Satellites : general discussion and musings

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Starbucked on April 5th, 2014, 6:36 am

In this launch of a satellite from a Soyuz in French Guiana, notice the 'corona' around the exhaust nozzle.

It is square. Is there a reason for this?


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YFLyHDj4jM

A screen grab from the video:

Image

Below, with contrast adjusted:

Image
Starbucked
Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: November 28th, 2012, 12:33 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby dblitz on April 5th, 2014, 10:39 pm

Perhaps the four engine nozzles arranged in a square?

o o
o o

I can't format this into an equal square, but you get my drift.
dblitz
Member
 
Posts: 237
Joined: April 27th, 2013, 3:32 am

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Starbucked on April 6th, 2014, 1:03 pm

Db, I see your point, but the glow around the exhaust plume in this flight produces a fairly well formed rectangle. The hot gas has a more rounded shape as it exits the conical nozzles and should produce a "corona" or glow of a similar shape.
In the case in the following video there is a more common 6 beam star pattern:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0id3rY2kDo

I propose that the rectangular (square) box we see around the exhaust nozzle is impossible and therefore must CGI, which leads me to think this launch video is CGI.
Starbucked
Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: November 28th, 2012, 12:33 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby dblitz on April 6th, 2014, 3:13 pm

Now that I've watched the video, I agree that it can't be the nozzle pattern, as the square glow maintains it's orientation throughout the clip, even though he rocket ends up at an angle.

Notice also the smoke and dust of the initial ignition and takeoff seems to be cast, or blown, on the other side of the launchpad, and so doesn't obscure the camera's view. Nothing is blown our way, toward the viewer, that space between the camera and the action is nice and empty. This is typical of shuttle and rocket launch videos and photos.
dblitz
Member
 
Posts: 237
Joined: April 27th, 2013, 3:32 am

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby simonshack on April 12th, 2014, 10:05 pm

*


SPACE DEBRIS : A menace? Not a menace? What's it gonna be?

A simple way of realizing just how farcical the 'scientific space community' is, is to compare the starkly conflicting information that they regularly release to the public (whether purposefully or not). For instance, if you simply wish to find out just how many active / operational man-made satellites are (meant to be) currently orbiting Earth, well, good luck to you: depending on who you ask, you will NEVER get the same answer - it's anything between "2000" and "6000" ... depending on which source you wish to believe: seriously now, does NO ONE have the exact figure? But it gets worse: absurdly enough, the two articles compared below - published by two seemingly authoritative sources - cannot even agree about (and actually submit diametrically opposed answers) to) a major/far more dramatic issue: "do our satellites oft / sometimes / ever collide with each other? Yes or no? Are we at risk of a galactic catastrophe of biblical proportions - a "chain-reaction" of colliding space debris wiping out our entire satellite fleet? Yes - or no ? "


The below two recently released articles (Feb 20-2014 and March11-2014) will tell you "yes ... and no". Take your pick, folks ! :lol:


"New Australian research centre to remove space junk, save satellites and spacecraft" (March 11, 2014)

Image
A new $150 million Australian research centre is being set up to target space junk in Earth's orbit. The centre will develop ways to track and remove more than 300,000 pieces of space debris in orbit. CRC chief executive Dr Ben Greene says debris is a real problem for satellites and spacecraft.

"A catastrophic avalanche of collisions that would quickly destroy all satellites is now possible," he said.

"In the worst case, two satellites would collide and the debris from those satellites would be directly in the path of more satellites in a very short space of time. "They would then generate more debris and very quickly the avalanche would grow until everything was colliding with everything and space would become uninhabitable for satellites for hundreds of years."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-07/n ... es/5306286


Oh ok, then: it definitely sounds like a very serious problem - and hundreds of million$ are being invested to deal with it.
Now, let's go to the "ALL ABOUT SPACE" scientific magazine - and see what they have to say about this very same matter:

Why don’t objects collide often in Earth orbit? (Feb 20, 2014)
Find out why manmade satellites don’t crash into each other all the time
Image
"The distance between things in orbit is vast, and Earth orbit is a huge place. Put simply, the chances of any two things colliding is very, very slim despite there being thousands of active satellites in orbit and many more pieces of smaller space debris because there is just so much space between everything."

