From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   Le vendredi 22 juillet 2016 19:44:53 UTC+2, Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw a   
   écrit :   
   >   
   > Here's your problem, you don't actually understand the core problems with    
   > stealth in space.   
      
   Actually, I do. You don't understand that we are already faced with the same   
   problems.   
      
      
   >    
   > There is no horizon.  On a planet you only have to be able to keep from    
   > being detected by sensors that are really close to you.   
      
   Have you noticed that there are camera EVERYWHERE? That does not even take   
   into account where cameras COULD be. Ever hear of aerial drones? You can put a   
   camera in the air for less then $100. For the cost of the Zimwalt programme,   
   you can have cheap    
   drones covering every square km of the Earth. If we REALLY wanted, there would   
   be no place to hide.   
   Horizon is only an issue when there are places you can not, or do not, go.   
   satellites made horizons irrelevant long ago.   
      
      
   >    
   > Space gives a very uncluttered background.  On a planet you have    
   > everything from mountains to shifts in atmospheric conditions causing    
   > sensor clutter.   
   >    
   And all of this sensor clutter can be fairly easily "blue-screened" out. We   
   only care about what moves, and we have had the software to clear such clutter   
   for decades. The problem is it takes time to analyse.   
   Space, OTOH, is NOT uncluttered. Not at all. Especially when you bring in   
   sensitive observation instruments. CBR is EVERYWHERE. Then you have all the   
   stars you can't see with the naked eye... but sensitive instruments CAN. Then   
   you have all the nebulae,    
   galaxies, etc. Then there is all the particulate dust in space, and all the   
   charged particles. Why don't care about these because we can't see them.   
   Sensitive observation platforms CAN. There is also a HELL of a lot more space   
   to sift through. On Earth,    
   there is only about half a trillion square meters to sift through. You really   
   don't have to be concerned about anything smaller, so resolution is not so   
   much an issue.    
      
      
   >    
   > Space really is a different sensor environment.   
      
   Yes it is. On Earth, you are only limited by the technical capabilities of   
   your sensors. In space, you are limited by hard absolutes. On Earth, there are   
   people, with cameras, litterally everywhere. In space, there are great swathes   
   where there is no one.   
    On Earth, off the shelf, hand held optics, even the poorest quality, will   
   give you usable information. In space, you need oversized optics, and the most   
   minute deformations will destroy the image.    
      
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)