backtop


Print 79 comment(s) - last by HaZaRd2K6.. on Aug 5 at 8:43 PM


(Source: Google and FAS)
The Chinese military may likely become the latest enemy of Google Earth

Google Maps and Google Earth users now have the ability to see a new high-tech Chinese nuclear ballistic missile submarine which can reportedly fire intercontinental ballistic missiles, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons analyst for the Federation of American Scientists.

Kristensen found the Jin-class, or Type 094, nuclear submarine's image after it was taken by the Quickbird commercial satellite late last year.  The Jin-class is the successor to the Xia-class submarine, "the unsuccessful Xia-class (Type 092) of a single boat built in the early 1980s," Kristensen wrote.

The Jin-class submarine was photographed while moored at the Xiaopingdao Submarine Base.

Using an image of the Xia-class submarine -- taken in 2005 -- Kristensen was able to point out some of the differences between the Xia- and Jin-class submarines.  The Jin-class submarine is at least 35 feet longer than the Xia-class, mainly because of an "extended mid-section" responsible for housing missile launch tubes.  The images do not conclusively determine whether the Jin-class mid-section has 12 or 16 tubes.

China expects to build as many as five Jin-class submarines in the next few years.  China currently relies on land-based nuclear missile technology, but the new submarines add an additional tool to the military's arsenal.

Images and technical information about the submarine can be found on Kristensen's Strategic Security Blog.

This may cause the Chinese military to become the latest organization to show concerns over what Google Earth can reveal to users.  The U.S. government and Indian military are both worried about the high-level quality of satellite imagery which is available to users.  A spy chief also predicted curbs on satellite photos may be needed for programs like Google Earth.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Well... they were asking for it to happen
By HaZaRd2K6 on 7/10/2007 9:44:48 AM , Rating: 5
I'm sorry, but if you leave a 250-foot boat lying around next to a dock in the middle of the day, not camouflaged at all, then somebody's going to notice it. What difference does it really make if it's a Quickbird commercial satellite, a government spy satellite or just some guy on a boat? (Not to mention that, as far as I know, spy satellites have much higher resolution than commercial satellites do.) I suspect there will be government satellites pointed right at the sub very soon (if not already), trying to figure out what it's capabilities are.

We live on the planet, too, we should have a right to know what's in/on it. Props to Google for not backing down from any fight though, 'cause you know one's coming with this picture.




RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By masher2 (blog) on 7/10/2007 9:57:49 AM , Rating: 6
> "I'm sorry, but if you leave a 250-foot boat lying around ..."

Rather more like 400+ foot. Ballistic missile subs are huge.

> "We live on the planet, too, we should have a right to know what's in/on it."

Just curious, but how would you respond to spysat pics of you sunbathing nude in your backyard, even though you were shielded by a high fence around your property?


By thejez on 7/10/2007 10:06:14 AM , Rating: 5
i think the better question there is how we would respond to nude pictures of him sunbathing... ewwww point taken spysats are evil...


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Adonlude on 7/10/2007 1:08:57 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Just curious, but how would you respond to spysat pics of you sunbathing nude in your backyard, even though you were shielded by a high fence around your property?


I would respond by continuing to sunbathe nude in my backyard and hope that society would slowly change from one that welcomes gross depictions of gore but cringes at the sight of a bare breast. If I truly couldn't stand to be seen then I would look into designing some sort of canope that would let the suns rays through but would not allow a clear picture of me to be taken from a camera in space. There are probably many easy solutions to this sunbathing problem that do not involve the destruction of a developing technology.

Innovation and advancements in technology are often feared by those who stand to loose money and power from it and feeble attempts to stifle such advancement are usually employed. Other examples include the US government attempting to control powerful software encryption and the music industry attempting to destroy file sharing programs.

If we put up with practices such as this then one day we might invent a source of free unlimited energy and never know about it becuase the energy industry will have stamped it out. Hell, we could invent a teleporter and the automotive and air travel industrys will have covered it up.

