US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast • Hacker News Board

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#231

Post by TheGuyWhoCodes » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:25 PM UTC

nsxwolf wrote: post #187

r3trohack3r wrote: post #95

There was a fun theory on UFOs I saw recently. The general premise is this: U.S. adversaries realized they couldn't compete with the U.S. on spending. So they got creative and loaded the equivalent of Pringles cans up with a bunch of sensors, hooked them up to either a balloons or relatively cheap unmanned aircraft, and sent them through U.S. airspace to collect intelligence. They'd occasionally get caught (perhaps o…

It's like Israel's "Iron Dome" interceptors. $50,000 each to take out what amounts to a $50 Estes model rocket.

I don't think it's a fair comparison because a rocket hit could be much more expensive in direct and collateral damage than 50k

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#232

Post by kylehotchkiss » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:25 PM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #9

Would be hilarious if they shutdown some high school project with a Go-Pro attached to it.

In northern Alaska? How are they getting this level of helium in the region as consumers?

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#233

Post by united893 » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:25 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #204

r3trohack3r wrote: post #95

There was a fun theory on UFOs I saw recently. The general premise is this: U.S. adversaries realized they couldn't compete with the U.S. on spending. So they got creative and loaded the equivalent of Pringles cans up with a bunch of sensors, hooked them up to either a balloons or relatively cheap unmanned aircraft, and sent them through U.S. airspace to collect intelligence. They'd occasionally get caught (perhaps o…

Those UFOs were lens flares. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEjV8DdSbs Turns out we like to spend gobs of money even when we're just chasing our shadow.

That video helps explain one property one of the UFO videos (the rotation) but doesn't explain the rest. Doesn't explain the Tic Tac videos. It does not explain why these were observed on radar as well.

While some of the videos have explanation, I would kindly encourage you to look at this with more curiosity.

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#234

Post by adolph » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:26 PM UTC

rocqua wrote: post #220

1970-01-01 wrote: post #20

We need a cheaper way to down these spy balloons. The sidewinder missile + F-22 flight time costs are an order of magnitude greater than the total cost of launching one balloon. Send over the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler (HELIOS) to protect the west coast.

What keeps a cannon from working? That would already reduce the costs by a lot, and from the visual identification it seems that 40,000 feet is well within the flight ceiling of fighter jets

Why Shooting Down China’s Spy Balloon Over The U.S. Is More Complicated Than It Seems https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/why-shooting-down-chin...

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#235

Post by andbberger » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:26 PM UTC

elmomle wrote: post #79

api wrote: post #59

So what’s the deal with these balloons? Provocation? Do they think nobody will notice?

It's boundary-pushing. They're unmanned and ambient, yet are clearly a provocation and give China an information advantage over where it would be without the balloons, and in a geopolitical sense it asserts Chinese ascendency. At the same time, it's hard for the US or other powers to figure out an appropriate response. Very similar to Russian/NK/Chinese/Israeli/American state-sponsored hacking groups--it continually…

nah, SIGINT. great way to probe the air-defense capabilities of your opponent

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#236

Post by LarryMullins » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:26 PM UTC

TheGuyWhoCodes wrote: post #231

nsxwolf wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like Israel's "Iron Dome" interceptors. $50,000 each to take out what amounts to a $50 Estes model rocket.

I don't think it's a fair comparison because a rocket hit could be much more expensive in direct and collateral damage than 50k

Yeah, a $50k missile to save even a single unoccupied house is a missile that paid for itself. And if it saves a few human lives then it was positively cheap.

If bankrupting Israel by forcing them to expend Iron Dome interceptors is Hezbollah's plan, it obviously isn't working.

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#237

Post by nsxwolf » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:27 PM UTC

TheGuyWhoCodes wrote: post #231

nsxwolf wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like Israel's "Iron Dome" interceptors. $50,000 each to take out what amounts to a $50 Estes model rocket.

I don't think it's a fair comparison because a rocket hit could be much more expensive in direct and collateral damage than 50k

True. But they're unguided, almost none of them will cause real damage, but you have no choice but to take all of them out to prevent the losses from a lucky shot - at great expense. It's a great way to drain your enemies funds, great asymmetric warfare. Casualties are just icing on the cake.

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#238

Post by GartzenDeHaes » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:28 PM UTC

themodelplumber wrote: post #105

r3trohack3r wrote: post #95

There was a fun theory on UFOs I saw recently. The general premise is this: U.S. adversaries realized they couldn't compete with the U.S. on spending. So they got creative and loaded the equivalent of Pringles cans up with a bunch of sensors, hooked them up to either a balloons or relatively cheap unmanned aircraft, and sent them through U.S. airspace to collect intelligence. They'd occasionally get caught (perhaps o…

Funny, though tbh it seems like there are cheaper ways to cause the US to spend gobs of cash. I even hesitate to mention some ideas that immediately come to mind that would be easier/more efficient to really nail than the Pringles can idea. Plus many of the more prominent base-personnel sightings land quite a bit far from that particular ballpark. Take a look into the Rendlesham Forest incident for example. The probl…

If you know something about how the USAF responds to incidents, the idea of the deputy base commander and disaster preparedness running around in the middle of the night chasing UFO's is hilarious. It's obviously a practical joke that got out of hand.

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#239

Post by cm2187 » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:28 PM UTC

1970-01-01 wrote: post #20

We need a cheaper way to down these spy balloons. The sidewinder missile + F-22 flight time costs are an order of magnitude greater than the total cost of launching one balloon. Send over the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler (HELIOS) to protect the west coast.

The big balloon from earlier this month was more like a satellite hanging from a balloon. Not sure it was that cheap.

The problem is what can you fly that has a cannon and can reach those altitudes. Apparently only the F22 and F15 could, and that was their very limit.

Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

#240

Post by oneoff786 » Fri, Feb 10, 2023, 10:28 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #211

elmomle wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's boundary-pushing. They're unmanned and ambient, yet are clearly a provocation and give China an information advantage over where it would be without the balloons, and in a geopolitical sense it asserts Chinese ascendency. At the same time, it's hard for the US or other powers to figure out an appropriate response. Very similar to Russian/NK/Chinese/Israeli/American state-sponsored hacking groups--it continually…

If I were Russia (which is not far from Alaska) I would launch these at random intervals with junk COTS electronics just to confuse matters. The cost of each launch can probably be denominated in thousands.

Damn that’s cheaper than 10 mobiks