[rbolla]

that's awesome.. I thought Army bases are masked on maps.

[renzo88]

There's really no point. A few high sensitivity assets are lower resolution, but any state actor that wants very high resolution shots of military facilities already has it and on a quicker update cadence than google maps allows.

[KennyBlanken]

In the initial years of Google Earth and similar services, a number of military and intelligence facilities were blurred.

[hk__2]

This is still the case today. See for example this military base in France: https://goo.gl/maps/gRLEBcCQB9CCx8Au6

[jimmyed]

Why does _france_ need to hide their millitary bases? I mean, France?

[gorgoiler]

This isn’t an answer to your inflammatory question, but there are only a handful of nation states with nuclear weapons, and France is one of them.

These aren’t hand-me-down US warheads on the back of a missile truck: the flagship of the French navy is a 40,000 tonne nuclear armed, nuclear powered aircraft carrier floating above a strategic submarine fleet that can destroy the world.

[widforss]

Are we talking about the same France? France, one of Europes largest military powers which actually use their military in various conflicts around the globe?

[mcv]

Maybe their argument is that France has nothing to fear from anyone, so why the secrecy? Of course it's nonsense no matter how you spin it. All militaries love secrecy (except maybe the ones that are just for show, but I expect even the Swiss Guard in the Vatican has its secrets).

[mbg721]

Because they're a NATO member with a pretty large and advanced military force, in a very accessible area of Europe?

[capableweb]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the biggest threat to domestic military facilities are foreign state actors but rather domestic terrorists, and those usually don't have access to any military-grade satellites.

[warner25]

Interesting that you mention only domestic military facilities... When I was deployed to Afghanistan ten years ago, with rockets and mortar rounds landing daily inside the perimeter of our Forward Operating Base, I was irritated to see recent and high-resolution satellite imagery on Google Maps. I can see my sleeping tent, office building(s), and parked helicopters in perfect clarity. The imagery hasn't been updated since then, so you can still see everything despite this base being abandoned years ago. https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9428134,69.0629605,492m/data...

[acdha]

Do they need military-grade imagery? The Chinese or Russian militaries do because they’re trying to estimate war-time performance but I find it hard to believe that there are any domestic terrorists building sensor arrays to support SAM batteries. If they’re trying to blow one up, the resolution on a consumer drone or telescope would likely be more than enough.

[tgsovlerkhgsel]

Those generally avoid hardened targets like military bases.

[jldl805]

It's 2021 (for another couple weeks) and everyone has access to imaging satellites with almost instant turnaround, for a negligible fee.

Consider yourself corrected.

[boomskats]

Have you considered including a source that supports your statement?

[mynameismonkey]

Not OP, and no idea on pricing, but https://www.spymesat.com/new-tasking.html appears to allow you task a satellite selfie on demand

[hk__2]

According to the pricing tab, it costs ~$20 to get a 1 km2 area with a 30-50cm resolution.

[renzo88]

I googled it and came up with multiple answers. Instead of demanding people prove their work, take reasonable statements in good faith imo.

[laurent92]

But do such consumer services mask military targets? Probably yes.