Dont stifle advancement... unless of course it's a better way to kill people, but thats a whole different argument.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By dever on 7/10/2007 3:30:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
we might invent a source of free unlimited energy
Are you a Steorn employee?


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Adonlude on 7/10/2007 3:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, but that does look facinating. I wonder how it works.


By Jellodyne on 7/10/2007 5:57:46 PM , Rating: 3
> I wonder how it works.

With regards to making unlimited free energy? It doesn't. Anyone with a basic understanding of the laws of thermodynamics can tell you that. Although if the function of the device is to attract attention, maybe suck in some gullable investor money and fail to generate free energy in any public venue where it happens to be exhibited, it appears to work as designed.


By PrinceGaz on 7/11/2007 10:51:48 AM , Rating: 2
Well, you get yourself and a few mates together in an Irish pub over a few pints of Guinness, and you come up with the idea of getting gullible people to invest large amounts of money in a company whose product is nothing more than a clever con-trick. That's how it works.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By feraltoad on 7/11/2007 4:34:09 AM , Rating: 3
Well said. I personally keep a sock on my dong when I sunbathe nude, perhaps the Chinese should adopt a similar policy.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By RjBass on 7/12/2007 12:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
I do the same thing, but only to keep my dong from getting burned.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By BiuTech on 7/13/2007 2:12:44 PM , Rating: 2
China needs a pretty big sock to cover that large sea submerged dong.


By MADAOO7 on 7/18/2007 1:11:32 PM , Rating: 2
Do you think they are perhaps trying to make up for something? It may be just like the saying goes.....


By christojojo on 7/13/2007 1:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
continuing to sunbathe nude in my backyard and hope that society would slowly change from one that welcomes gross depictions of gore but cringes at the sight of a bare breast.


Are you basically saying, "Nude to all tyrants?"

Side note: Isn't it funny that in a profession/ hobby known for the pail white "office tan" that sunbathing is even brought up. We all know Hollywood would be agast at being caught, then using it for another career launch.


By Sungpooz on 7/15/2007 5:34:19 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, make love, not war.

More love (media), not war (media).


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By gradoman on 7/10/2007 1:35:52 PM , Rating: 3
Really now..

I find that to just be such a silly argument. Is being snapped nude such a bad thing? I see people sunbathing nude/semi-nude quite often on beaches.

I guess it's all how each individual sees it, but I personally wouldn't really care. I find this discussion to be similar to that of CCTV cameras around cities, supposedly "spying" on folks. What are you so worried about the govt/police seeing you do?


By dever on 7/10/2007 3:34:22 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, I do see a difference between a company posting pictures and governments using my own tax-dollars to spy on me. At least in this particular case, the information is open to me and I'm not forced to pay for it directly.


By JustKidding on 7/10/2007 9:29:57 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Just curious, but how would you respond to spysat pics of you sunbathing nude in your backyard, even though you were shielded by a high fence around your property?


I suppose that would depend upon whether I had launched a rocket or not.


By theapparition on 7/11/2007 7:55:29 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Just curious, but how would you respond to spysat pics of you sunbathing nude in your backyard, even though you were shielded by a high fence around your property?

Nice try, but most states have ruled that if your under the open sky, you are not entitled to any privacy rites. That also includes backyards. The litimus test for most cases I've seen has been whether you are in an enclosed area. For instance, having sex in the outdoors in NYC, gets you arrested, in your car in NYC with "sufficient privacy" is perfectly legal. Many of the bathrooms (myself included) in modern homes have skylights, do we start worrying about them?
I refuse to believe in the "government is watching you" argument. Give me a break, they can't even find a few guys hiding in desolate mountains, and we are to be worried about getting caught in our birthday suits?
Despite movies like "Enemy of the State" showing the ability of satellites to track everyone down to the lint they throw off when walking, no one has anything even remotely that sinister. And even if they did, they're not pointed at the middle of Georgia, so feel free to nude sunbathe, if your into that sort of thing.... :P


By HaZaRd2K6 on 8/5/2007 8:43:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just curious, but how would you respond to spysat pics of you sunbathing nude in your backyard, even though you were shielded by a high fence around your property?


