Arguably, the space-based imaging was the one part that actually worked more or less as designed. Washington was a bit cagey about the details; because the DSP and SBIRS are still in the ‘cool toys we don’t like to talk too much about’ pile; but reportedly the systems picked up the missile launch, IDed the probable missile type and nailed down the location of the launch and the impact as they happened.
The utility of the satellite data was limited, it didn’t tell us who pressed the button or who told them to do it; and was of no use whatsoever in securing the crash site in a timely manner; but it’s hard to imagine how any pictures could have done that.
Probably doesn’t have that much of a resolution. But missile launches, at least the larger ones, release a LOT of energy in the mid-to-far infrared, from the plume. (You also get some UV from the bow shock once the thing gets fast enough but that’s of limited use for long-distance imaging.) The time profile of the signal is also specific, so it can be possibly fished even from a single-pixel signal. So a pixel or a small area brightening and dimming in a certain way is an indicator of something-suspicious-happening-at-that-place.
I wonder how much resources would it take to simulate that signature with a ground-based burn…
Unless the IR monitoring satellites have enough resolution, or views of the same area from different angles, to allow for decent height estimates, I’d imagine that the resources needed to provide a fairly plausible freak-out would be relatively modest. The missile that triggered this particular alert was under 1,000kg(I’m not sure which model it was; but all of them weigh less than this) so you’d need a substantial but not heroic supply of fuel; and since your ‘engine’ wouldn’t actually need to fly, you could skip all the really annoying design steps and use lazy shortcuts like ‘overengineering’ and reinforced concrete.
Getting the exact time/brightness signature of a specific real missile would probably get fiddly; but getting close enough to wring some cold sweat out of the analysts would likely be doable. You’d probably want to choose a site reasonably far away from radar installations, though, since hiding the fact that no actual missile is involved would get much harder if radar coverage is good enough that the ‘missile’ you are faking in IR should show up on radar.
I will throw in because this is my field. The piracy issues I deal with concern large American and European ships, and we are pretty much all about following the law. The particular ships I work with are armed with rifles, pistols, and shotguns. I train a six person group of the crew to be a reaction team, and we do lots of exercises and drills, and firearms training. By the time we get to the dangerous area, we are reasonably prepared to deal with a threat of piracy or terrorism.
The goal is to not let those guys board the ship. They have to show clear intent of violence, by making a threat or pointing or shooting a weapon at us. If some had to be rescued, we would call the company, and they would likely send us to a port to turn over the prisoner and talk to investigators. Our company lawyers would be there to make sure that the local law enforcement did not attempt to try is for attacking “innocent fishermen”.
Now it is different for a Taiwanese fishing boat. They might have guns, but they probably are not supposed to. They might also be fishing in a place that they should not be. Pirates attack, something that happens regularly. This time the fishermen manage to ram the pirate boat. They do not want to take them onboard, because of the legal nightmare that they would face if they brought the survivors ashore. “why did you ram those innocent fishermen?” “why were you in those waters” " lets examine your catch". “One of the “fishermen” said he saw a gun”. Perhaps you should all stay in this Indonesian jail for a few years while we sort this out.
I don’t know that this is what happened. But it is a likely possibility.
So zipties aren’t forbidden things that could choke fish if they got loose, so much; but then again FOA lawyer booking in the diaspora isn’t killing it if only I’d look further in Know Startup?
I know, but the unironic reference to Taiwanese embassies was too good to miss. Moreover, dodgy Taiwanese fishing outfits no doubt have ways to turn the island’s ambiguous status to their advantage.
Only to a degree. Law is not something holy to bow to and worship at any cost. When it is survival and the ability to self-defense vs being obedient to law, I choose the first and don’t even feel bad about it.
Do we KNOW they did NOT shoot (or attempt to forcibly board the ship) first?
You are giving the benefit of the doubt to the guys with guns who were high-fiving and laughing as their victims slipped under the waves. I’m not really comfortable giving the benefit of the doubt to the culprits rather than the victims. Practically every time we do that, it goes horribly wrong.
Let’s be clear, based on my limited reading of a few books (and some long essays) about the state of law on the high seas in the current era, how ships are owned by shell corporations owned by other shell corporations with a staff of hired contract sailors, and general lack of fucks to give by governments, no one is going to do shit.
