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

U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 171 posts

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#81

Post by micromacrofoot »

lightedman wrote: post #51
jpgvm wrote: post #30

Pretty interesting platform. Looks to have around 16x300W solar panels, so roughly 4.8KW. A lot but no unreasonable given it has 4 electric turbines and it would take a lot of grunt to influence a balloon of that size especially given air density altitude. If it is a civilian craft it's either government or maybe one of the big Chinese universities. Supporting the spy angle is the pretty obvious connectivity (looks t…

"surely a satellite does what this does but better?" Nope, which is why Google and Apple pay heavily for on-the-ground recording and aerial photography for their maps.

yeah but this balloon wasn’t doing sunny day photo flybys, it was up in the stratosphere and couldn’t even be controlled predictably

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#82

Post by mfkp »

jpgvm wrote: post #30

Pretty interesting platform. Looks to have around 16x300W solar panels, so roughly 4.8KW. A lot but no unreasonable given it has 4 electric turbines and it would take a lot of grunt to influence a balloon of that size especially given air density altitude. If it is a civilian craft it's either government or maybe one of the big Chinese universities. Supporting the spy angle is the pretty obvious connectivity (looks t…

$100k of solar? 360w panels are sub-$300 at full retail prices. So that's under $5k of panels (unless you're including batteries in the calculation, but even then, it's maybe $10k).

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#83

Post by amscanne »

atomicnumber3 wrote: post #22

[flagged]

I know the whole “land shouldn’t vote” thing is used to criticize the electoral college, but within the state what exactly are you referring to? I can’t think of any mechanism that wouldn’t be a simple tyranny of the majority but it sounds like you’re implying something more sinister.

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#84

Post by yencabulator »

evan_ wrote: post #27

Was this "selfie" literally taken handheld with a cell phone by the person in the shot? Surely they wouldn't bring personal phones into the cockpit- and wouldn't they be wearing gloves anyway?

> and wouldn't they be wearing gloves anyway?

Pro-tip, Android phones can usually take a photo by double-pressing power and then using volume up or down as shutter button. Works without unlocking, easy to do with gloves on or in the dark.

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#85

Post by yencabulator »

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #62
evan_ wrote: post #27

Was this "selfie" literally taken handheld with a cell phone by the person in the shot? Surely they wouldn't bring personal phones into the cockpit- and wouldn't they be wearing gloves anyway?

"The Standard Flying Gloves worn by American military aviators since the 1960s are also touch screen compatible." https://gibson-barnes.com/product/apparel/flying-gloves/touc... (sorry for using a random store as a source) Given that we often see USAF pilot selfies online, it's clearly allowed at (special?) times. But as others have said, this was probably asked specifically for PR reasons.

U-2 isn't just some random plane. They wear essentially space suits. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a30362885...

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#87

Post by Infinity315 »

harles wrote: post #54
jpgvm wrote: post #30

Pretty interesting platform. Looks to have around 16x300W solar panels, so roughly 4.8KW. A lot but no unreasonable given it has 4 electric turbines and it would take a lot of grunt to influence a balloon of that size especially given air density altitude. If it is a civilian craft it's either government or maybe one of the big Chinese universities. Supporting the spy angle is the pretty obvious connectivity (looks t…

> surely a satellite does what this does but better? China has no shortage of high quality spy satellites. Maybe not. Satellites are highly predictable and things can be tucked neatly away when they’re known to be overhead.

> Satellites are highly predictable and things can be tucked neatly away when they’re known to be overhead.

And the same can't be said for a balloon which flies wherever the wind takes it? Does China think NORAD is a joke or that we're incapable of modelling weather patterns?

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#88

Post by zabzonk »

Manuel_D wrote: post #38
sokoloff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The F-15 can regularly climb over FL600 and, under special conditions, has exceeded 100K above MSL.

In level flight or in a zoom climb? It's one thing to build up speed and pitch up in an ballistic arc, it's another thing to fly level at altitude.

the venerable english electric lightning (RAF) intercepted a u2 at 66k feet during a nato exercise under full control. it also made it to 86K feet, but that was a zoom climb, and the pilot seems to have found the experience rather scary.

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#89

Post by [deleted] »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #79
jpgvm wrote: post #30

Pretty interesting platform. Looks to have around 16x300W solar panels, so roughly 4.8KW. A lot but no unreasonable given it has 4 electric turbines and it would take a lot of grunt to influence a balloon of that size especially given air density altitude. If it is a civilian craft it's either government or maybe one of the big Chinese universities. Supporting the spy angle is the pretty obvious connectivity (looks t…

>4.8kw of panels >has $100k of solar on it Tell me you live in CA without telling me you live in CA

[deleted]

Re: U-2 pilot's selfie above China's balloon taken over Missouri

#90

Post by atomicnumber3 »

amscanne wrote: post #83
atomicnumber3 wrote: post #22

[flagged]

I know the whole “land shouldn’t vote” thing is used to criticize the electoral college, but within the state what exactly are you referring to? I can’t think of any mechanism that wouldn’t be a simple tyranny of the majority but it sounds like you’re implying something more sinister.

I mainly mean that Missouri is a super Red state despite the majority of the population being liberal. They just all live in the 3-4 counties that comprise the St. Louis and Kansas City areas, and Republicans in power use all the usual tricks to disenfranchise more liberal voters. Compared to, say, Seattle/WA, voting in Missouri is clearly designed to make it hard for "certain types" of people to have a say in their governance.

(Plus, yeah, I don't like the "land shouldn't vote" part of the electoral college either).

Post reply on HN