"However, another reason is that most of our manmade satellites travel in similar orbital bands at similar speeds within those bands. This means they’re moving in the same direction at specific heights, sort of like an imaginary conveyor belt moving around Earth. There’s not really much chance of one satellite catching up to another and, even then, the chances of a collision are low."

http://www.spaceanswers.com/space-explo ... pUQOK.dpuf


So which way is it? Are we safe? Or are we under the menace of an imminent Cosmic Armageddon? The silly satellite saga goes on...
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby simonshack on April 19th, 2014, 5:18 pm

*

HOW DOES GPS WORK?

So much to learn, folks, so much to learn ...

Image
"The GPS satellite constellation" http://www.schriever.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123260251


Did you know that GPS was handled by a fleet (they actually call it 'a constellation') of 29 orbiting, man-made satellites? (that is, according to NASA - in 2005):


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n0T992ccik


But wait. In 2007, we learn that USA and RUSSIA (with their GLONASS system) are now combining their satellite fleets to provide higher precision (since satellite signals can sometimes be obscured "by a tree or a building"). So now we have a total of 38 satellites which provide us with "GPS+" (that is, according to the funnily-named TOPCON Corporation):


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv-LrxSiCno



Let's now fast-forward to 2014, and learn about a quite recent 'disturbing' event that, reportedly, paralyzed RUSSIA's entire GPS system! :o


The terrifying 11-hour TOTAL BLACKOUT of GLONASS (on April 1 2014)

I recommend all interested readers to read the full, "dramatic" article - but here's an excerpt of it which should 'wet your appetite':

"Locata Warns: Lessons to Be Learned from GLONASS Spasm"

"Calling it an “unprecedented and deeply worrying total disruption . . . [that] shook the industry,” Locata Corporation reiterated its call for redundant terrestrial systems to back up GNSS in the wake of the April 1 11-hour GLONASS system outage."

"Nunzio Gambale, Locata CEO, said “We have been telling the industry for years that you cannot have a critically important capability like GPS without also having a backup! What is Plan B if the satellite systems fail? What replaces the space signal when there is a problem? If anyone needed a sign to understand why Locata has spent years inventing and developing the world’s first local terrestrial equivalent of the GPS system, then last week’s meltdown of a complete global satellite navigation system is it. This event should terrify every nation, government, and company that depends on navigation satellites for their business or, in some cases, their very lives.”
(...)
“There is no other technology that can do this, and it’s delivered in the complete absence of GPS,” continued Gambale. “What is being demonstrated at White Sands is that Locata supplies precisely the same function as GPS, even when there is no GPS available. That’s exactly what you need if the satellites fail. “If this event had been a GPS failure instead of a GLONASS failure – and it could very easily have been – then the entire world would have plunged into a catastrophe."

http://gpsworld.com/locata-warns-lesson ... ass-spasm/


So what's going on here? Are GPS and GLONASS destined to be replaced by terrestrial global positioning systems? Hey, what if they always were? What if there never was a constellation of man-made satellites in the first place - and that we have been fooled all along by a global / galactic scam? At this point, this hypothesis doesn't seem too far-fetched - seeing that they already have a system ("LOCATA") which claims to supply precisely the same function as GPS... <_<


April 4, 2014: "Russia implements the transition to using the terrestrial geocentric coordinate system (“Parametry Zemli 1990”) in operating the GLObal NAvigation Satellite System (GLONASS)" : http://glonass-iac.ru/en/content/news/?ELEMENT_ID=721


********************************

"How to Survive a Total [GPS] Constellation Outage"
"Yesterday we posted news of an 11-hour downtime for the full GLONASS constellation, due to an upload of bad ephemerides. Coincidentally, during that 11-hour period, the mass-market chip company Broadcom was conducting multi-constellation receiver tests in Asia."

http://gpsworld.com/how-to-survive-a-to ... on-outage/


In any event, a number of recent developments seem to suggest that some sort of exit-strategy is underway - aimed at 'phasing out' the old and worn-out man-made satellite hoax started way back in 1957 with the "Sputnik scare"...
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby simonshack on April 20th, 2014, 1:01 am

*

A million times stronger than GPS... "Could compete"? :blink:

New positioning technology could compete with GPS

"Instead of satellites, Locata uses ground-based equipment to project a radio signal over a localised area that is a million times stronger on arrival than GPS. It can work indoors as well as out, and the makers claim the receivers can be shrunk to fit inside a regular cellphone. Even the US military, which invented GPS technology, signed a contract last month agreeing to a large-scale test of Locata at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... 1MNkHS3t3M


Image
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby ElSushi on April 29th, 2014, 10:44 am

