We aren't being told the truth about the James Webb Space Telescope's abilities. - The lies are stacking up

necroshadow said:
Indeed, the closest we've gotten is Roman Space Telescope (in development, formerly WFIRST), which is the product of a donation by the NRO (see here). In short, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) donated two primary mirrors to NASA, to be repurposed into instruments for astronomical research. These primary mirrors that are comparable to Hubble's. Of course, this is a far cry from turning a space telescope around and pointing it at Earth. It's taken several years of development to repurpose them into better-than-Hubble telescopes. They are expected to launch this decade.
Click to expand...
I think I was seriously hi that night I wrote this, and it was a shit thead TBH. I should delete it, but that would be lame. I'll have to wear this shit thread as. badge of...something...
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Sandy Sun Dunes, Ira the Weatherman, JustSomeDong and 2 others
AirdropShitposts said:
One thing to remember is that the government (and related agencies) classifies all kinds of shit that it doesn't need to (and often legally should not) and they become absurdly anal about these things no matter how many times they're told there's no reason for them to be secret, that they aren't secret anyway as everybody knows about them and that they can't stop protecting these non-secrets. There was some flight test disaster they covered up for decades on the basis that it was protecting national security secrets. Not a single one was involved, nothing about the plane was not already in commercial aircraft and they weren't even fighting disclosure to try and be immune from lawsuits.

It's therefore entirely possible that these "proprietary secrets" are stuff you can buy at Home Depot.
Click to expand...
When I tell someone I did something with "trade secrets" in my circles, it's usually a joke codeword for "I mickey-moused the shit out of it and if anyone else saw, they'd pull their hair out"

Reading way too much into this. If JWST is being used to spy on earth, that's just unsurprising. There are plenty of spy satellites already. I doubt JWST is less capable than NASA states. NASA frankly has no reason to lie to the public about this sort of thing. It's no secret that NASA has had plenty of failures and that they don't get good funding.

Considering that a different company provided that specific part, I can imagine that company just wants to cover its ass. The way the actuators were designed or implemented may be clever or efficient and they may not want other companies to get ahold of the idea. There are so many non-conspiratorial reasons that NASA would do this.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, Moths and saintJogger
1652418746074.png
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Space Cat, Ira the Weatherman, Magnum Magazine and 8 others
Earth glowniggers have sooper sekrit tech deals with space alien glowniggers. Just common sense, when you think about it.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: thejackal
BONE_Buddy said:
Hubble used a *lot* of the same tech and components as spy satellites of the same era. Makes sense for the JWST to have commonality as well.
Click to expand...
The successors to CRYSTAL, the Boeing led Future Imagery Architecture (FIA) was a failure and Lockheed got a contract to make more KH-11s. NROL-21 was a tech demonstrator for the FIA satellites and apparently was based on a constellation of smaller satellites and an advanced radar imaging system (from what I understand the radar imaging systems did show some promise) so I can't see it having any relation to the JWST in any real way. I doesn't help that the tech used in the JWST don't really translate to spy satellites all that well. NROL-21 was destroyed by a SM-3 missile after it failed in orbit.

Also, when Hubble was being built, Lockheed used their facility in Sunnyvale, California, This facility (3 cleanrooms) was used to build the KH-11s years before. Apparently serval NASA employees took one look at the facility and came to the conclusion that a satellite like the Hubble wasn't all that new. The tech and manufacturing facility for the JWST are fairly well documented so I feel like JWST isn't really related to anything over at the NRO.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Smaug's Smokey Hole
MadStan said:
no such precision needed for an orbiting spy sat unless we are looking for terroristic ants.
Click to expand...
I dunno man, having the precision to trace your CPU in whatever spectrum sounds potentially useful to me. That's just a lack of imagination. More data is more data, if we had the technology to directly perv on the DNA in a petri dish they'd put it up there.

It's probably just an actuator or whatever from a contractor that came pre-classified though. I'm doubtful they'd use a public telescope for occasional windows of Earth shit when they could just put up 10 equivalent bespoke secret sats that point downwards all the time, like usual. I remember looking up spysat spending once and it was something like an aircraft carrier worth of spacebux every year in some periods if I recall correctly.
 
It needs the 8.6 times zoom to see into your window and know what kind of troon porn you are watching. Then it will text your mother.
 
T0oCoolFool said:
Are you saying that they might be using this telescope to spy on Earth, specifically, to see if there are any bases/structures deep within the ocean or deep under ground, that regular satellites can't pick up on?
Click to expand...
an optical telescope would be terrible at doing those things compared to synthetic aperture radar. and there's already tons of research in the field and companies winning contracts with government agencies that disappear into the ether to make me pretty confident that they have capabilities far beyond what people think is technically feasible.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SeniorFuckFace
SeniorFuckFace said:
Please elaborate on this.
Click to expand...
this is public advertising for a private company that owns a synthetic aperture radar satellite constellation in orbit. it is capable of resolving car sized targets, in real time, through solid objects. this isn't even cutting edge, it's a product.

the research on the topic that's publicly avaliable has all sorts of crazy shit like milimeter resolution, being able to resolve 10cm sized targets underneath meters of concrete, and real time video. it would be foolish to think that the CIA has not leveraged this technology to peek into the chinese/russian/afghani/doomsday prepper bunker complexes we've known about for decades but can't see inside of.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: The Ghost of Kviv, ABE LINN COHN, T0oCoolFool and 2 others
nigga that crab pollack said:
this is public advertising for a private company that owns a synthetic aperture radar satellite constellation in orbit. it is capable of resolving car sized targets, in real time, through solid objects. this isn't even cutting edge, it's a product.

the research on the topic that's publicly avaliable has all sorts of crazy shit like milimeter resolution, being able to resolve 10cm sized targets underneath meters of concrete, and real time video. it would be foolish to think that the CIA has not leveraged this technology to peek into the chinese/russian/afghani/doomsday prepper bunker complexes we've known about for decades but can't see inside of.
Click to expand...
What would be considered cutting edge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back