561–570 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why they didn't just use 20mm.
> I wonder why they didn't just use 20mm. Canada tried that once, with poor results. https://news.yahoo.com/weather-balloon-went-rogue-almost-161...
Why didn't they use machine guns? Perhaps one reason was the risk that if they used machine guns, they would hit the balloon and crash the fighter. In that case, it would have provided China with the worst possible performance of shooting down a U.S. fighter with a Chinese balloon. On the other hand, if they used missiles and shot down the Chinese balloon with flair, we could advertise a strong and brave U.S. The U.S…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if the pilot gets to paint a balloon silhouette on his plane.
I don’t think F-22 pilots get to paint their aircraft. It would destroy the stealth coatings, which are so specialized they are measured to the milligram when removed (to ensure an adversary hasn’t taken some for analysis).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure where your info is from, but this balloon was seen by the naked eye and all over social media. As someone who lives in Montana, many many people could see it. The idea that the USG prompted the publicity is unlikely to be accurate (would suggest a calculated social media psyop). Not impossible, but not likely.
there’s a bit of difference between it being spread as a meme online and then quietly fading into the background v.s. the President of the country ordering it to be shot down by a jet and then announcing said order to the public. just how close/far is this from “business as usual”? if this balloon were no big deal, i wouldn’t expect it to be escalated to the Commander in Chief. which tells me either (a) there’s (susp…
According to the front pages...New England had some cold weather today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US Navy is apparently pretty good at finding missile debris on the ocean floor. Since they know where it hit the water, they can probably find it. They might not even care that much, if they've seen this model of ballooncraft before.
Yah I believe that. But all the electronics will be shorted and likely damaged by salty water, which is conducive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The risk/reward ratio of that would be insanely bad. That's in the realm of "lizard people" in terms of likelihood.
You have NATO already providing training, signal intelligence, communications, weapons, advisory personnel and volunteers in Ukraine. Russia is already saying it’s in a limited war with NATO. Germany is already saying it’s at war with Russia. What I suggest is actually the F-22 is being using for signal intelligence over the Black Sea; helping guide in missles. Such as this attack https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europ…
NATO recon planes far more capable than the F-22 (RC-135s, for example; https://news.yahoo.com/russian-fighter-jet-fired-off-1432464...) are flying regularly over the Black Sea already.
No one needs an F-22 to guide missiles to a known airbase. It doesn’t move; GPS will hit the targets you can clearly see on Google Maps to within feet of where you want.
> Russia is already saying it’s in a limited war with NATO.
Sure. They also said they didn’t have troops in Crimea, and that they weren’t planning an invasion of Ukraine. It’s a weak attempt at explaining their poor performance.
Sidestepping the geopolitical issues with this for a moment ... What advantage is there to using a high altitude balloon for surveillance? I have to imagine there are some - like longer loiter time over a specific point, maybe better optics because you are still in atmosphere, it's obviously cheaper than launching a satellite - but I don't really know enough about this kind of hardware to say. Or maybe the point wasn…
Whether or not that reveals any non usual background signal of interest is an interesting ponder.
[flagged]
Fighter jets are the only planes even remotely close to capable of flying to 65,000ft. It’s physically impossible to send any other type of aircraft, there’s simply not enough air up there.
It's not "physically impossible" since the balloon is flying up there
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I ignore the majority of it myself. Maybe I'm a pessimist but there is little I can do to make an impact on geopolitics. I want to spend my energy on the things I can control and little energy on anything else. I'm much happier being completely unaware of whatever may be happening with the world.
So interesting to see this thread. I carefully curate and limit my intake and am intensely aware of the anger economy news organizations have built to drive engagement. Glad to hear others are avoiding being a product and are staying healthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think F-22 pilots get to paint their aircraft. It would destroy the stealth coatings, which are so specialized they are measured to the milligram when removed (to ensure an adversary hasn’t taken some for analysis).
Where do stories like this come from? Simple logic would tell you there is no possible way to weigh an aircraft coating to a milligram and verify that it matches a somehow measured precise amount applied to the aircraft. The concept is ridiculous.