Here's a little "funny" video I made recently...uncovering the satellites hoax in a sarcastic way with some great friend's music from Spain...
The band is called "Betunizer". :lol:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGjx0v16r2M
ElSushi
Member
 
Posts: 126
Joined: August 3rd, 2011, 9:53 am

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby icarusinbound on April 29th, 2014, 1:49 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2614568/The-lost-cities-Middle-East-uncovered-Cold-War-era-spy-satellite-photos-looking-Soviet-missile-bases-captured-historic-sites-overtaken-urban-development.html

The lost cities of the Middle East uncovered by Cold War-era spy satellite photos that were looking for Soviet missile bases and captured historic sites since overtaken by urban development

Reconnaissance photos captured by Cold War-era spy satellites have tripled the number of known archaeological sites across the Middle East
The new CORONA Atlas of the Middle East revealed 10,000 previously undiscovered sites in Iraq, Turkey and Syria – including long-lost cities that could be among the earliest in human history
The photos, dating from 1960-1972, were intended to expose Soviet missile bases and military camps
The images have proved an invaluable resource because they pre-date the widespread construction of reservoirs, urban expansion, and agricultural intensification that the Middle East has undergone in recent decades

By David Mccormack

Published: 01:38, 28 April 2014 | Updated: 13:19, 28 April 2014


Please have a look at the above link, and consider that the supposed CORONA archive in question is reported to contain 860,000 satellite images, covering most of the world (two equally-extreme claims, I'd say). Bill Clinton apparently declassified it in 1995.

Reconnaissance photos captured by Cold War-era spy satellites have tripled the number of known archaeological sites across the Middle East, revealing thousands of ancient cities, roads, canals, and other ruins.

The archaeologists behind the new CORONA Atlas of the Middle East report that a survey of satellite images has revealed thousands of previously undiscovered sites in Iraq, Turkey and Syria – including long-lost cities that could be among the earliest in human history.

‘Some of these sites are gigantic, and they were completely unknown,’ said University of Arkansas archaeologist Jesse Casana at the launch of the atlas during the Society for American Archaeology’s annual conference on Thursday.
Reconnaissance photos captured by Cold War-era spy satellites have tripled the number of known archaeological sites across the Middle East, for instance this 1961 satellite photo shows Tell Rifaat in northwest Syria, which is now completely surrounded by a modern town


Reconnaissance photos captured by Cold War-era spy satellites have tripled the number of known archaeological sites across the Middle East, for instance this 1961 satellite photo shows Tell Rifaat in northwest Syria, which is now completely surrounded by a modern town

‘We can see all kinds of things – ancient roads and canals. The images provide a very comprehensive picture.’

The images were taken by the first generation of United States spy satellites - a system code-named CORONA - dating from 1960-1972. The photos were intended to expose Soviet missile bases and military camps, reports National Geographic.


I particularly like this quote, and ask, in all honesty, how can this possibly be functionally accepted as being true? Within the conventional paradigm of atmospheric friction, melting-point of celluloid, trackability etc

Also: why the apparent implicit denial of video transmission capablities from low-orbit satellites, despite the impressive Apollo moonshow? Or come to that, signals from Sputnik itself, sending down radio transmissions, as opposed to tiny little parcels on parachutes.

CORONA images were acquired on large rolls of black-and-white film, and because no means of transmitting images remotely had yet been developed, canisters of film, once exposed, were ejected and parachuted to earth where they were intercepted in mid-air by a plane.


I have much more of a tolerance and acceptance for the apparent tangible outputs of satellites (as in radio/tv/data rebroadcast capabilities), as opposed to the technology itself. I feel it's far too simplistic to believe that aircraft-borne cameras/equipment are delivering what the world has come to depend upon.

Nor do I feel that we can totally-discount GPS and similar 'off-earth' navigation systems, as being somehow directly terrestrial in nature. And yet I am hugely-sceptical of the imagery we see reportedly taken inside/outside, and from, the I$$.....and, of rocket launch footage, virtually the whole published spectrum of 'space technology' reports.

But somehow, remote imagery and rebroadcasting is here, all around us.
icarusinbound
Member
 
Posts: 393
Joined: November 28th, 2011, 9:49 am

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby scud on May 2nd, 2014, 11:43 am

In today’s Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/book ... e-sky.html

What would happen if satellites fell from the sky?

The world would grind to a halt

Planes would fall from the sky

Congestion would reach critical levels

Illegal poachers would thrive

Thousands would be lost

Food production would plummet

Archaeological treasures would lie undiscovered

Investors would lose billions


...nothing that bad then.

