Live data from Hacker News

US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

bbc.com

81–90 of 526 posts

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#81

Is there a plausible explanation as to why the US government has not announced objects 2 & 3 are balloons, if they are balloons? They call them "objects", yet must know what they are. They wouldn't randomly missile unknowns. If it's for reasons of secrecy, why announce it at all? The second one was in the middle of nowhere, it could easily have been ignored, or dismissed as a military exercise if anyone had made a fu…

Could be Drones?

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#82
post #19

So the F-22 is now 3-0 against balloons? And people had the audacity to call this plane a "failure"!

The F-22 was never called a failure. The main criticism is that we didn't make enough of them.

Well, it has a very niche application. It is absolutely the best at what it does, but an air superiority/dominance fighter is not typically useful in the conflicts that the US has been involved in since the F-22 entered service. The fact that it has been in service for almost 15 years before seeing any air to air action has meant it has been a cost that is tricky to justify.

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#83

The US Government shooting down an Unidentified Flying Object sounds like the start of a science fiction film. If there were ever a bad time and place for actual aliens to come visit...

The first tic-tac they shoot at is going to kick their ass. No offense America but my money is on our alien overlords to win.

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#85

I think China erred by sending such a large balloon that was visible to the naked eye, causing the American public to demand it be shot down. There's no hard rule about where national airspace ends and space begins.. a lot of times they fly too high for planes to reach, and under certain circumstances balloons are allowed through national airspace.. so if the balloon isn't causing a problem (like being a hazard to ai…

[flagged]

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#87

So how long has the CCP been sending these balloons and what caused the USG to start talking about them?

They've been doing it for a few years. The US did it in the 50's. The reason we're talking about them is two fold: 1) the "first" one had such a massive payload that people could see the object from the ground. People were posting a bunch online even before the media picked it up. 2) It became a political issue about the US's strength in response to China. That amplifies the former to be a larger and broader discussion(s).

This could also indicate China's surveillance capabilities. Need to use balloons to get high resolution rather than relying on satellite imagery (kinda why we don't really use U2s anymore and why that Trump tweet was seen as a big deal). It could also be trolling. It could also be testing (including of cameras that would be put on satellites). It is hard to say anything with certainty tbh. Militaries work in secrecy and that's why information is so valuable (despite what many think). But the objects will be recovered and you'd be surprised what can be reverse engineered from an exploded pile of scrap.

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#88
post #16

I wonder what the cost is of sending such a balloon vs shooting it down. If I was China I would be sending thousands of these. It's not going to cause an all out war, but it does impose some security threat which should be dealt with and can't be ignored.

I've not looked into it - but it's possible there is zero or negative cost to shooting down a small number of balloons. Imagine each pilot needs X hours of training or to fire Y missiles in training. A couple balloon missions could just replace training exercises, on net saving money because we wouldn't need to setup the target.

Also, the US has a ton of Sidewinder missiles. I thought I saw 20,000 of AIM-9X; it is at least 5,000. The US may have a ton of older variants but it sounded like they need the imaging sensor in the new variant for balloons.

There may be cheaper ways to shoot down balloons. Unguided rockets might work. There are guided rockets that would work better and still be cheap.

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#89
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>erred by sending such a large I surmise you need large balloon to carry required instruments on one platform. Going forward IMO PRC just going to fly them higher, US can keep shooting them down... possible until they can't, both will reveal US capabilities. At minimum, finding out f22 + missile ceiling is worth the cost. PRC isn't going to stop program just because US domestic politics goes full retard, if anything,…

Serious question: was there ever any doubt that US military could shoot something down out of the sky no matter how high it flies? If they are doing this to determine capabilities, it's like staking at a grocery store to see if it sells milk.

Removing doubt has value. If US has to shift to another platform to hit 80k feet ballon reveals specific capabilities. Like if US has to start using advanced ground based interceptors, it will inform PRC on constraints relevant in IndoPac scenario. If US has to break out asat tier weapons, ASM135 cost 5B for ~15 missiles then PRC can start developing capabilities to accordingly to shift strategic math. Imagine if balloon threat forces US to reorient billions on homeland balloon defense, that's potentially billions not going elsewhere.

E:over post limit but Streak Eagle was high performance preproduction airframe specifially designed to hit 100k for a few minutes. Hard to say if current blocks can do the same or reliable prosecute mission at 100k, finding out is value itself.

> knowing the US would use it to undersell capabilities

Simultaneously capabilities can be prodded, i.e. PRC start testing counter measures on balloons, and if successful reveal gaps / cause more drama - US domestic politics may constrain how much US can undersell. Ultimately getting US to change ROE and consistenly enagage with live weapons is opportunity for both sides.

Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada

#90
post #61

I think China erred by sending such a large balloon that was visible to the naked eye, causing the American public to demand it be shot down. There's no hard rule about where national airspace ends and space begins.. a lot of times they fly too high for planes to reach, and under certain circumstances balloons are allowed through national airspace.. so if the balloon isn't causing a problem (like being a hazard to ai…

>erred by sending such a large I surmise you need large balloon to carry required instruments on one platform. Going forward IMO PRC just going to fly them higher, US can keep shooting them down... possible until they can't, both will reveal US capabilities. At minimum, finding out f22 + missile ceiling is worth the cost. PRC isn't going to stop program just because US domestic politics goes full retard, if anything,…

You could just pop them with a laser instead of bothering to scramble jets and missiles, I’d think.
Post reply on HN