Talk:Enhanced Imaging System

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:KH-13)
Jump to: navigation, search

Article[edit]

Maybe some things people shouldnt know about. I find theres quite abit of information that is "need to know". Maybe some revisions on certain articles need to be placed.

I don't quite understand that. If it's known to reliable sources, there's nothing new about describing them here... 68.39.174.238 17:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC) (BTW, sign your talk page comments)

However, this article seems to be particularly poorly sourced and light on information. I don't need a page to tell me a bunch of stuff that science fiction writers have said about a satellite (which may not even exist). Personally, I'd vote for deletion, or at least sticking a warning at the top of the page. (I've since done this) 88.96.214.6 13:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

conflict with KH-12 page[edit]

This page contradicts the KH-12 page. Were USA-161 and USA-182 KH-12s or KH-13s? Also, I find it odd that neither page even contains the word "Keyhole" ... I mean, that's what everybody knows the satellites as, and that's what KH stands for after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brettland (talkcontribs) 08:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Shuttle Atlantis STS-38: DOD Classifed Launch[edit]

Prime time network news reported satellite as being KH-13 Key Hole. Noted in personal log. LanceBarber 05:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

PROPOSED DELETION[edit]

Notability is certainly disputable. Some cited references contain unverifiable claims, original research, references to works of fiction etc. But notability is the main issue here. This article seems to have been of interest to a certain user with particular interest in so-called 'black projects'. No real notability, no verifiable sources. Proposed deletion. --Javit 00:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

No, Notability isnt disputable. THe KH-series of satellites is famous and has been around for years. I will take down the PROD immediately. Squidfryerchef 15:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Why is Lacrosse 5 mentioned?[edit]

I am very surprised to see Lacrosse 5 listed here as a suggested KH-family IMINT. All analysist I know rather feel it is a SAR. In terms of orbit inclination (57 degrees) and orbit eccentricity (0.0008) it is similar to other Lacrosse SAR's like Lacrosse 3 and very unlike the accepted Keyholes (97 degrees and 0.05)). It's brightness is also unlike the accepted Keyholes (it's much brighter)[1].LaMa (talk) 22:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Re-PROPOSE DELETION?[edit]

Franky, I feel this page should go. It is highly ambiguous, with questionable data (see above). There already are pages on the KH-11 and KH-12 KeyHoles that are much better in quality. Real existence of the "KH-13" isn't clear at all! LaMa (talk) 10:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Agreed. I think the easiest way to deal with this is to remove everything that is not related to EIS and move the article. Should be uncontroversial since I suggested it as an alternative in the AfD, so I'll do that. --GW 19:02, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

August 2013 leaks[edit]

NRO budget information leaked in August 2013 suggested that EIS was still fully-funded, implying that it had become part of the KH-11 series. What would be the best way to incorporate this into the article? --W. D. Graham 12:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ Amateur determined orbits at http://www.io.com/~mmccants/tles/classfd.zip