Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NonValueAdded
As opposed to a drone?

If a drone isn't already flying in the area, how long would it take to request one to support a soldier in the field?

The small satellite capability is significant because it would be far more responsive than traditional systems. Soldiers could access 1.5-meter resolution satellite imagery within minutes.

5 posted on 10/29/2017 6:24:21 AM PDT by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Elderberry

How many drones can be built, deployed, and “lost” for the amount of one satellite launch.

The space folks are wanting job security.

Go for the drone.


6 posted on 10/29/2017 6:41:33 AM PDT by ptsal ( Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - M. Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Elderberry

Maybe our little satellite is looking down on the opponents own drones in the target area?


7 posted on 10/29/2017 7:08:07 AM PDT by Doctor DNA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Elderberry
The problem here is a guy named Johannes Kepler.

Satellites don't hover or fly "racetrack" patterns. And if you really want 1.5 meter resolution from a small imaging satellite, you have to fly in a Low Earth Orbit (LEO) where your viewing access to any patch of ground is a maximum of 12-15 minutes at a pop--and then the satellite goes "over the hill." If you want persistence over an AO, you can either: (a) Build a huge telescope and put it in a higher orbit or (b) Build a large number of small satellites.

8 posted on 10/29/2017 11:04:08 AM PDT by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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