The effort and commitment to truth are greatly appreciated and commended. Good job man.
I'm far from being knowledgeble but one other avenue for coverup would be Airbus being given the necessary images for the switch by a state actor. There are only so many satalite image providers and I'm 100% positive that they willingly cooperate with western intelligence (plus any company that reaches a large enough size is forced to cooperate with the IC eventually). I think it's very possible they are told which patch they are allowed to show which date of and then given images to replace them with. The NRO alone probably has a dozen sats scanning important patches of Ukraine daily at multiple angles so they have the necessary material for a switch. Commercial providers might even get a daily briefing on which patch to update and which not. Since the factory was already hit maybe they were even told to block any new damage from Oktober on.
I wouldn't even be surprised if all non-Western providers cooperate.
Why risk a headache and loss in profits for something that doesn't really affect business? Like the Americans can make life difficult for any company. What parts of a country at war are damaged and to what extent isn't the core product of the satalite image providers I imagine. That's what intelligence agencies are for.
If I were willing to get much more speculative (I'm done speculating on this issue in these articles because of being so wrong in the last one), this is the exact explanation that I would favor. The problem is that it would be very hard to prove without somehow doing an in-depth comparison of the two images to look for a clear difference which can't be explained by a variation in angle and time of day. The two passes (October and November) do look *very* different, but the difference in angle and time of day potentially explains this. I have metadata files from each but couldn't find anything to indicate that the November pass may have come from a different satellite. Of course, it's trivially easy to modify a file like this, anyone can do it in a text editor.
I do think that a subject matter expert in satellite imagery could do an analysis based on the image files alone. If such an expert happens to be reading this, I'll be happy to send you the original GeoTIFF and metadata files for both passes.
Our humanity, shares, humility. Or some of humanity does, perhaps. The level of expertise required is so extreme… life happens. I sincerely respect your work, and, your humility. The Spiritual Revolution continues, God will guide. May comfort be found in knowing your work is fostering a greater awareness of the dual forces at play, here, now. Your gifts are many, carry on my pal. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛💙🇷🇺❤️
Amerikanets, I have found that Google Maps (images supplied by Maxar, copyright 2024) chooses not to show all kinds of war damage in Ukraine. For example, a school in Zmiivka, destroyed on the 13th of April 2023 (coordinates 46.866434, 33.579484), is shown on Google Maps as undamaged. So damage to civilian and military targets are both hidden. What is your comment?
It is enough to check satellite photos of Mariupol. Photos are over two years old, even if dates state it is 2024 imagery.
City, in the sat imagery, looks like fighting stopped yesterday. Even if we know that massive rebuilding is under way and there are hundreds of videos on YouTube that prove that.
You wrote: “It would be very hard to cover up the damage if 36 projectiles travelling at Mach 11 (according to Ukrainian sources!) slammed into random buildings in Dnipro.” But I have made a map showing two random buildings that were hit: https://www.lindelof.nu/karta-over-oresjniks-nedslagplatser-i-dnipro/ The southernmost of my three red dots is wrong; it is an old hit from 2022.
Good job and thank you for sharing the results! I would suggest to wait for news in various social media. It will appear, itțs just a question of time. The simple fact that the area is still sealed tell a story... They are still searching where Yuzmash is hiding after the hit :-)
Amerikanets, I made relevant comments, but you did not respond. 1) Google maps is indeed a patchwork of images from different years, and the patches are often “sloppy” and have funny shapes, sometimes they are narrow strips, but this happens in agricultural areas as well, where there are no important buildings. 2) This practice is obscuring some of the war damage in places that are militarily unimportant; Pivdenmash/Yuzhmash is shown as undamaged on Google maps, but this is also true of rural villages. 3) Using news reports one can geolocate Oreshnik hits to two places 400 metres and 1000 metres north of Pivdenmash/Yuzhmash; https://www.lindelof.nu/karta-over-oresjniks-nedslagplatser-i-dnipro/ (one of the three red dots is wrong because that crater is from 2022).
Not sure for others, but I would totally be willing to support buying imagery via buymeacoffe or others services like that, if at any point in time you are willing to spend your time on analyzing it. As a scientist, I truly appreciate the two posts, it shows a tremendous degree of willingness to research and scientific integrity. Especially the last post - there is not enough of that in the world, people just become silent, covering things up, when they realize they drew wrong conclusions for whatever reasons, good or bad. Так держать!