Hearing quite a bit about this ‘terror from above’ aren’t we? Here’s a video of the author Dr. Lewis Dartnell talking more crap... http://vimeo.com/54928358
scud
Member
 
Posts: 117
Joined: July 23rd, 2011, 6:56 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Sukiari on May 9th, 2014, 8:35 pm

lux wrote:Radio controlled clocks use an interesting technology. A single radio transmitter called WWVB located in Colorado transmits time codes received all over the USA and beyond. I wonder if this technology might have something to do with how faux satellite tech actually works?

As this plain-English web site describes it …

WWVB is a very interesting radio station. It has high transmitter power (50,000 watts), a very efficient antenna and an extremely low frequency (60,000 Hz). For comparison, a typical AM radio station broadcasts at a frequency of 1,000,000 Hz. The combination of high power and low frequency gives the radio waves from WWVB a lot of bounce, and this single station can therefore cover all of the continental United States plus much of Canada and Central America as well

The coverage map looks like this:

Image
source

So this single transmitter can be received well into the Pacific and Atlantic oceans as well as parts of Canada, Central America and even part of South America.

It would seem to me that it would only take maybe a dozen or so of such transmitters to cover the entire globe.


In fact, WWV can indeed cover the globe when propagation is good enough. Just like a GPS satellite, it constantly broadcasts the time, and it seems possible that one could use its signals in precisely the same way as one uses GPS to determine one's location, given several signals. There is a rub, though - WWV broadcasts in the high frequency part of the radio spectrum (1.8-30 MHZ is HF) which is subject to ever changing and anomalous propagation. Sometimes I can send out some dits (morse code) and hear them echo back once, even twice very rarely. These signals have passed all the way around the earth, or have been ducted strangely.

GPS operates in the gigahertz range, which is not subject to this kind of anomalous propagation. It is more or less strictly line of sight, perhaps bouncing off raindrops and snowflakes by by and large going in a straight line unlike HF signals which bend when the encounter the ionosphere (or the giant crystalline orb inside the hollow earth in which we live which contains all of "space").

However there was in operation for a long time (perhaps it still is?) a system called LORAN which used very low frequencies below the AM broadcast band to perform a function identical to GPS but with decreased accuracy. I believe that the decreased accuracy was simply a function of the longer wavelength of the radio waves, and not a property inherent to an earthbound vs space borne transmitter.

I do not see any reason for these radiolocation services to be on satellites other than the gee-whiz factor.
Sukiari
Member
 
Posts: 44
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 12:06 am

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Starbucked on June 15th, 2014, 10:20 am

A bit more on Skybox Imaging which was just purchased by Google.
http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/656471- ... aging.html

These satellites are said to travel at ISS speed (7.71 km/second) and at 600 km above Earth. In the video below, the skybox would have traveled 455 kms in 59 seconds.
Hmmmm. Do those video perspective changes seem right for a video camera moving at an altitude of 600 kms and a lateral movement of 455 kms?
Notice how the image goes from dark to bright, yet shadows remain sharp which depicts the scene always in direct sunlight.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKNAY5ELUZY

Here is the launch, from Russia (of course), of Skybox on a converted ICBM. Looks like pure CGI magic


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMi0DbQGfxs
Starbucked
Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: November 28th, 2012, 12:33 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Starbucked on June 15th, 2014, 1:25 pm

To add to my above post, using a right angle calculator to determine the 'hypotenuse' of the triangle: at the beginning of the video the satellite would be 600 km above a fixed point on the ground and after traveling 455 kms would be 753 kms from that same point. Thatis the approx. distance from San Francisco to the Mexico border.

That is some awesome camera. Did Skybox get the technology right on the first orbit? B)
Starbucked
Member
 
Posts: 209
Joined: November 28th, 2012, 12:33 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby Pilgrim on July 1st, 2014, 11:15 pm

Interesting that that we had positioning systems for ships and aircraft as early as the early 1940s via Decca technology.
Simply put, satellites were not necessary for GPS then let alone today. "But my mobile phone shows where they are" is the most stupid objection i get when i try to tell people. :)
http://www.jproc.ca/hyperbolic/decca_hist.html
Pilgrim
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 10:33 pm

Re: Satellites : general discussion and musings

Postby lux on July 1st, 2014, 11:56 pm

The one technology the public has the hardest time understanding is the technology of lying.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Altair and 6 guests