Talk:Kosmos 1408

Orbit data

 * The current values seem to be the original orbit. The satellite has decayed notably. Heavens-above reports a 465 x 490 km orbit, while n2yo.com reports 472.0 - 497.5 km, that's compatible. This is important as the lower altitude means debris will re-enter the atmosphere much faster. --mfb (talk) 23:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)


 * "Global orbital data base have data about 600 and 632 km orbit" - what does this mean? --Annihilannic (talk) 00:07, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Kosmos 1408 and ELINT

 * The following discussion was moved from .

I'm not sure I understand this edit. At, which is referenced in the 'Purpose and launch' section of the article, it's said clearly that it's "ELINT (Electronic and Signals Intelligence)". The problem seems to be that ELINT redirects to Signals intelligence, and someone decided to helpfully bypass the redirect? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:24, 18 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I was going off of the lead section of Signals intelligence, which has "ELINT" defined as "electronic intelligence" in boldface. If that's wrong, then it should be addressed at that article first. Despite what any sources say, I don't want to be inconsistent across Wikipedia.
 * But now that you've pointed it out, I see that ELINT currently redirects to a specific section of Signals intelligence. That section seems to contradict the lead to assert—once again—that "ELINT" stands for "Electronic signals intelligence". Even if it stands for "electronic intelligence" (There's no "S" in the acronym, after all.), it would seem that electronic intelligence is a type of signals intelligence, so it seems we're getting into semantics.
 * Still, my feelings are that these inconsistencies need to be discussed and rectified on Signals intelligence first, and then the redirects and this article can follow suit. Perhaps you should start a discussion there...? – void  xor  17:40, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * For comparison, the cited Drive source calls Tselina an "electronic intelligence satellite system". This article should go with whatever the reliable sources say for Kosmos 1408. If there are issues with the semantics in the signals intelligence article, they should be raised on talk:signals intelligence. Modest Genius talk 18:04, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, there's the additional problem of what the acronyms actually stand for. The intended function of 1408 is one thing, but the acronym used to shorted it is another. And while I completely agree that we should follow the sources as far as the intended function is concerned, I have to respectfully disagree that—should a source arguably misuse an acronym—we are bound to follow suit. After all, we are linking to Signals intelligence or a specific section of it. So to have a function and associated acronym link to another Wikipedia article that then says, right off the top, that it stands for another thing, I found confusing as a reader which is why I tried to correct it in the first place. – void  xor  20:04, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * We should go with what the sources say - and they say Electronic and Signals Intelligence. That seems to be a bit different from SIGINT? Perhaps ELINT should be a disambig page? If the acronym is really a problem, then I suggest we just write it out, and not link it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I attempted to more closely follow the source, perhaps as a bit of a compromise. Although the NASA source says "Electronic and Signals Intelligence", I simplified that slightly to "electronic signals intelligence" because that's the redirect and target section. Now, the only problem that remains is the lead section of Signals intelligence, which implies that "ELINT" stands for simply "electronic intelligence". Or vise versa. That really needs to be hashed out on that article's talk page. – void  xor  17:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)