There is another explanation for the lack of visible evidence of this strike. We know that submunitions are small, heavy, fast and hot. Also, they don't explode on contact. If they were made of something like tungsten and weighed 100 kg, they would have a volume of 5 lt. Assuming they are stretched out and pointed, their diameter would be much less than that of other missiles, as little as 20-50cm. Given the speed and momentum of these submunitions, they are likely to punch through the relatively thin industrial roofing, leaving a small, neat hole, which could be all but invisible to satellite photography.
In the video, each specific submunition leaves a distinct (albeit small) afterglow which lasts for ~1-2 sec. Ejecta of sorts? I am not an expert of course, but it is hard for me to imagine how that afterglow can result from a neat ~20-50 cm hole in the roofing that is not seen on the imagery.
Thank you for the update, and for courageously and virtuously owning up to mistakes made (due to enemy action).
As I noted with Postol's evidence - there are many inconsistencies and outright falsities in the OSINT BDA information that is available.
The evidence you have provided concerning outright falsehood - the editing of satellite images - reinforces my already existing view that a full agitprop campaign in the West is in progress concerning Oreshnik capabilities - and so any attempts to objectively analyze Oreshnik based on OSINT material is going to be suspect beyond the normal highly speculative nature of OSINT.
I also reiterate that a core assumption of Postol's - that an inert warhead even of solid tungsten - cannot possibly penetrate the ground if it strikes at more than Mach 4 - is highly suspect given that Russian hypersonic missiles are not optimally aerodynamic to start with, and therefore it seems certain that there are material and/or other types of breakthroughs associated with hypersonic missile operation that are presently unknown to the West. At a minimum, the types of wear that any form of control surface would experience - and it is 100% clear that Russian hypersonic missiles do use such control surfaces - would certainly induce high uncertainty and irregularity into operations unless some way existed to ensure said control surfaces are not significantly altered by prolonged exposure to 4000C plasma.
The effort and commitment to truth are greatly appreciated and commended. Good job man.
I'm far from being knowledgeble but one other avenue for coverup would be Airbus being given the necessary images for the switch by a state actor. There are only so many satalite image providers and I'm 100% positive that they willingly cooperate with western intelligence (plus any company that reaches a large enough size is forced to cooperate with the IC eventually). I think it's very possible they are told which patch they are allowed to show which date of and then given images to replace them with. The NRO alone probably has a dozen sats scanning important patches of Ukraine daily at multiple angles so they have the necessary material for a switch. Commercial providers might even get a daily briefing on which patch to update and which not. Since the factory was already hit maybe they were even told to block any new damage from Oktober on.
I wouldn't even be surprised if all non-Western providers cooperate.
Why risk a headache and loss in profits for something that doesn't really affect business? Like the Americans can make life difficult for any company. What parts of a country at war are damaged and to what extent isn't the core product of the satalite image providers I imagine. That's what intelligence agencies are for.
If I were willing to get much more speculative (I'm done speculating on this issue in these articles because of being so wrong in the last one), this is the exact explanation that I would favor. The problem is that it would be very hard to prove without somehow doing an in-depth comparison of the two images to look for a clear difference which can't be explained by a variation in angle and time of day. The two passes (October and November) do look *very* different, but the difference in angle and time of day potentially explains this. I have metadata files from each but couldn't find anything to indicate that the November pass may have come from a different satellite. Of course, it's trivially easy to modify a file like this, anyone can do it in a text editor.
I do think that a subject matter expert in satellite imagery could do an analysis based on the image files alone. If such an expert happens to be reading this, I'll be happy to send you the original GeoTIFF and metadata files for both passes.
Our humanity, shares, humility. Or some of humanity does, perhaps. The level of expertise required is so extreme… life happens. I sincerely respect your work, and, your humility. The Spiritual Revolution continues, God will guide. May comfort be found in knowing your work is fostering a greater awareness of the dual forces at play, here, now. Your gifts are many, carry on my pal. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛💙🇷🇺❤️
Отличная работа, ошибки бывают у всех. Ждём снимков из Китая
Amerikanets, I have found that Google Maps (images supplied by Maxar, copyright 2024) chooses not to show all kinds of war damage in Ukraine. For example, a school in Zmiivka, destroyed on the 13th of April 2023 (coordinates 46.866434, 33.579484), is shown on Google Maps as undamaged. So damage to civilian and military targets are both hidden. What is your comment?