Well first off, said pictures would not exist as I don't sunbathe. Let alone sunbathe nude. And I know some people point to the "I don't have anything to hide" argument, but if I really wanted something to be kept secret, I'd put a roof over it and a fence around it. A 400+ foot boat sitting at a dock is bound to be spotted. If not by a spysat, then by someone/something else.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 10:00:34 AM , Rating: 5
Why do you assume that China wants to keep their military capabilities secret? A big part of the value of having these kinds of capabilities is the deterrent effect they can have - and that effect is maximized when you have these types of "open secrets."


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Amiga500 on 7/10/2007 11:19:41 AM , Rating: 2
We have a winner folks...

You can only have a nuclear deterrent if the other guy knows you have it.

As for the thought rest of the world (US, Russia, major NATO countries etc) - laughable, at best. They aren't wondering whether it has 12, 14 or 16 missiles I can assure you.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By FITCamaro on 7/10/2007 11:23:15 AM , Rating: 5
You think the US or any other major military power doesn't already have far more than just an overhead shot of this thing?


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Amiga500 on 7/10/2007 11:57:10 AM , Rating: 2
Uhh, no.

Ahh, reading over it, I missed a bit - sorry.

I meant to say, as for the thought they (US/OTAN/Russia) didn't know about this - laughable.

They have as much info on it already as they are ever likely to need.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By fic2 on 7/10/2007 1:19:41 PM , Rating: 5
I would hope that the U.S. knows it capabilities. Most of the tech is probably stolen from the U.S. (or almost given by companies too lameass to actually do security). Same as with their missles.

from http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/17...
quote:
Hughes, Loral, and Lockheed all later paid massive fines for illegal exports of advanced missile technology to China. Hughes paid the largest fine after being charged with 123 counts of national security violations. Loral eventually had to declare bankruptcy in part due to the China-gate scandal.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By bernardl on 7/10/2007 6:55:54 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Most of the tech is probably stolen from the U.S. (or almost given by companies too lameass to actually do security). Same as with their missles.


Not sure why they'd have to do this when:

1. They have been doing subs for years, mostly thanks to Russian help (and who was copying who by then...),
2. They have thousands of very highly educated PhDs who have been doing a lot of the work that enabled many high tech US and European companies to be successful.

Using these guys to compensate for the lack of educated engineers in the West (mostly the result of our protected education systems that only enables the rich to study), and then complaining about possible technological leaks is way too double standard for me...

Cheers,
Bernard


By ziggo on 7/10/2007 10:29:06 PM , Rating: 2
Even a passing glance at Chinese missiles, particularly of the air launched variety will reveal a complete rip-off of others technologies, not even just US ones.

And we know for a fact they stole nuclear reactor designs, if they got that, do you think they didn't get information about the things those reactors are in?

And btw, I was by no means rich and managed to graduate with a BS degree that allowed me into the field. The problem isn't the cost; its the work ethic of this generation. Instant gratification mentality doesn't pair well with studying hard in school so you can actually be worth something.


By thatguy39 on 7/14/2007 1:01:34 AM , Rating: 2
sorry but you're wrong, check your history, the Chinese are by far the largest thieves of US technology, everyone knows this by now...

I could give examples but if you're so silly to speak without the slightest knowledge you're not worth anymore of my time.

pwnd.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By emboss on 7/10/2007 1:19:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can only have a nuclear deterrent if the other guy knows you have it.


It's probably just a plyboard and duct tape mockup :)


By Sulphademus on 7/13/2007 4:15:44 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By rackley on 7/10/2007 12:51:53 PM , Rating: 2
I guarantee you this was not an accident, it was a planned exposure by high-ranking military and/or intelligence officers in the Chinese government. Being in the military myself, I can tell you that everything is done with aerial/satellite imagery in mind, ESPECIALLY for something as sensitive/important as a submarine. If they didn't want to advertise it, they would have parked it in a covered docking area, it's that simple. As for satellite imagery being evil? Puhleese. If knowledge and information is evil, then yes, I suppose it is.


