Hacker News Reader

Comment by nopassrecover | Hacker News Reader

Rather interesting timing after the US accused China of supplying Iran with high-res imagery used to support attacks on US bases, then a Chinese satellite mysteriously broke apart

View on HN

Wouldn't it be possible to confirm who may be supplying imagery by taking some IRGC supplied imagery such as [1] and figure out which satellite(s) were overhead at the time and capable of taking the image? It may not be particularly straightforward to do so--but seems theoretically possible with:

- Consideration of time-of-day/azimuth of overhead satellite based on shadows and perspective.

- Comparison to other imagery of the same location checking for portable objects (such as vehicles) and keeping track of when they appear and disappear, and whether they're present in the imagery being analysed.

- Consideration of cloud coverage and weather conditions to rule out unwanted satellite passes.

Then write up a report and publish it, making it a believable and concrete finding instead of a finding that otherwise may just be perceived to be speculation/vibes.

[1] https://soaratlas.com/maps/asia-jordan-strike-at-u-s-aircraf...

That's exactly how it was revealed that a high quality image intentionally leaked by Trump came from a satellite and not an overhead plane.

Press article: https://www.livescience.com/secret-classified-satellite-trum...

Blog write up: https://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2019/09/image-from-trump-tw...

It's really not interesting at all. The US Destroyed that satellite to stop that information flow.

China has more intelligence/imaging satellites in space than the US does. I don't think it will stop the information flow.

And all they have to do is move them into position to gather intel on the Iran region to have them destroyed as well.

You think the US will destroy 230 Chinese intelligence satellites? LOL

The DEW announcement is the message "we destroyed your satellite, Xi"

Yaogan-50 for anyone asking.

Interesting. A bit conspiratorial, but hey. It would be a major provocation if so

As an aside - the word conspiratorial has become polluted.

If you accept the premise that governments and their military and intelligence agencies aren’t 100% transparent, which is true, then the above comment is simply speculative.

A major provocation? "Oh, you deny using your satellites to supply them with imaging? All right, then it wasn't us who blew up your spy satellite that wasn't supplying imaging."

That is, China's in a bit of an awkward position to complain very much.

Problems start when their complaints take the form of using their own deniable capability against U.S. satellites.

I've a feeling our satellites are far more expensive and advanced than theirs. Nobody wants a space tit-for-tat that can escalate dramatically.

So, what solution do you have in mind, if China supplies military support to an adversary? Politely ask them to stop? Let them continue? Seems not so trivial to me, especially since everyone has satellites up there for this purpose, and there's a good chance China would do the same.

Politely ask them to stop seems like a great idea to try first before you actively attack a space capable nuclear superpower!

If they did supply images, to supporting the attacks, that did or even didn't result in the death of soldiers, then they were first to commit an act of aggression towards a nuclear superpower. This is a measured response to that act of aggression. Asking politely, in that context, doesn't necessarily make sense, especially when you can just burn a few hundred million of their dollars to demonstrate why they shouldn't do that.

I think China would have done the same, but with the usual gaslighting [1].

[1] https://spacenews.com/china-says-it-remains-opposed-weapons-...

There is a meaningful difference between „providing information to a country currently being attacked“ and „blowing stuff up in orbit“.

One is significantly more risk to the rest of the world than other.

Don't be naive. If a blind man is asking you where to aim his gun, are you responsible for the death or is the blind man pulling the trigger? In the context of war, BOTH of you are, and both are valid military targets, just as a spotter is, directing a sniper, on the battlefield, because the intention of both of you is to cause death.

>Don't be naive.

You do realize that since the advent of image reconnaissance satellites, imagery has been used to support the wider geopolitical objectives of whoever owns the satellites doing the reconnaissance, up to and including sharing intelligence with geopolitical allies?

In other words: the point of contention here is a tale old as time, and when caught one power usually just registers diplomatic complaints against the other power. Rather than, you know, kick off WW3 by messing with space assets between two nuclear powers.

I'd also like to note that the Soviets literally provided a massive amount of logistical support to North Vietnam. In the Korean War, their own pilots even squared off against Americans. The United States returned the favor when they invaded Afghanistan, our logistical and intelligence support killing scores of Soviets. At no point did either power decide to start blowing up each other's satellites.

It's 2026, Iran I'm sure has a myriad of ways of acquiring imagery via commercial satellite providers. Let alone other intel modalities.

The notion that a giant KC-135 sitting on a tarmac somewhere being otherwise safe were it not for the Chinese sharing intelligence is laughable.

Reads more like incompetent threat assessment and regional asset positioning.

China is not Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela or some other third world country that the US has fought in over the past few decades. You can't just destroy one of their satellites for free. And I can bet the US didn't do it, because that would be a major escalation, especially now that Xi is coming to the US and there are rumors that the US wants a deal.

So it broke apart by itself?

"The European Space Agency estimates that there have been more than 660 explosions, collisions, or anomalous events resulting in fragmentation. As it stands, there are currently more than 1.5 million space debris objects in Earth orbit.

It’s not clear what may have caused the Yaogan-50 (02) satellite to break apart, but it may have been a propulsion or battery failure, or it may have itself collided with another object or space debris."

That doesn’t mean anything. “Sometimes satellites hit things or have problems and blow up. Maybe it hit something and had a problem”.

Edit: Its a perfectly valid response to the question that was asked.

So China's brand new recon satellite that was placed specifically in orbit over Iran just happened to self-destruct weeks after China was accused of giving Iran high-res satellite imagery that was used to kill American soldiers?

And the US just publicly told everyone they have weapons in space?

Hell of a coincidence.

I thought the Russians were supplying them with HiRes imagery. I've not heard of any Russian optical or radar satellite breaking up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com