It is enough to check satellite photos of Mariupol. Photos are over two years old, even if dates state it is 2024 imagery.
City, in the sat imagery, looks like fighting stopped yesterday. Even if we know that massive rebuilding is under way and there are hundreds of videos on YouTube that prove that.
You wrote: “It would be very hard to cover up the damage if 36 projectiles travelling at Mach 11 (according to Ukrainian sources!) slammed into random buildings in Dnipro.” But I have made a map showing two random buildings that were hit: https://www.lindelof.nu/karta-over-oresjniks-nedslagplatser-i-dnipro/ The southernmost of my three red dots is wrong; it is an old hit from 2022.
Yep. If someone can get the Chinese images that should settle it.
Good job and thank you for sharing the results! I would suggest to wait for news in various social media. It will appear, itțs just a question of time. The simple fact that the area is still sealed tell a story... They are still searching where Yuzmash is hiding after the hit :-)
Amerikanets, I made relevant comments, but you did not respond. 1) Google maps is indeed a patchwork of images from different years, and the patches are often “sloppy” and have funny shapes, sometimes they are narrow strips, but this happens in agricultural areas as well, where there are no important buildings. 2) This practice is obscuring some of the war damage in places that are militarily unimportant; Pivdenmash/Yuzhmash is shown as undamaged on Google maps, but this is also true of rural villages. 3) Using news reports one can geolocate Oreshnik hits to two places 400 metres and 1000 metres north of Pivdenmash/Yuzhmash; https://www.lindelof.nu/karta-over-oresjniks-nedslagplatser-i-dnipro/ (one of the three red dots is wrong because that crater is from 2022).
Unless and until Russia strikes NATO targets, Oreshnik andnits impact are irrelevant.
Nobody in, nobody in Brussels, nobody in Kiev cares what happens to Ukraine or Ukrainians.
Not sure for others, but I would totally be willing to support buying imagery via buymeacoffe or others services like that, if at any point in time you are willing to spend your time on analyzing it. As a scientist, I truly appreciate the two posts, it shows a tremendous degree of willingness to research and scientific integrity. Especially the last post - there is not enough of that in the world, people just become silent, covering things up, when they realize they drew wrong conclusions for whatever reasons, good or bad. Так держать!
There is another explanation for the lack of visible evidence of this strike. We know that submunitions are small, heavy, fast and hot. Also, they don't explode on contact. If they were made of something like tungsten and weighed 100 kg, they would have a volume of 5 lt. Assuming they are stretched out and pointed, their diameter would be much less than that of other missiles, as little as 20-50cm. Given the speed and momentum of these submunitions, they are likely to punch through the relatively thin industrial roofing, leaving a small, neat hole, which could be all but invisible to satellite photography.
In the video, each specific submunition leaves a distinct (albeit small) afterglow which lasts for ~1-2 sec. Ejecta of sorts? I am not an expert of course, but it is hard for me to imagine how that afterglow can result from a neat ~20-50 cm hole in the roofing that is not seen on the imagery.
Thank you for the update, and for courageously and virtuously owning up to mistakes made (due to enemy action).
As I noted with Postol's evidence - there are many inconsistencies and outright falsities in the OSINT BDA information that is available.
The evidence you have provided concerning outright falsehood - the editing of satellite images - reinforces my already existing view that a full agitprop campaign in the West is in progress concerning Oreshnik capabilities - and so any attempts to objectively analyze Oreshnik based on OSINT material is going to be suspect beyond the normal highly speculative nature of OSINT.
I also reiterate that a core assumption of Postol's - that an inert warhead even of solid tungsten - cannot possibly penetrate the ground if it strikes at more than Mach 4 - is highly suspect given that Russian hypersonic missiles are not optimally aerodynamic to start with, and therefore it seems certain that there are material and/or other types of breakthroughs associated with hypersonic missile operation that are presently unknown to the West. At a minimum, the types of wear that any form of control surface would experience - and it is 100% clear that Russian hypersonic missiles do use such control surfaces - would certainly induce high uncertainty and irregularity into operations unless some way existed to ensure said control surfaces are not significantly altered by prolonged exposure to 4000C plasma.