By TomZ on 7/10/2007 1:33:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As for satellite imagery being evil? Puhleese. If knowledge and information is evil, then yes, I suppose it is.

I think the point is to have the information advantage over your enemy, right?


By Nightskyre on 7/10/2007 10:26:46 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
props to Google for not backing down from any fight though,


'scuse me? Have you read anything about Google's censoring fight with China?

They certainly backed down in that one.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By ksherman on 7/10/2007 10:47:05 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I suspect there will be government satellites pointed right at the sub very soon (if not already), trying to figure out what it's capabilities are.


haha, if this picture is already a year or so old, I expect that the government has been looking at this ship for quite some time.


By noxipoo on 7/10/2007 12:43:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Type 094 is the second-generation Chinese nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). The first-of-class has reportedly been under construction at Huludao Shipyard since 1999 and was launched in July 2004. The submarine is armed with 16 JL-2 submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) with a maximum range of 8,000km.


from sinodefence


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Acid Rain on 7/10/2007 11:04:10 AM , Rating: 2
"(Not to mention that, as far as I know, spy satellites have much higher resolution than commercial satellites do.) I suspect there will be government satellites pointed right at the sub very soon (if not already), trying to figure out what it's capabilities are."

Well spy satellites shouldn't have much better resolution (it should be somewhat better, yes). The biggest problem for improving spy satellites is the optical array weight and size. and commercially available missiles are probably not far behind military/government ones.

it's probable they already the knew the subs location - the thing about intelligence gathering is the gathering part - china's military facilitates are probably mapped out for years now. so it's a one-off shot this photo gives any new info.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By Hakuryu on 7/10/2007 1:39:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well spy satellites shouldn't have much better resolution (it should be somewhat better, yes). The biggest problem for improving spy satellites is the optical array weight and size. and commercially available missiles are probably not far behind military/government ones.


My best friend was with military intelligence in Korea when I was stationed there in 1991. Part of his job was to pick out and highlight differences in satellite photo's over time, like moving of artillery and troop movements.

I've seen some of those images, and they were better resolution and much clearer than Google Earth is today, and that was 16 years ago.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 7/10/2007 8:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
Some of the people involved with DailyTech used to work with satellite imagery for the government several decades ago.

The joke goes -- in 1985 the NSA needed to cut back on expenses, so they're removed all the clocks from their satellites. Whenever someone needed to tell time, they just read it off Gorbachev's watch.

Some of the stories I've heard about optical spy satellites just blows my mind. There's no question about it, we had adaptive mirrors up in those satellites decades before they were ever used on the ground.

Oh and never mind the new $25 billion system that's just coming online now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Imagery_Archit...


By Acid Rain on 7/11/2007 3:24:50 AM , Rating: 1
The jokes and stories have always been highly exeagurated. ask your NSA buddy's.

even on the best class sattlite imagery theres no way you can read a hand watch - at best you MIGHT be able to read the time on the big-ben.

simply put it best in class imagery is said to be around 10cm/pixel resolution (link below) - even IF it's half of that - you'd still need pretty huge digits so they'll be defined as a few pixels to be able to recognize them.

and I'm not talking out of my ass FWIW.

http://www.space.com/news/gov_imagery_990921.html


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By FITCamaro on 7/10/2007 11:19:59 AM , Rating: 2
The difference with a spy satellite is that you and me can't look at the images taken by it. And a guy in a boat isn't going to get a picture of that kind of thing. You think any military in the world just allows boats to sail around highly classified ballistic missile subs?

