There does not seem to be anything "exclusive" about these images. They look like regular worldview 3 images that anybody can buy.
From TFA:
> The strange gap in imagery raises questions about who gets to access high-res satellite technology. And if the largest urban construction site on the planet doesn’t appear on Google Maps, what else can’t we see?
This is ridiculous. Commercial satellite images are sold everyday to thousands of buyers. You only need a credit card. Google maps is just not updated immediately with all these images that people buy.
I'm surprised at the low quality of these MIT "reporters".
Lately I see this dosconnect from "reality" (for lack of a better word, in your example how satelite images are bought and how Google maps works) and people writing about it without a clue or interest to actually investigate (using outdated Google maps data to formulate a conspiracy theory). And it is not just journalism, it is everywhere, I see it at work (between seasoned people and those fesh from university or those that drank too much founder kool aid), in politics, you name it. I find that tebdency rather troubeling.
I think it is also one of the reasons why a majority of people have no idea how the infrastucture of world works, from electricity over supply chains to the internet and basically everything in between.
Apple maps still show a construction site near where I live where there has been houses for several years. WhAt ARe thE CIA HiDIng in thIS SwEDIsh suBURb?!
So many of these articles, and none address the realities of Saudi/Gulf family power structures. For the king/MBS to remain in power they need to keep the powerful families on side. That means giving them money, enough money that they don't get too jealous of the king's money and decide they should be king. But handing them money without directing how they spend it will lead to ruin. They will set themselves up as new powers, to the point that they will one day be buying weapons and influence to overthrow you. You have to keep them busy doing other things than plotting your doom. You give them jobs. Rich Saudi families own and run the construction firms building these silly projects. The up-and-coming sons of these families are called "investors" and "developers" of mega projects. They go to nice schools and spend their working lives consulting with architects and engineers. They hire famous westerners (Beckham) to promote their pet projects (soccer/golf tournaments). That is way way better than them consulting with militants, extremists and mercenaries. It is better than them running around the world building their own power bases. Call these projects wasteful and inefficient all you want. They are doing exactly what they are designed to do: keep the king from being overthrown. They are the Saudi version of Louise XIV's Versailles.
The Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Sa'Ud. Robert Lacey - 1982
Also any and all European history dealing with Kings and royal houses. They are all basically the same: Property, religion, upstart sons and a king trying to stay king.
They dug a trench in the sand, which is not such a tall order given the consistency of sand.
It's also the reason why they can stick a straw in the sand and oil comes out.
The only big trademark Core infrastructure project made in Saudi up to now has been the Abraj-Al-Bait [0], spearheaded by the Bin Laden Group [1] (founded in 1931 by Osama Bin Laden's father) which is something comparable to the recent CityCenter Las Vegas Development.
And that trench is maybe 5-7 kilometers long (it's supposed to be 170).
I never doubted they'll build something, but until they reach that something the original presentation will get dumbed down a few times. It's still gonna be a long (but definitely not 170 kilometers) line with a metro and no cars, but that's about it.
To add to the possible justifications for this project, the YouTube channel Economics Explained made a nice video on how these insane megaprojects can make sense. Essentially, they are meant to be long and expensive just to attract enough foreign companies to establish permanent presence in the country. Once that happens, the idea is that they eventually start to contribute to the SA economy independently, helping them move on from oil only economy.
It makes sense if you consider that when you have oil, it will make your currency strong, so exporting goods is expensive and that makes developing other industry difficult. Also, investments, people and other resources in your country will be all mainly directed towards oil, since that's where the profits are largest. So to escape this trap, you have to basically do something rather crazy.
I'm well aware of the explanations that this project is infeasible and not based on logic. But it still seems to me that digging foundations across the entire footprint is spreading development resources more thinly than a standard development would?
Can someone better-versed in the economics of large development projects explain to me why this isn't being pursued in a more risk-reducing fashion, with a smaller section being built top-to-bottom to demonstrate its viability?
I have no idea on what the project details are, but - generally speaking and if possible - building an open-cut tunnel (as opposed to bored) is much cheaper (like 1/3 of the cost) and much faster (also because the works are not sequential and can thus be carried on easily in multiple stretches at the same time, given enough equipment and workers ).
