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

Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 593 posts

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#221

Post by LarryMullins »

philippejara wrote: post #214
handedness wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UN is certainly something more than that, and not literally just a forum. They have an active duty peacekeeping force of approximately 81K people. While that's similar in size to the active duty forces from a nation like a Peru or Chile, the Blue Helmets have had a de facto quasi-blanket immunity when committing war crimes, and have some pretty horrifying history in places like Central Africa. For example: "Consi…

is there no mechanic for them to be prosecuted by the UN itself? as some kind of court-martial or something? Or even their own countries, sounds absolutely insane to expect the judicial system of a country that needs a peacekeeping force to come in to deal with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...

Nuclear powers play by whatever rules they choose to play by.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#222

Post by consp »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #132
duxup wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL, that's cool.

> Commercially available radar reflectors are frequently found as a sailboat supply item Wooden and fiberglass boats are fairly invisible to radar, even with metal masts and rigging. If you are ever planning to head out into the ocean and near where you might expect commercial shipping, these are a cheap safety item for making your boat visible.

If you attempt to go near larger commercial shipping lanes you are required to have them at least were I live, they are not optional here. Also get the right size, some smaller ones are useless (so I've been told).

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#223

Post by phpisthebest »

llacb47 wrote: post #7
Ancalagon wrote: post #4

Why are there no photos of any of these except the original Chinese balloon?

Well, two were over remote parts of Alaska. And this one just happened like an hour ago, so maybe pics will come out from people on the ground. In any case, the best pics from the first one over Montana were shot with telephoto lenses, so it’s not like anybody with a phone can snap a close up shot

The military has released radar, IR and other sensor data from other UFO's before. Why not release them for these things?

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#224

Post by themitigating »

lolc wrote: post #165
giantg2 wrote: post #133

Imagine if you launch a balloon for say $10k so that your adversary has to spend $400k on a missile plus $70k x number of planes x hours in flight. And now do it multiple times per week. Seems like a decent strategy.

It's a decent strategy until you realize you're just providing target practice on sorties the enemy would fly anyway. Shooting one missile a day is not affecting that budget. And pilots need constant training.

That depends on the cost difference between training and the missiles. May they have to use more fuel maybe the person on duty didn't need training.

I'm being picky but still

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#225

Post by ianburrell »

janoc wrote: post #89
userbinator wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cylindrical description fits what could be hung from a balloon, however.

And it just so happens that most meteorological payloads tend to be cylindrical/small boxes. So it is possible that trigger-happy NORAD is shooting down a lot of perfectly harmless stuff now.

Most weather balloons are small. The balloon is 3ft across at the ground. The payload is phone-sized or computer-sized. The payload wouldn't be visible to fighter.

There are large scientific balloons. I couldn't find any standards of large balloons using transponders. They have communications and tracking so location is known. I wonder if NORAD is in contact with all the organizations about their balloons.

I suspect there will be move to put ADS-B on larger balloons.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#226

Post by maxerickson »

heyflyguy wrote: post #8

I wish there was more clarity on if these are balloons or not.

There's a good chance they aren't making that determination before blowing them up (instead checking whether it is known, communicating, etc).

So they call it an object because that's what they know.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#227

Post by prawn »

cududa wrote: post #51
bombcar wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original ballon was large enough to be noticed and photographed by civilians on the ground.

Isn’t it a little TOO convenient that no civilians were out on Lake Huron in the middle of winter under the objects flight path to take a picture? (/s, if that was necessary to clarify)

Is there a chance that this is a low-effort and low-risk way for China/whoever to further stir up drama in the US? "Where's the proof?" "They're making this up. I haven't seen a photo of the balloon..."

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#228

Post by giantg2 »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #182
giantg2 wrote: post #133

Imagine if you launch a balloon for say $10k so that your adversary has to spend $400k on a missile plus $70k x number of planes x hours in flight. And now do it multiple times per week. Seems like a decent strategy.

Does that 70k per plane per hour actually cost an additional 70k? If it becomes frequent enough I imagine they could start shooting down balloons in lieu of their regular training missions. Same for the missiles.

I believe that $70k is actual operating cost - fuel, maintenance, salaries, etc.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#230

Post by s1artibartfast »

lost_tourist wrote: post #68
zmanian wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The AIM-9X is infrared imaging based rather than heat signature based. The pilot resolves that contrast between the object and sky before firing the missile and missile targets the object based on the image.

Do you know what sets it off? Seems like it wouldn't be from impact as these balloon materials couldn't be comparable to say hitting another plane, right?

Adding to janderwogs response, air intercept missiles don't really deal damage with the explosion. The missiles are built with shrapnel payloads propelled by the explosion. These are what actually damage the aircraft on the receiving end.
Post reply on HN