Personally I really hope curbs are put on Google to start restricting whats in images on Google Earth. Spy satellites already see whats going on everywhere. You and me don't need to do the same, nor should we be able to. I'd rather pictures of our nations naval and air power not be accessible on a desktop or laptop computer. Kinda makes mobilizing for military operations that are supposed to be a secret kind of hard. And don't say "Well you shouldn't be mobilizing in secret anyway." Certain things need to go down without the enemy realizing it before the bullet is in their brain.

I realize most satellite imagery is a few years old at best. But its only a matter of time before its updated on a nearly daily basis. When that happens, I think any photograph showing military bases or other highly sensitive areas should be blacked out or blurred at least.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By lynxss on 7/10/2007 12:04:52 PM , Rating: 2
Google earth already blocks images of US military sites and the national labs. You can still get the pictures if you are zoomed out enough but not if you try to see any detail.

I've tried to see my house on google earth and all that shows up is a greyed out block that says We're Sorry We do not have satellite imagery for this resolution or something like that.

My house: accross the ridge from Los Alamos National Labs - blocked
My GFs house: next to Kirkland AFB - blocked
My college roomates house: close to White Sands Missile Range - blocked
My GFs parents house: next to Sandia National Labs - blocked

They certaintly have greyed out enough stuff arround here they might as well grey out the whole state while they are at it heh.


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By timmiser on 7/10/2007 7:21:24 PM , Rating: 5
Who do you work for???

Strategically placing your assets next to highly sensitive locations. Time to call the Men in Black!


RE: Well... they were asking for it to happen
By lynxss on 7/13/2007 7:34:07 PM , Rating: 2
Lol..

Well all the major population density centers arround here just happen to be located next to a sensitive military installation which employs most of its residents. So statistically its highly probable you'd also live a short distance from one living out here.


By timmiser on 7/16/2007 7:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
Of course Mr. Lynxss. Now just stare into my pen light for a second...you will not feel a thing.

:)


By Performance Fanboi on 7/10/2007 12:55:16 PM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure if they had the cash laying around to build this thing they could have found the cash to build a roof over the dock. It's hard to believe that they were very concerned about secrecy on this one since the mainstream media has somewhat detailed specs and production targets. A grainy/blurry photo isn't exactly cutting edge espionage.


By TimberJon on 7/13/2007 11:47:16 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, any time the CIA learns that metals are being shipped anywhere in another country, theyre already following up on where its getting shipped and rerouted, what kind of material it is, If theres something else being hidden within the stack of steel girders or ingot stacks, Etc.. etc..

Im sure they not only knew it was being built, but WHERE.
They wont obviously WATCH the site, but program whatever sat has the closest passover, to take a snap every once in a while, discreetly.

As for the res, I bet they could count the rivets on the hatch.


What does a land power...
By jskirwin on 7/10/07, Rating: 0
RE: What does a land power...
By glenn8 on 7/10/2007 11:09:30 AM , Rating: 4
Perhaps because of the humongous body of water to the east of China? Subs are not just for offensive reasons. They are also used to protect their borders.


RE: What does a land power...
By bohhad on 7/10/2007 11:16:24 AM , Rating: 2
a sub capable of launching 12 or 16 ICBMs is for border defense? i would say its more for deterrance (i think i mangled the spelling there)


RE: What does a land power...
By glenn8 on 7/10/2007 11:20:59 AM , Rating: 2
A deterrent is still defense. It screams "Don't come near me!".


RE: What does a land power...
By Ringold on 7/10/2007 6:20:11 PM , Rating: 5
Considering that almost every major conflict conceivable involves in one way or another <China or China Proxy> vs <Random American Ally>, and our primary way to project power globally is through our aircraft carrier battlegroups, anything that says to the world "You may say we have no blue-water navy, but we beg to differ" is powerful. Consider also their stunt last year of reportedly surfacing a submarine within range of the USS Kitty Hawk -- and the fleet didn't know it was there until it'd surfaced. That time it was publicity, but the message is clear; in the future, it may not be. This satellite photo also goes along with the fact that they apparently are building submarines at twice the rate we are; we can just barely keep our few remaining shipyards open.