The issue is the scale, which requires a construction effort probably spanning decades.
So if they really do start building it they'll likely start from one end and build it section by section until either it's complete or they give up. Even 1km out of the 170 will result in a very large building.
They're not remotely digging foundations across the entire footprint yet. This thing is (in theory at least) supposed to be 170 km long. The linked article says that only half of that length even has any construction activity on it yet.
A fractal design would be equally interesting (possibly more interesting) and much more efficient. I should think nature usually designs for efficiency. Leaf, fern, ant hill, watersheds might provide ideas.
> in a more risk-reducing fashion, with a smaller section being built top-to-bottom to demonstrate its viability?
My guess would be the time. If this would be built in 3-5 years, then with a demonstrator it would take 5 to 10 years to complete. Also - not enough (heh) money constraints.
Can private earth observing satellites change orbits for full mission retasking? I would have assumed they only have enough fuel for maintaining orbit and station keeping and their coverage areas are pretty much static from the point they are inserted into their operational orbit.
Maxar says it covers "60% of Earth’s surface monthly" [1]. But it's one thing to fly over a place, another to allocate bandwidth, compute and analysts to beam down, process and analyze images of it.
Readit News
From TFA:
> The strange gap in imagery raises questions about who gets to access high-res satellite technology. And if the largest urban construction site on the planet doesn’t appear on Google Maps, what else can’t we see?
This is ridiculous. Commercial satellite images are sold everyday to thousands of buyers. You only need a credit card. Google maps is just not updated immediately with all these images that people buy.
I'm surprised at the low quality of these MIT "reporters".
I think it is also one of the reasons why a majority of people have no idea how the infrastucture of world works, from electricity over supply chains to the internet and basically everything in between.
Also any and all European history dealing with Kings and royal houses. They are all basically the same: Property, religion, upstart sons and a king trying to stay king.
They dug a trench in the sand, which is not such a tall order given the consistency of sand.
It's also the reason why they can stick a straw in the sand and oil comes out.
The only big trademark Core infrastructure project made in Saudi up to now has been the Abraj-Al-Bait [0], spearheaded by the Bin Laden Group [1] (founded in 1931 by Osama Bin Laden's father) which is something comparable to the recent CityCenter Las Vegas Development.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraj_Al_Bait
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Binladin_Group
And that trench is maybe 5-7 kilometers long (it's supposed to be 170).
I never doubted they'll build something, but until they reach that something the original presentation will get dumbed down a few times. It's still gonna be a long (but definitely not 170 kilometers) line with a metro and no cars, but that's about it.
It makes sense if you consider that when you have oil, it will make your currency strong, so exporting goods is expensive and that makes developing other industry difficult. Also, investments, people and other resources in your country will be all mainly directed towards oil, since that's where the profits are largest. So to escape this trap, you have to basically do something rather crazy.
Can someone better-versed in the economics of large development projects explain to me why this isn't being pursued in a more risk-reducing fashion, with a smaller section being built top-to-bottom to demonstrate its viability?
I'm no construction expert, but building the railway first so you can use it to ship material and workers seems like it could be good.
I have no idea on what the project details are, but - generally speaking and if possible - building an open-cut tunnel (as opposed to bored) is much cheaper (like 1/3 of the cost) and much faster (also because the works are not sequential and can thus be carried on easily in multiple stretches at the same time, given enough equipment and workers ).
The issue is the scale, which requires a construction effort probably spanning decades.
So if they really do start building it they'll likely start from one end and build it section by section until either it's complete or they give up. Even 1km out of the 170 will result in a very large building.
My guess would be the time. If this would be built in 3-5 years, then with a demonstrator it would take 5 to 10 years to complete. Also - not enough (heh) money constraints.
It's almost as if something happened in March which caused Maxar to focus on some other area of the world.
https://blog.maxar.com/for-a-better-world/2022/aviation-week...
[1] https://www.maxar.com/constellation
[0]: https://deusex.fandom.com/wiki/Rabi%27ah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prora