U.S. Withholding Satellite Data 274
plover writes "Because of Congressional legislation passed quietly in 2003, the Air Force Space Command will no longer distribute space surveillance data via NASA. There was supposed a three year transitional period where the data was to be made available via a NASA web site, but earlier this month their transitional server went down hard, and NASA has decided to not rebuild it. (It was scheduled to be shut down on 31 March 2005 anyway.) The only way to obtain satellite data now is by signing up with the official Space-Track website. Part of the agreement to obtaining data from their site is that you agree to not redistribute their data. Of course, amateurs are still free to redistribute their observations, including those of classified satellites."
Homeland Security? (Score:3, Interesting)
Quietly passed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Homeland Security? (Score:1, Interesting)
How difficult is it to build ? (Score:5, Interesting)
I found this site about building a miniature
Miniature Space satellite [micro-a.net]
A canadian cheapy.
Canadian Satellite [space.com]
I think it would be cool if someone could put a cheap one in space from off the shelf telescope parts . Don't you think these prices for these orbitting telescopes are a bit farfetched ?
Re:Quietly passed (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's an example of such a failure. In Hawaii, there is a tsunami monitering center, the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, [noaa.gov] which moniters the west coast of the US, and pretty much all of the pacific basin for tsunami. I'll bet that after the massive seaquake, they knew what was coming. I'll also bet that there was no protocol for who they could contact to pass on this information. While they probably had a system for warning the continental US about dangers approaching the west coast, it doesn't seem like had a contact in the state department who could inform foreign governments about the information they had. With 2-3 hours notice, several thousand lives could have been saved in the affected regions. You can raise the point about not being able to help poor vilages who have no infrastructure and no ability to contact them, and that's a valid point. However, there were still thousands of casualities on resort beaches in tourist cities, places where communication infractructure wasn't a problem. The problem was that you had these group of people in Hawaii with lifesaving information who were likely shouting in the dark trying to get someone to listen to them, which is what likely happened to any watchdog group who may have known about this legislation.
This is going to help honestly... (Score:2, Interesting)
Am i the only one thinking that people likely to abuse this information
Re:This is bullshit...No it's not (Score:3, Interesting)
Its the projections of the sattelites that are secret and should be. Why should we all care?
A powerfull land based laser could take out a satelite and a trajectory is needed.
Weather and other services are still available.
Open ended (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Spies. (Score:5, Interesting)
No. Hubble regularly looks at Earth for calibration purposes. See: http://www.stsci.edu/stsci/meetings/shst2/williams r.html [stsci.edu]
Comment removed (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Spies. (Score:3, Interesting)
I didn't know about the Hubble Moon pictures, nice one! Found them here: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive
Re:Spies. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Spies. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How difficult is it to build ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, you could buy a simple telescope, duct tape a digital camera and a packet radio transmitter to it, and blast it into space.
But building optics that won't break during launch, and can handle the temperature changes is another matter. Building an attitude control system (a cluster of miniature rocket engines, plus control system) is nontrivial, too. You'll need energy (solar panels, fuel tanks), also built to last in space.
Off-the-shelf? No chance.
Re:Quietly passed (Score:3, Interesting)
There are such watchdogs, however...to be frank, that's your job as a responsible voter to keep track of what your elected officials are doing since, you know, they are there to represent you.
Saying that the government should take the time to inform everyone of whats going on because people are too lazy--or don't care--to pay attention is akin to wanting to change the channel on your TV but you don't feel like getting up to either find the remote or switch it manually.
Re:Quietly passed (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of a job I had in the '70s required reviewing both our state and the federal legislative Registers. Be afraid. Be very afraid. If people only knew everything that gets proposed but doesn't pass committee, or if it passes committee, fails the vote (but isn't widely reported).
Doesn't help that Congress seems especially corrupt at this moment in history. It isn't so much that the system is broken. It's working just fine for the special interests the way they want it to work.
Re:Quietly passed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Quietly passed (Score:3, Interesting)
The only notable exception to this is when legislation like the Patriot act was rammed through and only one Senator had time to read the whole thing.
Re:Quietly passed (Score:3, Interesting)
The system provides a mechanism for demonstrating your dissatisfaction. It is called the null or blank vote. It shows that you are interested in what is happening in your political system but no political force expresses your beliefs or supports your interests.
Sitting on a couch on election day does not "break the system" and apatyh is not a valid criticism of the futility of the system.