes things up for the rest of us.
      Its about time we start watching them..

      It's about time we start whacking them.

      There ya go, fixed that for ya!

      --
      Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
  14. Also from US military by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are better pictures courtesy of the US military
    http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/~cannon/medports/Faslane/HMNB_picture.html

  15. Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures by OldCrasher · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only people left that haven't a clue about what goes on in dockyards at Faslane are the British Taxpayers. Everyone else has spies there and photographs the place as needed.

  16. Flash New Update by wmduncan · · Score: 2, Funny

    In related news, it is reported that the Wall Street Journal leaked that the Allied have broken the Nazi Ultra code.

  17. Blurred out on the map == by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 2, Funny

    All your base are belong to Gauss?

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  18. Re:You think the submarines are still there? by FTWinston · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fastlane's where the UK's fleet lives. Its where they all come back to dock at - its our only nuclear sub base, afaik.

    There's a permanent protest camp just outside it.
    This is about an article from the Sun ... so by definition, its a non-story.

  19. They should slap a Coke logo over it... by ebydav · · Score: 3, Funny

    and at least make some ad revenue.

  20. Nothing special by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Interesting

    During most of the cold war, you would think that the superpowers would be cognizant of satellite spying. These days, there's ever more satellites out there so governments should take necessary safeguards. There were stories about how the Soviet missile sites were easily detectable on by satellite photos.

    First of all, a nuclear missile is expensive. You probably want high security around it. According to Soviet protocols, three layers of fencing are standard. Also to get the missile to the site, it has to be a delicate operation. You can't haul them over rocky and uneven terrain. Unlike the West, the Soviets didn't build roads to everywhere, only where they were necessary. Also the missile launchers were loaded onto trucks that required a wide turning radius.

    So American intelligence found 1) a paved road to the middle to nowhere, 2) wide turning radii in the road, and 3) three layers of fencing at the endpoint of the road, they found a missile site.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  21. Google censorship of Washington reduced. by Animats · · Score: 2

    There's been progress. At one time, Google blurred the roof of the White House. That was just silly, and that stopped some time ago. The entire U.S. Naval Observatory area in Washington was blurred while Cheney lived there, but it's not blurred as much now. In fact, there's even a marker for "One Observatory Circle". There remains some blurring, though, and it ends just outside Observatory Circle.

    The big change is that StreetView is now available for the Washington area.

  22. Submarines move occasionally..... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Geez.. if you look at the imagery date in GE, it's March 13, 2003!!! Last time I heard, submarines move around a bit.. especially over 6 flippin' years!!
     

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)