All of which is meant to come to mind in any future situation where we find ourselves pondering "Should we come to the aid of Taiwan?" or "Should we save Korea -- again?" The cost of doing so could be an aircraft carrier -- or three.

Like I said, it might be a missile sub, but it's all part of their plan.


RE: What does a land power...
By chusteczka on 7/12/2007 8:11:37 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
What does a land power... Need with a sub?


This wikipedia article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Thayer_Mahan, describes how Rear Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan taught in his book, The Influence of Seapower Upon History ,1660-1783, that ...
quote:
in the contests between France and England in the 18th century, domination of the sea via naval power was the deciding factor in the outcome, and therefore, that control of seaborne commerce was critical to domination in war. To a modern reader this may seem obvious and repeatedly demonstrated, ...


Therefore, any land power requires the ability to protect its interests at sea by dominating the sea lanes to continue the shipment of supplies, treasures, and trade goods.


Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By Butterbean on 7/10/2007 10:25:25 AM , Rating: 2
Campaign contributions to Clinton/Gore helped make that sub!




RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By lumbergeek on 7/10/2007 10:31:08 AM , Rating: 2
While you're at it, stop shopping at Wal-Mart too.


RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By imaheadcase on 7/10/2007 10:49:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
While you're at it, stop shopping at Wal-Mart too.


While you're at it, stop stereotyping people.


RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By glenn8 on 7/10/2007 11:11:59 AM , Rating: 2
How is it stereotyping? Even if the OP doesn't shop at Wal-mart, I can almost guarantee he/she bought something that either directly or indirectly gives money to China.


RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By FITCamaro on 7/10/2007 11:25:53 AM , Rating: 2
We all do whether we like it or not. I don't shop at Walmart and never will. But I'm not naive enough to think that some of my money doesn't end back up in China some way or another.


RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By vxmqzz on 7/10/2007 12:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
i believe the companies like walmart earn the big portion while china get 5% to 10% of the profit.


RE: Don't Buy Lenovo Products
By Ringold on 7/10/2007 6:22:48 PM , Rating: 2
I don't care much for the general class of people that shop at my local WalMarts.. but I do like the lower prices. I wouldn't be a very good proponent of capitalism if I was picky about WalMart, now would I? :)


...
By Verran on 7/10/2007 11:11:11 AM , Rating: 3
To put a spin on Lewis Black's bit on satellite proof of WMDs:

Wow, satellite pictures of a sub that contains long-range ballistic missiles... or... ice cream.

If we can identify this craft's capabilities simply through this crappy picture, then we already know infinitely more than this picture could ever tell us.

Now if this pic was of an Overlord Tank, that'd be an entirely different story!




RE: ...
By TedStriker on 7/10/2007 11:39:02 AM , Rating: 2
Only if it had the gattling gun upgrade...


RE: ...
By Verran on 7/10/2007 12:05:06 PM , Rating: 2
Propaganda tower FTW! :P


Is this really a big deal?
By Homerboy on 7/10/2007 10:59:35 AM , Rating: 3
If google earth has captured that grainy, crappy picture, I'd venture to guess that those that need to know (ie: the US and other foreign governments) about a Chinese nuclear sub, DO know about it and in much much MUCH better detail.

While and interesting "capture" of google earth, its not that amazing on any level.




RE: Is this really a big deal?
By Faust0 on 7/10/2007 1:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
it's more likely that's an altered[reduced quality] release sample.


I call intientional on this....
By SiliconAddict on 7/10/2007 2:13:43 PM , Rating: 2
China is known for sword rattling. And they aren't stupid. They KNOW where these satellites are in the sky and sure as HELL knows where commercial sats are.
While it is quite possible that this is nothing more then a slip up; China has enough hidden naval yards that are underground that would be used instead. I think this is nothing more then a statement that: "hey guys. Look at our news toys. Please keep that in mind when you deal with us."




