Popular Science, Popular Mechanics articles
Allen Thomson (thomsona@netcom.com)
Mon, 15 Jan 1996 11:48:16 -0800
I just posted this note to some of the Usenet groups, and thought
it might be interesting to seesat folk, as you're indirectly mentioned.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The February 1996 issues of Popular Science and Popular
Mechanics have American spysats as their cover stories.
PopMech's article is written by cyberspace's own Philip Chien
and PopSci's by Stuart Brown. Both are quite good, though
Chien's is a little closer to my own interests.
Brown's article concentrates more on CORONA, reviewing the
material released last year at the GWU symposium last spring --
I'd guess he was there, based on the detail contained in the
article. He concludes with a good commentary by John Pike on
how spysats probably kept us and the Soviets from nuking each
other by decreasing the extreme levels of ignorance-based
suspicion which characterized the 1950s. It would be
interesting to study the extent to which this was an "unintended
side effect;" certainly in the US, and I'd imagine in the USSR,
reconnaissance satellites had SIOP targeting/planning as one of
their major missions.
Chien covers the CORONA history also and then goes on to
give a quick overview of the present and possibilities for the
future. In one respect he's a little inconsistent (I think)
when he says that current spysats' resolutions might be as good
as 2 inches but also states that they could read a license plate
placed flat on the ground. OTOH, he notes that the amateur
observer community has demonstrated that finding and tracking
spysats isn't very hard, and that effective ASAT systems can be
derived from SCUD-level technology. As those are theses I've
been advocating the US should pay more attention to, I was
pleased to see the words.
As an aside, I was recently talking with a professional
astronomer/amateur satellite watcher about building a space
surveillance system on the cheap. He'd done some preliminary
design studies on an optical system, and thought that
commercially available equipment could be used to detect and
track satellites down to visual magnitude 15. That would be good
enough to see even quite small debris objects in LEO, or small-
to-medium sized satellites in GEO.
Something that P.C. suggested which I hadn't thought of is
that the Air Force's amusingly acronymed MSTI satellite,
ostensibly an SDIO/BMDO targeting sensor testbed, might be
trying out technologies that could be used on smallspysats.
I'd like to believe that, but it would be nice to get some
substantiation. If anyone has more (unclassified, of course)
technical details on the MSTI sensors, please post them here.