Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by palunon 3353 days ago
Hubble was launched in 1990, is it surprising that 22 years later, NRO telescopes are substantially better ?
3 comments

The donated telescopes were build for the Future Imagery Architecture project:

   http://www.space.com/16077-nasa-space-telescopes-failed-nro-program.html
They're substantially newer technology than Hubble (which is older than the 1990 launch date suggests -- it was delayed several years after the Challenger disaster).

That said, I don't think they'll give an appreciably better resolution -- given good fabrication techniques, optically a 2.4m mirror is a 2.4m mirror, and everything I've read suggests that US IMINT satellites have been (in good seeing conditions) close to diffraction-limited for a long time now.

I'm sure the capabilities of the satellites have improved a great deal, but in other directions than resolution. More communications bandwidth? Faster repointing (giving more flexibility about which targets get imaged on a given pass? Better multi-spectral imaging? I'm sure there will be some surprises when the program is eventually declassified. (And I'm optimistic it will be -- there's lots you can read now about the film-return satellites).

The point is they were giving them away. Meaning the sats they kept are even better than better than bubble.
The satellites would've been near contemporaries of Hubble, not 22 years junior. NRO didn't need them anymore.