Observing spy satellites using consumer hardware | Hacker News Reader

Observing spy satellites using consumer hardware

home.online.nl

76 pointscodelizard4219 comments

I don't have the equipment to track or photograph them, but I do follow these guys. It's fun to look up and see a multi-billion dollar "classified" object whipping by. Some of them (lacrosse) are almost recognizable with the naked eye. They have specific colours.

A bit nerdy, but being able to accurately predict a 'shooting star' can be a great party trick.

http://www.heavens-above.com/

> The station uses off-the-shelf photographic equipment: a Canon EOS 450D DSLR, used with an EF 50/2.5 Macro lens for satellites in Low Earth Orbit, and an EF 100/2.8 Macro USM lens for high altitude objects (objects in a Molniya orbit).

This is no doubt a stupid question, but I thought Macro lenses were used specifically for photographing subjects that are extremely close to the lens. Objects in space seem to be the definition of far away [1], so could someone explain what I'm missing, please?

[1] small vs far away: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS12p0Zqlt0

edit: greatest of thanks for the replies -makes perfect sense :)

It can probably be set to focus on infinity. The reason to use a macro lens would be the field of view (since they don't offer much magnification, the field of view will be maximized).

> The reason to use a macro lens would be the field of view (since they don't offer much magnification, the field of view will be maximized).

Doesn't sound right to me. Is the field of view of 100mm "regular" (non-macro) and 100mm macro objective really different for distant objects? Can someone explain how that works out?

My phrasing is likely poor, but the part about not wanting magnification to maximize field of view should be fine.

(Then I guess things like price and distortion would guide the choice from there)

Generally speaking, a macro lens just has a shorter minimum focus distance so that you can fill more of the frame with your subject. The macro lens I've got is perfectly willing to focus at infinity, and I frequently use it for other things (like portraits) due to it's 100mm focal length.

It's reviewed as quite sharp for it's low price. That's likely why he's using it. He's using an old Zeiss on some of his other photos. Sounds like he's using good, but inexpensive equipment.

He's been tweeting at me about this, so I'll just copy-paste what he wrote and put down the links:

"@PjotrLigthart @HackerNews That 1 guy has it right: I use not too expensive but good equipment (1/2)"

https://twitter.com/Marco_Langbroek/status/58123542384388505...

"@PjotrLigthart @HackerNews (2/2) the 50mm macro excels in quality at full lens opening. That's one reason why I choose it."

https://twitter.com/Marco_Langbroek/status/58123605665531494...

"@PjotrLigthart @HackerNews also choose it because I can also use it for other things, it is great for close up of artefacts, geol. Spec."

https://twitter.com/Marco_Langbroek/status/58123660870119014...

Thank you :)

Nice!

Hey, someone else here knows Langbroek! His work and writing on tracking US reconnaissance satellites is very interesting, I'm wishing more people here follow it in the near future!

This article is only talking about some "internet biijl je wjiit hurf durf €29.95"? Is it appropriate to flag this spam link?

Yes, it should be flagged, or a moderator should change the link to the archive.today link given elsewhere in the HN comments. It was fine when it was submitted, but now it is broken.

On Safari, every time I follow the link I get to the page the submitter intended--an interesting page, in English, about satellite tracking with not one hint of monetization (except a box with some weather information for the site's location and a link to the service providing that...it's possible that this counts as an ad).

On Chrome, however, I see what 0x0 seems to be seeing: the front page of online.nl, which is in Dutch. They appear to be an ISP, phone, and TV provider and the front page is trying to sell various plans.

I also see that on Safari if I hit refresh on the interesting satellite page.

On Firefox, I get the same result as on Chrome. All of these are on a Mac.

On Safari, I have AdBlock Plus, but I get the same behavior regardless of whether it is enabled or disabled or the site.

Asking for the link submitted here with curl gives this:

   <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN">
   <HTML><HEAD>
   <TITLE>302 Found</TITLE>
   </HEAD><BODY>
   <H1>Found</H1>
   The document has moved <A HREF="https://www.online.nl/403">here</A>.<P>
   </BODY></HTML>

I took a look with tcpdump at what is happening on Safari, and I see why I'm able to see the right page in Safari. It's cached, and the site is returning a "304 Not Modified". Clearing my cache makes Safari behave like the other browsers.

wouldnt that be the government trying to censor something that deals with spy satellites?

Link now redirecting to a landing page for online.nl.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rr5IWu_...

sigh I figured something like this would happen, considering it's being hosted on fairly small-bandwidth webspace. I fed the link to archive.today before I posted it on here: https://archive.today/jqSia

Ha! So it is possible!

Personal plug: I wrote a short story concept / film script idea about a similar idea sometime between 2006 and 2008. Can't exactly recall, but I know it was in my typewriter phase. Just the idea of watching was neat, but I made up a structure with a jouranlist and I added a conflict element of an international incident which justified some suspense and action.

"Watching for the Weird" was the original working title, which eventually morphed into "Satellite Seeker" and I think it's somewhere out on the 'net. I know I've got hard copies and scans around. Written under my pen name Vernon Walter. VernonWalter is also the email address via Google if you'd like to contact me for a copy or for any other writing related work of mine.

I believe this is his new blog http://sattrackcam.blogspot.mx/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com