Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: driftdiver

That picture is impressive for a smartphone, to be sure. That’s only a few city blocks though. Twenty-five square miles is a LOT of area to photograph by comparison.

However, I’m still sceptical. The article said the airplane would fly at 30 kilometers altitude, that’s over 15 miles high. It would require tremendous resolution to correctly identify and accurately track a car any for distance, through traffic and particularly overhead obstacles, such as buildings, shadows, trees, overpasses, etc. Forget trying to track pedestrians from that height. Maybe on a barren desert, but not in a city.


35 posted on 07/06/2015 2:42:40 PM PDT by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: TexasRepublic

We’ve been doing this since the 60s. Down to the resolution of a dime.

The only thing new here is its in civilian hands and supposedly based on a small airplane. I agree the 30km altitude seems bogus. Some of the drones fly that high. More likely its simply wrong or a lie.

Its simply a matter of resolution, data storage and bandwidth.


36 posted on 07/06/2015 2:46:47 PM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson