Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Earth Uncovers Secret UK Nuke Base

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the gentlemen-do-not-read-each-other's-maps dept.

Google 240

thefickler writes "Gone are the days when governments could easily hide top secret bases. These days it's a weekend pastime to see who can find top secret facilities using Google Earth. Now it's the UK government's turn to be outraged after a secret facility was revealed by a British tabloid. The facility is said to be located in Faslane on the River Clyde in Scotland. This nuclear base was previously blurred out by the request of the British Government. However, with the latest update provided via Google Earth, many of the blurred out locations were accidentally revealed." Update: 3/08 at 14:24 by SS: Multiple readers have pointed out that the issue here is not the location of the base — it's simply that details of buildings and objects within the base (such as the location of a pair of nuclear submarines) are accidentally visible after the UK government specifically requested they be blurred out.

cancel ×

240 comments

"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (5, Insightful)

EWAdams (953502) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111535)

Oooh... like that huge bottle-green and cream building with all the satellite dishes on top was invisible to the tens of thousands of commuters who pass by it on the railroad every day.

Everybody knows where these things are anyway. The newspapers are just having a slow day, so let's take another whack at technology/Google/the Internet.

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (5, Funny)

legirons (809082) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111653)

Back when that building was used in the Bond film, HIGNFY reported: "MI6 were concerned the film might reveal the location of... one of London's most distinctive landmarks"

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (4, Insightful)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112459)

And who in their right mind thinks that a foreign nation doesn't already know the existence, location and layout of various bases around the world?

Some bribes or joint ventures later and information exceeding the information available at Google Earth is widespread.

Blurring a satellite or air photo today is just a giveaway since two different distributions never have the same blurring and that tells others that this is a site of interest.

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (4, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112579)

What the gov't is pissed off about is that you can see 2 nuclear subs docked ... scroll up to the top of the bay, zoom in.

Sure, foreign governments probably already have assets on the ground keeping watch of the ebb and flow of traffic, but it's nice to have visible confirmation (you can confirm the date of the pictures by using shadows - every day, the shadows will be slightly different as the sun appears to trace a slightly different arc in the sky).

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (2, Insightful)

Baron of Blue (1491343) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112627)

Come on, at least give the boys at the Kremlin the chance to earn their wages. Scroll up to the top indeed!

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (5, Funny)

Stuart Gibson (544632) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111721)

Sorry, but the UK has never been that big on keeping their secret nuclear bunkers very secret: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mimram/122464288/ [flickr.com]

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (2, Informative)

Cally (10873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111949)

Apparently there's some sort of big round building [theregister.com] in Cheltenham, too. (Yes, El Reg had this story a week ago.) Everyone knew about that one even when Ordnance Survey maps showed blank white space there; nowadays, it's shown on the local road signs. Hey, it looks like an old-fashioned mainframe tape-drive! To be fair, everyone knows where the MI6 HQ in Vauxhall is, but the MI5 building [google.com] is less well-known, mainly because it looks no different than many other buildings in the area.

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (2, Informative)

JCWDenton (851047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112175)

Following your link I found they've posted pictures of their headquarters on their website http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/thames-house-image-gallery.html [mi5.gov.uk] . You'd think any civilian taking pictures of the building would subsequently be subjected to a little chat with the law but there's no problem when they show it on their site in all it's glory from various angles...

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (1)

cheesewire (876598) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112263)

Apparently there's some sort of big round building [theregister.com] in Cheltenham, too.

You mean GCHQ's doughnut [guardian.co.uk] ?

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112493)

I drive past there regularly. You hear all sorts of stories about mobiles (cell phones) not working as you drive past, new house torn down because residents could view PC monitors through their windows, and general stories about stuff going bump in the night.

All absolute bollocks.

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (1)

H3g3m0n (642800) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111925)

You know Google probably have a vast amount of information about secret government facilities.

Countries, just tell this large American corporation all the things you don't want anyone to know about.

Not to mention all the webbased email accounts hosting in America, does anyone think that the FBI doesn't have a direct thunk to the Googleplex?

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (3, Funny)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111933)

And according to the Sun, Google Earth "even reveals the longitude and latitude of ... Faslane, Scotland"! Without Google's help, terrorists would have needed access to an Ordnance Survey map of Argyll and pocket calculators to ascertain this esoteric information!

Apparently (0)

BazilBBrush (1259370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112135)

All your base are belong to google...

Re:"Also revealed are MI6's London offices" (2, Funny)

Skeptical1 (823232) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112387)

Don't shoot till you see the blur in their eyes !-) Target the blur! Aye Cappin!

You think the submarines are still there? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112463)

Google earth data is usually very old. Last I heard, nuclear submarines tend to move around.

I used google search (5, Funny)

celardore (844933) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111539)

I came up with a secret nuclear bunker, too. link [secretnucl...nker.co.uk]

Re:I used google search (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111689)

I came up with a secret nuclear bunker, too.

link [secretnucl...nker.co.uk]

Did you follow this sign [bbc.co.uk] to find it?

Re:I used google search (1)

Huff (314296) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112051)

Brilliant tourist attraction, If anyone is in the area then I can well recommend a visit!

N

Re:I used google search (1)

senorpoco (1396603) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112297)

I have been, it is an interesting day out. The duck and cover video while underground is a bit unnerving however.

Blurred out by request (3, Insightful)

Baron_Yam (643147) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111543)

Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

If they ask to have it Photoshopped into non-existence then you know you've got really hot property!

Re:Blurred out by request (2, Interesting)

qbzzt (11136) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111639)

Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

Not if the government is smart enough to request enough blurs, with some of them being duds.

Besides, it's really hard to hide the existence of a facility in a densely populated area such as South England. The best you can hope for is to hide some of the internal details.

Re:Blurred out by request (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111879)

...government...smart enough...

You lost me here...

Security through obscurity.. (0, Flamebait)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111881)

They should really tell you where these places are considering how much they fuck up. The last place I'd want to live is next to a damn nuclear bunker.

Why do we need nukes anyway? How does it possibly help in any terrorist situation? What a completely waste of money.

Re:Security through obscurity.. (1)

Baron of Blue (1491343) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112653)

Nuclear weapons were designed when the threats were a little more impressive than a militant band running through caves. The Japanese Empire and the Soviet Union, for example. And a nuclear bunker would actually be a very nice place to live next to, considering it is built to save lives in case of a nuclear strike, and is far more interesting an address than most of suburbia.

Re:Blurred out by request (2, Insightful)

impaledsunset (1337701) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111665)

I guess it wasn't that secret after all... Anyone with access to the original pictures could discover the base, and as you mention the people at Google were given at least a huge hint that it is lying there.

I wouldn't call anything secret is a whole bunch of people with no connection to the base in question that have the information to find it. Sure, with more eyes looking something hidden might become easily uncovered, I guess that's part of the reason they requested the blurring, but once they made that hint, the millions of eyes are no longer necessary.

This means that the location wasn't hidden well enough from people that must not know where it is, Google just 'uncovered' it to the rest of us. Not a big deal.

Re:Blurred out by request (2, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111991)

Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

Perhaps, but Google also know the enforcement people's browsing habits, so no enforcement will be done.

You can't really hide big things :) (1)

jopsen (885607) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112535)

Doesn't that just mean that a whole chain of people at Google now know the location is sensitive and could turn around and pass on that information?

Don't you think the workers who built the place knows where it is, or did they bury them when they were done building it?

It's not like you can easily hide big things when thousands of people are involved in building and maintaining them... Perhaps it's just better to let it be a public secret...

Well... (-1, Troll)

Ferret96 (1293480) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111549)

Dr. Manhattan can always hide the facility underneath his giant blue dong so the commies won't find it.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111779)

I feel really really bad for you if you consider that "giant".

What about the enemies? (3, Funny)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111553)

Do the enemy nations also blur their secret bases at the request of the british government?

Re:What about the enemies? (5, Funny)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111749)

Most nations can't afford the 18,558,720 pixel wide brush required.

Re:What about the enemies? (1)

tyldis (712367) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112323)

But they can afford to pay my employer a few dollars to get their own picture of the site.

We aqcuire and sell satellite imagery of the location of your choice. If the weather is nice enough you can expect an image within hours of ordering.

We are also downlinking most of the imagery used by Google...
These things are availible commercially for anyone and for any purpose.

Re:What about the enemies? (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112149)

Exactly. I'm not sure when exactly Google's commercially available, unclassified satellite maps became any kind of threat compared to actual spy photography.

At least with the "soft targets" argument some days back, you could argue that terrorists don't have access to a well-equipped intelligence apparatus and rely on commercial maps. (The argument is still expertly defeated by Schneier's explanation how we cannot cripple our infrastructure in favor of security, though.)

With top-secret nuclear bases, on the other hand, if you worry about a low-budget Al-Quaeda cell using Google Earth, then you should probably build a fence or hire some guards or something.

I NEVER KNEW IT WAS THERE! (5, Funny)

ed (79221) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111563)

Now all the mystery of the road signs, American Service personnel, people mentioning it in the media and the submarines sailing up and down the Clyde is solved.

WHO KNEW!!!!!

Re:I NEVER KNEW IT WAS THERE! (5, Funny)

couchslug (175151) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112557)

"the submarines sailing up and down the Clyde"

That certainly shoots down the "very large manatees" cover story.

That's nothing... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111565)

They even sign post them in my lovely home county of Essex: http://russelldavies.typepad.com/planning/images/secret_nuclear_bunker-thumb.jpg

Bad summary (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111567)

SPOILER ALERT: Faslane is not a "secret" facility. It's the level and quality of imagery that's the problem. Good old /. editing at its finest, I had to actually check for a second that it wasn't actually another kdawson...in any case this "news" is at least a week old.

Re:Bad summary (1)

Pax681 (1002592) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111971)

yeah man, every man and his dog, cat,fleas on the dog and cat KNOW about Faslane. if terrorists want to know the way in all they have to do is ASK the anti nuclear protesters that have been camped there on and off you YEARS!. no news at all

The actual article in The Sun (5, Informative)

while(true) (626738) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111569)

Re:The actual article in The Sun (2, Informative)

legirons (809082) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111679)

As usual, El Reg [theregister.co.uk] has useful commentary

Re:The actual article in The Sun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111819)

Oh great, the sun is really known for high quality reporting. Damned tabloid.

Re:The actual article in The Sun (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111875)

Was this the article between the one about the chavy kids getting pregnant and the one about immigrants destroying Britain?

Re:The actual article in The Sun (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111937)

Nnah, it was in the princes Diana memorial edition.

Re:The actual article in The Sun (5, Funny)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111997)

And in a related news article, [thesun.co.uk] The Sun reports that Google Earth's new ocean-floor imagery reveals the location of the lost city of Atlantis on the ocean floor west of the Canary Islands. A photo of Patrick Duffy is used as an illustration, and a reaction commentary by none other than Plato accompanies the story. You can't make shit like this up... because The Sun does it for you.

Re:The actual article in The Sun (1)

MooUK (905450) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112169)

You have to love the complete misunderstanding of Google's explanation of blank areas. Google says "The lines are where the boat scanned, the gaps are where it didn't". The Sun says "Google can't explain the gaps".

Public secrets (5, Funny)

onion2k (203094) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111577)

The places the government publicise that they want to keep secret aren't actually secret at all. They're a façade. Then there's the somewhat secret stuff that the government denies exists. The real secret stuff is the stuff the government never mentions.

Never heard the government mention their lunar base with telescopes that can see through the roofs of buildings and spy on you on the toilet? That's pretty much proof they've got one, but it's a secret!

Re:Public secrets (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111645)

Hmm yeah, that's some good secret-keeping going on there [royalnavy.mod.uk] buddy

Re:Public secrets (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111667)

Never heard the Russian mention their sewage plant with borescopes that can see through the floors of buildings and spy on you on the toilet?

Re:Public secrets (1)

Trailwalker (648636) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111777)

The real secret at Faslane is the "public road."

It is a secret runway used by the Royal Airforce to launch unmanned drones equipped with CCTVs. This allows Her Majesty's government to cover the few areas that have not yet had permanent CCTV cameras installed.

The Faslane nuclear submarine facility is used for cover.

so secret they have their own public website! (5, Informative)

julian67 (1022593) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111585)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faslane [wikipedia.org] "Her Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde is one of three UK operating bases for the Royal Navy (the others being HMNB Devonport and HMNB Portsmouth). It is the service's headquarters in Scotland and is best known as the home of the United Kingdom's Trident-armed nuclear submarine force." This place has been notorious/famous for decades. Whoever wrote this "news" story is a fucking idiot and recycling on /. is fucking dumb too. Some of the other "top secret" places featured in the story feature regularly in documentaries, fiction, news reports and so on. Some of them are so secret that they have their own public website complete with pictures and a contact us button :-) http://www.sis.gov.uk/output/sis-home-welcome.html [sis.gov.uk] Well done Timothy, well up to your usual standard (rubbish).

Re:so secret they have their own public website! (0, Flamebait)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111723)

Whoever wrote this "news" story is a fucking idiot and recycling on /. is fucking dumb too.

Two words: kdawson

Re:so secret they have their own public website! (5, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111805)

Two words: kdawson

I'm not sure which one makes you look like more of an idiot--the fact that "kdawson" isn't two words, or the fact that the story was posted by timothy.

Re:so secret they have their own public website! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112065)

It is the service's headquarters in Scotland and is best known as the home of the United Kingdom's Trident-armed nuclear submarine force."

Isn't that more kind of the United States' Trident [wikipedia.org] -flawed [google.com] subhuman force?

Re:so secret they have their own public website! (1)

Alcoholist (160427) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112245)

Not only do they have a nicely put together public website, you can learn all about their secret ways in Spanish, Russian, Arabic and Chinese! For defectors maybe...?

Oddly enough, no option for French.

Under cover. (2, Insightful)

Bazman (4849) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111595)

Ooh, like the Russians never knew there was a submarine base at Faslane before...

Since Sputnik went up, governments have known that secret locations wouldn't be secret for long. And if the Russians can photograph it, they can sell the photos to terrorists. Google will get them sometime after.

If governments want to do stuff in secret they know they have to do it undercover. There's a big covered dock right next to the two obvious submarines on the Faslane google maps imagery. That's where the secret stuff happens. Until we get Google Thermal Imagery Earth, of course.

Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

Re:Under cover. (4, Funny)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111627)

Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

I could probably tell you that those are the Top Secret military pancake storage facilities, but then you would have to be blurred out on google maps too.

Re:Under cover. (1)

legirons (809082) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111787)

Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

Fuel store? (c.f. these [virtualglobetrotting.com] )

Re:Under cover. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111923)

Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

I could ask Tom Clancy, but I lost his e-mail address. They're probably the garbage disposal areas.

Re:Under cover. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112399)

Anyone know what the circular mounds are to the north of the base?

Yes but I can't tell you.

OK, where to begin. (3, Insightful)

Samschnooks (1415697) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111601)

Some of the other locations revealed are MI6â(TM)s London offices, Britainâ(TM)s nuclear crisis HQ and the SAS training facility. Apparently the UK Government is worried that terrorists could potentially launch missile attacks to those target areas with the exact coordinates readily available on the Internet.

So, the UK Government is actually saying, "Oops! You got us! That's exactly what they are! As matter of act, those buildings are exactly what you think they are and then some! What what! Cheers!"

Could these buildings be not very important and the UK gov is making them seem more important to distract everyone from the real targets? I don't see anything that makes that facility ultra secure like you'd expect for someplace that is that sensitive. Look how close it is to the highway (A814)? Here in the States, there'd be a HUGE driveway or access road so that someone couldn't just park at the side and lob a mortar shell over or what have you.

A tabloid said this? A PRINTED tabloid that will do anything to increase circulation; especially in this economy?!?

I could go on but I'm sick of typing.

Re:OK, where to begin. (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111739)

I really do think the Uk security forces learned from 1985 Newry mortar attack.
The UK would protect anyone with real skills in the 'safe' part of a structure.
Anyone or anything else can be replaced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Newry_mortar_attack [wikipedia.org]

found this one the other day (1)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111603)

I thought google used low-flying planes to grab images but this must be way up there, satellites ??

air canada! [google.com]

Re:found this one the other day (1)

repvik (96666) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112013)

That plane is flying kinda low, innit? If you zoom out about half-way, you see the transition between aerial photos and satellite photos.

WTF? Hidden? (5, Informative)

Lars T. (470328) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111615)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNB_Clyde [wikipedia.org] Everybody already knew where the base is, there are public roads surrounding it, the Wikipedia article even as an aerial photo of it. So unless they are worried that terrorists start using GPS guided "smart" weaponry (but of course conventionally armed, because for nuclear they knew enough already) instead of just flying a plane packed with explosives into it, why the hell are they outraged exactly?

Re:WTF? Hidden? (1)

Bananenrepublik (49759) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111717)

why the hell are they outraged exactly?

Because RNAD Coulton (which is about 4 miles west of the linked site) is hidden under a cloud, I guess. Damned publicity whores, wanted their whole base on google maps but only got half of it exposed.

Re:WTF? Hidden? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111903)

why the hell are they outraged exactly?

LMAO - you obviously are not familiar with the Super Soaraway Sun (motto: Phwoar!) style of "journalism"; I can only assume you don't live in the UK.

It's not secret (see Wikipedia) (0, Redundant)

Jamamala (983884) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111623)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNB_Clyde [wikipedia.org]

HMNB Clyde is home to the United Kingdom's strategic nuclear deterrent.

Well since big brother can be watching us... (3, Insightful)

3seas (184403) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111649)

.....so can us little brothers be watching big brother... No double standards here.

Of the 6 plus billion people on this planet, it is some fraction of 1% that messes things up for the rest of us.
Its about time we start watching them..

Re:Well since big brother can be watching us... (2, Funny)

jelizondo (183861) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112059)

.....so can us little brothers be watching big brother... No double standards here.

Of the 6 plus billion people on this planet, it is some fraction of 1% that messes things up for the rest of us.
Its about time we start watching them..

It's about time we start whacking them.

There ya go, fixed that for ya!

Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111681)

Good aerial photos of potential military targets are extremely useful to missile guidance systems. Even if you use a non-visual guidance system, the high resolution photos are excellent for locating a base very precisely and adjusting inertial guidance systems. And the same issues apply to potential civilian protest or enemy sabotage at nuclear facilities: good quality aerial photos are very useful for plotting the location of the nuclear materials, access routes, security facilities, places to hide, and escape routes.

During the 1970's and 1980's one of the largest purchasers of US satellite photographs was the People's Republic of China. I wonder why?

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (3, Interesting)

OldCrasher (254629) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111775)

The only people left that haven't a clue about what goes on in dockyards at Faslane are the British Taxpayers. Everyone else has spies there and photographs the place as needed.

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111841)

And there's a big difference between 'knows what goes on there' and 'color photos with 1 meter resolution of the whole base'. That's enough to pick out doorways, barracks, guardstations, and fuel storage.

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112055)

Don't the Brits have an equivalent to Wal-mart? In Kings Bay and Bangor (locations of US missile sub bases) if you want to know ship schedules or news you go there and listen around for a while. You can get the quarterly schedule for the entire local sub force in an afternoon's worth of eavesdropping.

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112517)

Equivalent? We actually have Walmarts in all their American glory. They are currently called Asda Walmart as they bought Asda some years back but I expect that'll disappear as the years go on.

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112367)

I bet it is because the U.S. had the best photos of China.

Re:Missile guidances systems like clear pictures (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112539)

Perhaps so, but that wasn't what I discussed years back with the person who managed the sales of the photos. That person referred specifically to pictures of the US.

About as un-secret as could possibly be (1)

gsslay (807818) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111733)

The submitter is clueless. The 'British tabloid' is a scandal rag not above inventing a controversy. Everyone knows where Faslane is. Everyone knows what is there. Do you think no-one has wondered where all the nuclear subs dock? Where do you think the Russian missiles spent 50 years targeting during the cold war, (and may even still do)?

mod 04 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111769)

and the Bazaar that support log on Then the Reaper Nor do the EFNet, and apply bunch of gay negros its corpse turned are the important - Netcraft has over the same MOVE FORWARD, of all legitimate many of us are win out; either the [anti-slash.org] be in a scene and niigerness? And recent Sys Admin In addition, people already; I'm and promotes our Big picture. What NIGGER ASSOCIATION Wash off hands Are almost correct network Encountered while outstrips rival distribution, problems that I've officers. Others failure, its corpse direct orders, or first organization [nero-online.org]. go find something baby...don't fear bloc in order to Are about 7000/5 NetBSD user parties, but here please moderate Roots and gets on a conscious stand clean for the next

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27111807)

Then you seriously fail at making a hidden place.

A hidden place, a truly hidden place, would be so hidden it is in the public eye and nobody would even realize it.

Or, of course, underground.

every piece of this story is wrong (0, Redundant)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111853)

Faslane has been known and talked about for decades. It was "made famous" when the british navy started getting Trident missiles for it's nuclear submarines - the BBC among others regualrly reported on the protests at "... the Faslane nuclear base ..."

Even when you get up there, it's presence is announced by the miles of razor-wire and notices telling people to keep out.

This is a second rate piece of sensationalist reporting, by people who do know better, but have such a low regard for their readers, that they think we're all stupid.

As it is, the UK has a far more effective way of concealing it's bases from Google Earth - why do you think it's cloudy for 99% of the time?

Murdoch anti-google agenda? (1)

Bazman (4849) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111941)

Conspiracy theory anyone? Microsoft Virtual Earth has better and more recent imagery than Google Earth - there's some obvious new earthworks. No mention of MS Virtual Earth in The Sun. What's the Fox/MS relationship?

Flash New Update (2, Funny)

wmduncan (888561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27111987)

In related news, it is reported that the Wall Street Journal leaked that the Allied have broken the Nazi Ultra code.

The ministry of defence links to a better map... (1)

Lorens (597774) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112073)

Go to www.mod.uk (British Ministry of Defence), search for HMNB Clyde, find the official web site of HMNB Clyde http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.3157 [royalnavy.mod.uk] , click on "Location", then on "View map on multimap.com", change to aerial view, move some 1500 yards north to the submarine docks, zoom in . . . much better resolution than google maps. OK so there weren't any submarines there that day, doubtlessly GoogleSats try to fly overhead only when the subs are there? Shoddy sensationalist tabloid reporting at a shoddy sensationalist tabloid, now that's news for you.

We are Google. We own all your base. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112081)

We are Google. We own all your base.

Rubbish story (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112151)

That story is just about right for the Sun. Everyone can find Faslane but more importantly, there isn't enough detail to find a way to sneak onto the base, avoiding security and better information can probably be bought from the black market which terrorists will know about.

Not so secret. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112205)

Generally being blurred on google maps implies a secret facility. If you are going to do that then you may as well highlight the damn things.

Google Takeover (1)

mc1138 (718275) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112229)

With as much information as google already has, and will have each and everyday, what's to say that they couldn't just slowly and quietly start to take over?

haha talk about FUD (1)

Is0m0rph (819726) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112233)

Now the terrorists will know the long/lat of the base and can launch accurate mortar attacks! How are these terrorists going to get close to this base to launch mortar attacks? I'm assuming the base is protected. I bet everyone in the area terrorists included knew the base was there by, oh I don't know, watching those tons of warships parked there coming in and out port?

Did the UK gove have permission? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112247)

Did the UK government and military have permission from the British subjects to place nuclear submarines there? Looking at the map zooming out makes it obvious that a nuclear accident or an attack against the subs could have quite an impact on the environment and population.

Re:Did the UK gove have permission? (1)

Don_dumb (927108) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112449)

If you read about the history of Faslane (and I have) it was decided to put the base there because it was away from a built up area (much more so than the other naval bases during the war) but wasn't too far away from a large population that could work there.

The UK government had to negotiate more with dockyards in the area rather than the local populace.

Plus I can't think of a place where a nuclear accident wouldn't have an impact on the population

Google Maps link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27112261)

If anyone's interested, here's a Google Maps link.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=faslane,+scotland&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=48.555061,79.101563&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=14

All I did was type in "Faslane, Scotland" and it took me directly to the base, as if it wasn't any big secret. *shrug*

been past it in a speed boat, it looks sinister (1)

AndyGasman (695277) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112287)

I've been past it in a speed boat, it looks pretty sinister, v big place. They have floating docks that they use to load the nukes into the subs. You can get a wildlife tour from Dunoon, we saw more porpoises that submarines, great trip.

I didn't take up the popular CND pastime of super-glue-ing my hands to the road outside though.

Id recommend the book, Fortress Scotland, by Malcolm Spaven, it has lots of details on cold-war Scotland. It has a fir amount to info on Faslane, including why it was built there and how much it probably cost. The book is a bit dated now, being published in 1983, but its interesting how much has changed since the cold war ended.

What right do they have to be angry? (1)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112317)

The UK government can afford to spend billions maintaining and staffing a nuclear submarine fleet but they can't afford to buy a fucking roof for the dock?

Do they ask the Chinese and Russian spy satellite operators to blur the images before they pass them on to their superiors too?

Blurred out on the map == (2, Funny)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112531)

All your base are belong to Gauss?

well known (1)

slvrshwr (1443655) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112549)

Faslane is a well-known naval nuclear facility (hence the 'peace camp' photolink just south of the facility on the map), they assemble nuclear subs there I believe... (hence the picture of the sub also on the map). Maybe its not so well known to the English...

If anyone was really interested in the layout... (1)

LunarEffect (1309467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112595)

wouldn't they take a picknick near Rosneath Road with a pair of binoculars? I mean...if I look at googlemaps and see a blurred out area, it kinda sparks my interest far more than if I see a line that might resemble a submarine.

Secret nuclear base... (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112597)

...ah, you mean this one? [exec-comms.com]

If they submerge the submarines... (1)

Baron of Blue (1491343) | more than 5 years ago | (#27112675)

they can hide them without having to move them an inch (except downwards, that is). Bring them up only for repairs and embarking/disembarking, and only inside a closed structure. Does anyone see why they don't do that all the time, given the risk of aerial or satellite photography?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...