By Jerricho24 on 7/13/2007 10:03:39 AM , Rating: 2
not only do they know, when, where and what type of satalite is over head they can shoot it down with ease.
I would think that this is a third tier Sub. There top of the line sub is probably in test tryels as we speak, while there second tier subs sit of the coast of koria in silant mode. I wouldn't be surprised if it had anti missile and anti torpedo laser deffence with all the bells and whistles.


Can't see much underwater
By SirRoger on 7/10/2007 3:58:12 PM , Rating: 2
Who cares too much about what the thing looks like.

You need the photo to tell when the thing is putting to sea so a Los Angeles can be waiting off the coast to listen to the new boat.




RE: Can't see much underwater
By 0uterlimitz on 7/10/2007 8:28:36 PM , Rating: 2
China probably wants this attention and exposure otherwise this new vessel would be hidden, as it's most likely been for quite some time. what great PR they now have when a state of the art Nuclear Sub is photographed in clear view. It's more like "look at me"...or whose d*** is bigger.

Now they can also flip out and stir up the pot...referencing to this apparent gross misconduct of a "commercial" spysat.

On the lighter side of things....does a Chinese Seaman say "I I" captain?

exactly.


Is it just me
By ali 09 on 7/10/2007 10:58:33 PM , Rating: 2
Is it just me, or has no-one asked where it actually is? I sure as hell would like to know.




RE: Is it just me
By TxJeepers on 7/13/2007 9:45:33 PM , Rating: 2
no worries mate, we've got a seawolf class or maybe a virginia class on it. just like it would be foolish to think we do not have some pretty high tech air related tech up our sleeves, we most likely do in the water as well. being one of the few countries in the world that has the abilitiy, if desired to close any port in the world with its subs is kind of nice. i can only imagine the thrill of the chase, the cat and mouse our subs play with subs like this one from China.


"Made in China"
By oTAL on 7/11/2007 2:12:30 PM , Rating: 2
This is no big deal.. just a publicity stunt by the chinese government.
If a commercial satellite can get this picture, then I'm sure there are photos from military sats and spy planes where you can see the license plate and the "Made in China" engraving.




RE: "Made in China"
By pentiumobile on 7/11/2007 9:27:12 PM , Rating: 2
It is viable to communicate with a man 1000 feet away from you...but talking to a man 10 feet away, but INSIDE the water; its almost impossible.


Just what the world needs...
By Jellodyne on 7/10/2007 6:01:39 PM , Rating: 3
A tactical nuclear missile submarine with a one star crash rating.




I wonder
By fliguy84 on 7/11/2007 1:48:48 AM , Rating: 3
I wonder how will Subway and Quiznoss respond to this new 'sub' :D




Give me a ping, Vasily
By MonkeyPaw on 7/10/2007 11:18:34 AM , Rating: 2
I'm surprised that DT didn't use a Captain Ramius picture for this article.




does google own satellites?
By Gul Westfale on 7/10/2007 12:17:25 PM , Rating: 2
my understanding is that google buys satellite images from a number of different suppliers, who actually own and/or have access to the satellites, whereas google does not. google simply provides end users with a program/service that stitches together all the images and lets them see the images.

google is also not the only company that does this, microsoft's service also purchases images from various sources, including some of the same as google.

so isn't it really the providers of satellite imagery here who are to "blame", and not google? also, i thought the chinese were smart enough to use hidden docks... but i guess not.




By spillai on 7/13/2007 2:34:59 AM , Rating: 2
If the Chinsese can make such a huge Sub in Secret,they know how to hide it.This could be
a Startegic Leakout of Phototo study the Reactions fo the public and Governments.
Satheesh
www.knowledgevibes.com




So now Google owns submarines
By alexleonard on 7/10/2007 11:33:09 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The Google Earth Jin-class submarine was photographed while moored at the Xiaopingdao Submarine Base.


Is it just me or does this read that Google Earth own a Jin-class submarine?

Good to see writing standards are being maintained.




First again!
By MobileZone on 7/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: First again!
By Spivonious on 7/10/2007 9:54:47 AM , Rating: 3
Grow up!


"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki