It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

recent groom lake satellite image

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Hi there, in a Dreamlandresort web site shows new Area 51 satellite images, it seems they have built a new hangar (I don't know for what purpose) the new hangar also have a paved way, and new RCS range structure (Howland Company the builder?, may be).

Look more at here: www.dreamlandresort.com...




posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
My new wallpaper, I cut it across my 5 monitors.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Groomforce
 


Well spotted Groomforce, I've been waiting for that!

I found it particularly interesting that the taxi lines for the new hangar terminate in the centre of the hangar which could indicate that it will be used to house one large aircraft, rather than several small ones such as UAVs. UAV's don't really interest me, but a long range hypersonic recon/strike vehicle really does! ;-)

Cheers

Robbie



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 07:55 AM
link   
What the hell is that new triangular tower? I have never seen or heard of that thing before today.



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by PokeyJoe
 


It's likely to be some form of Radar device used in the testing at the RCS range. The theory goes that instead of using guy wires to support the antenna they've built a triangular structure that is self supporting so that the antenna can be rotated. Analysis of different versions of satellite imagery seems to support this.

It could also be some form of phased array radar, designed to give a 360 degree 'picture' of the range during testing. The height of the tower may suggest it could be used for very high altitude detection, i.e hypersonic re-entry vehicles!!!

Cheers

Robbie



posted on Jul, 9 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by stratsys-sws
 


Phases array radar doesn't rotate mechanically. Rather, it uses beam-forming techniques to rotate the beam electronically.

Guy wires are death near airports. Way too dangerous for choppers, and not much better for fixed wing.

As I pointed out in the other thread, this does not look like any existing RCS.



posted on Jul, 10 2009 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Other images of Groom Lake, there are two more, they built a black metal structure in front of the famous Hangar 18: www.dreamlandresort.com...
In it, you can see three F-16 parked on a paved runway, they built another ramp, possibly for more aircrafts: www.dreamlandresort.com...

I wonder if this contract that I have found has something to do with these constructions in Groom: www.fbo.gov...



posted on Jul, 10 2009 @ 07:12 AM
link   
dlr.thexhunters.com...

TAKE A LOOK AT THIS BAD BOY, COURTESY OF DREAMLAND RESORT. I was actually gonna use the same method of image stacking to reduce distortions but someone beat me to it.



posted on Jul, 10 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


The link 404s. Image stacking does not improve resolution. It is useful in astronomy for a lot of reasons, but not daytime telephotography.

You are generally better off taking a series of photographs for each frame, say 6, then picking the sharpest of the 6 images.



posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Go here then

www.dreamlandresort.com...

1-Click on area 51 photos
2-Area 51 Panorama
taken from Tikaboo Peak on June 29, 2008
3-Then the topmost photo. It is big but amazing



posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by PokeyJoe
 


Something I am very interested.

Never seen a huge tower located at a secret facility before.



posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


It is not as good as the one from 2005 without stacking.

I've done the experiment, both from Tikaboo and other scenes. Stacking does not help. This about this for a second. The imagery is wiggling due to thermal distortion. You stack some wigging shots, you end up with blur. Less noise mind you, but a blurry image.

When you do astrophotography, you are contending with about 2.5 miles of atmosphere. It is done at night (DOH!), so there is substantially less thermal interference. Shooting Tikaboo is done in the daylight over 26 miles of air. It is a totally different ballgame.

Note also that your results depending mostly on atmospheric conditions. Some days are clear, and some days you can't even see the base. So it is very hard to compare image techniques from one session to another. Rather, you need to try your techniques at the same session to remove atmospheric conditions out of the equation.

This is the first google hit from image stacking, and it follows pretty much what I know from studying signal processing and real life results:
Image stacking

If you check out this page, you can see shots at full scanner resolution (film) showing how much the image changes from frame to frame:
all images are not created equally

This is an image of the hew hangar I shot:
new hangar
Because I used film, you need to deal with grain, but otherwise it is not too shabby.

Here is the whole webpage:
telephotography

I never bothered to link it since I have a digital body now. Unfortunately, a lightning storm prevented my last photo session.

Getting back to image stacking, the problem is that term is a poor description of the process. Rather than stacking, you are averaging. It is a completely linear operation done in the time domain.

There is one stacking technique I've played with that might improve image quality that is done in the frequency domain. A commercial program "helicon" does this, as well as a free program called imagej.

helicon
imagej
extended depth of field

This nonlinear scheme sort of improves the stack by using the sharpest parts of the image to make the final composite. However, there is a problem in that sometimes the very thermally distorted images in themselves are pretty sharp if the shutter speed is fast enough, so it doesn't always do it's magic uniformly.

I think the best bet out of all these techniques is simply to shoot the same scene multiple times and pick the sharpest frame. There may be some other technique I am not aware of that might be better, so I am open to suggestion. But I have spent considerable time experimenting with image summing and don't believe it is useful for daylight telephotography.



posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
very cool photos

thanks Groomforce and the-pro

i've never seen such clear, up close photos of A51



posted on Jul, 12 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 



Oh ok cool. Thanks man.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Hi Gariac

I agree with you, fixed phased array's don't usually rotate. The photographic evidence seems to show that the tower has rotated, and the modular or array appearance of the faces of the tower is clear on all the latest shots. This led me to the theory that perhaps this is a new type of array, which during testing may be rotated rather than using beam steering, or a combination of both.
Plus, phased arrays on land designed for missile detection etc are fixed because the direction of the re-entry vehicle is predicted, however fixed arrays have their limitations, so do rotating arrays. By combining the two you remove the limitations! Three-dimensional real-time synthetic aperture imaging using a rotating phased array transducer


Cheers

Rob



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
the black object has been there for a long time it is a jet blast deflector.



posted on Jul, 13 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by stratsys-sws
 


That paper is in the ultrasonics symposium, though that doesn't rule out radar. In any event, there are simpler methods to achieve the same results as a rotated phased array, though hard to describe without drawing a diagram. [Basically, if you omitted every other element in one array, you could replace them with elements from another similar array with such gaps. Design the two arrays at a angle, and you have the equivalent of two panels, though with reduced SNR.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join