Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#771

Post by yawpitch »

moomoo11 wrote: post #517
ck2 wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea people would still function while the entire east and west coast burns is the same fantasy at massive scale as people who walk around with guns thinking they are going to somehow defeat someone who has planned and already actively shooting at them. I believe great many ICBMs would definitely make it to major cities and that is the end of the world. We've already seen how people handle a pandemic, imagine act…

I don’t believe that deploying the entire nuclear arsenal of the world would wipe humanity off the face of earth. Would it suck and render some places uninhabitable? Yes. Would it affect fresh water and air quality? You bet. But people will find a way like a worm and some will survive. I am in Bay Area so I probably won’t, but others will. What about places in Africa and South East Asia? Probably will be “fine”. Besi…

> Humans are definitely the best species this planet has ever produced (that we know of).

It’s certainly the most solipsistic… and, likely not coincidentally, it’s the only one that has developed the capacity to make the entire planet functionally uninhabitable to its own species.

Also tardigrades will definitely outlast the human species… as will rats, cockroaches, and those mouth-less tube worms that cluster around deep sea vents… the only question is how soon will they have outlasted us?

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#772

Post by baybal2 »

SergeAx wrote: post #454
moomoo11 wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really believe the USAF and rest of the military and 3 letter agencies had not already intercepted/jammed/hacked the comms link? By letting it saunter all the way across they also probably got a lot of good info on its capabilities.

FWIW, all comms of that balloon would be satellite. I don't think it is easy to jam, let alone intercept.

[dead]

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#773

Post by cesis »

WalterBright wrote: post #273
KennyBlanken wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like the large size is mostly just solar panels (I'm assuming that's what they were; they could have been 'sails' to help steer it) and their scaffolding. From some of the available photos there's two wings, each with eight panels. There's a tradeoff between the weight of the solar panels vs simply using batteries (though batteries don't like the cold, and solar panels do), so I think maybe they were hoping…

> they could have been 'sails' to help steer it Sails are useless in a balloon. The only way to steer a balloon without a propeller is to raise and lower its altitude seeking a wind blowing in the right direction.

Why not?

Add a fin to a baloon and you can steer it.

And once the baloon can hold direction in the wind with the help of the fin, you can add sail to actually get some propulsion in direction other than wind.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#774

Post by q7xvh97o2pDhNrh »

garyfirestorm wrote: post #759
darkerside wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Size of a football field, got it

How many washing machines?

It's just under 73 washing machines laid on their backs end-to-end.

That does assume, though, that you got the tallest possible washing machine, which stands at a whopping 47 inches, compared to the industry average of a puny not-even 41 inches.

(It's honestly mind-blowing to me that I could get this data [1] in a few seconds, when it might've been nearly impossible in a sane amount of time ~10 years ago. But I'm also enjoying just citing it really casually.)

[1]: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=washing+machine

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#775

Post by njharman »

za3faran wrote: post #734
heartbreak wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw it from my car today while driving before I knew it was going to be in my area. It was very visible to the naked eye. It was large enough that the perspective made it seem a lot lower altitude than it actually was.

Not sure what the CCP is thinking. Are they simply trying to instigate a response with such a brazen display?

Its not like USA have never violated other nations air space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_aerial_reconnais... but I guess we quit doing it to China https://www.nytimes.com/1971/07/29/archives/us-spy-flights-o...

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#776

Post by mike_d »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #761
WillPostForFood wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

especially compared to satellites It is a lot easier to take pictures and collect data at 60,000 ft (balloon) than from a satellite in low earth orbit, which is closer to 6,000,000 ft.

Okay, genius: explain how easy it is to generate as good imagery at 80,000 feet (almost ten times the typical aerial imagery altitude) from a platform being buffeted and spun and tilted by the wind with the weight restrictions of a high altitude balloon. Now compare that challenge to simply setting up a shell company and purchasing 15-30cm commercial satellite imagery in their choice of bands. Commercial satellites c…

> explain how easy it is to generate as good imagery at 80,000 feet

Camera gimbals provide image stability regardless of motion in 3D space. Digital post processing is used to clean up images from planes and other moving sources.

> with the weight restrictions of a high altitude balloon.

People seem to really underestimate the size of these balloons. They are hundreds of feet across and capable of lifting massive loads. Using Google's Loon as an example it had a balloon that weighed almost 200 pounds and carried an additional 175 pounds of solar panels before you even added the mission payload.

> compare that challenge to simply setting up a shell company and purchasing 15-30cm commercial satellite imagery

Satellites have predictable passes and military installations schedule sensitive outdoor activities around them. The problem for defenders with balloons is that they can loiter on station for months at a time making scheduling around them impractical.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#777

Post by herewulf »

LarryMullins wrote: post #198
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it probably cost >$1M to shoot it down? How much did that balloon cost to make?

> So it probably cost >$1M to shoot it down? Basically free, when you consider they were going to fly planes and shoot missiles anyway for practice.

Except the military has lots of different pots of money and lots of red tape about how they're spent. No guarantees the cost of this little escapade came out of a training fund.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#778

Post by atoav »

mattmaroon wrote: post #733
404mm wrote: post #382

I feel like the balloon takedown was seriously mishandled. Imo it should have been shot down right after it crossed our borders and before it started move over populated areas. That way there would be no surveillance and you could examine the payload. Now that it’s in the water, you may not even find it.

Do you think that did not occur to the military? I’m sure that if they blundered, it was not in some way that was so obvious. Either they simply didnt know about it until it was too late, or they had some reason to not shoot it then that you’re not aware of. The idea that they decided not to do so for no good reason is silly.

I'd assume it was politics who delayed the destruction.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#779

Post by mike_d »

cesis wrote: post #773
WalterBright wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they could have been 'sails' to help steer it Sails are useless in a balloon. The only way to steer a balloon without a propeller is to raise and lower its altitude seeking a wind blowing in the right direction.

Why not? Add a fin to a baloon and you can steer it. And once the baloon can hold direction in the wind with the help of the fin, you can add sail to actually get some propulsion in direction other than wind.

The problem at 60k feet is actually you are above the weather and don't have a ton of wind to work with. Moving up and down in the minor wind currents is far more efficient energy wise and practically.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#780

Post by cpursley »

moomoo11 wrote: post #695
IMTDb wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The danger for the US are inside, not outside. The military spending is already far sufficient to guarantee the safety of the country against external state nations. The issue is that it does not spend enough to maintain internal peace. The dudes that took over the capitol aren’t Chinese or Russian. Now of course, you could use your military power to control your population and prevent it from rebelling even if it is…

I agree from an optics pov but even with the capitol thing.. half the country and half the politicians elected by them think it wasn’t a big deal. Meanwhile everyone argues over it while.. Everything is in control, at least in my opinion. I’m just a simple tax payer, and honestly I trust the people who really run the country while laymen argue over dumb shit and our side vs that side etc.

> I trust the people who really run the country

Yikes.

Post reply on HN