Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

rocketsocks t1_iususvg wrote

Reply to comment by LonelyDriver in China’s mystery spaceplane releases object into orbit by ye_olde_astronaut

It's 9 meters long and three hundred kilometers away, moving at orbital velocity. You get a good picture of it if it's so easy.

80

cinred t1_iutr9xz wrote

Someone has never heard of the "Enhance!" button.

60

Caenwyr t1_iuwdr9f wrote

I can almost hear the fake computer noises as the pixels turn into smaller pixels and 2 seconds later there's a perfect, in-focus image instead of a blur. chef's kiss Perfection.

2

DBMS_LAH t1_iutozd5 wrote

You can see the ISS with the naked eye from many places on earth. It being far away makes it easier to spot at high-speed. I'm assuming it's designed in such a way as to not reflect a bunch of light and be easy to spot however.

9

chris_4 t1_iutztmt wrote

We also know exactly where the ISS is. These things are tricky since they can maneuver into a different orbit

11

toodroot t1_iuv36up wrote

This one has only maneuvered once in 90 days.

2

invent_or_die t1_iuuh8jm wrote

Use the Heavens Above app, know exactly when and where to see the ISS, Tiangong, and many more objects. I see the ISS and Tiangong (Chinese space station) all the time, but I live in a somewhat dark area.

7

mfb- t1_iuuly6x wrote

It's trivial to spot as object, but that doesn't mean you get a high resolution picture of it. I don't think OP would call a picture with one featureless bright spot a "decent picture".

6

rocketsocks t1_iuv2mu6 wrote

The ISS is huge. Also, you can't see any detail on the ISS with the naked eye, it just looks like a dot.

Go look at images of the ISS from the ground, the tech for that has gotten a lot better in recent years but there's still not much detail. Consider that the X-37B or China's spaceplane is about the size as a single module on the ISS and you start to understand why there aren't any public pictures of it.

Using large telescopes with special tracking capabilities or on orbit assets capable of taking photos of other satellites would make it possible to get decent imagery, but all that stuff is classified.

5

dc_IV t1_iuujod6 wrote

So hear me out: I have a friend of a friend that has a cousin that cleans the pool of a artist that did some conceptual mocks on a 9 meter long cylinder that uses LEDs on the bottom that simulate what Starlink looks like in the sky. I am not sure if it's related, but that could explain why photos may exist, but are not associated with this object.

/s

0

[deleted] t1_iutgcgy wrote

holy shit, 9 fucking meters???? we're all going to die!

−4

skatenbikes t1_iuuaapl wrote

Nah I used to blast womp rats smaller than that back home

5