Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I doubt that. There are no reports or sightings and there are no leaks. Someone would have leaked that if it occurred.
[flagged]
US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
341–350 of 864 posts
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#342We 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 balloon shot down last week was likely order of magnitude more expensive than the Sidewinder that shot it down. Someone posted link to similar sized NASA balloon that cost $1 million for just the balloon and maybe platform but not the payload.
It might be possible to shoot down balloons with unguided rockets. It depends on how close the fighter can get and how accurate the rockets are. Rockets are super cheap.
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Iron Dome is selective and only fires when the trajectory will go to a built up area.
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#344I dread to think of all the state-funded technology companies with backdoor-ed firmware/software coming out of China
While RSA isn't a state-funded technology company, they did accept a $10M payment from the NSA to make their BSafe security product default to use the DUAL_EC_DRBG cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator. Which the NSA had designed and backdoored... https://www.theverge.com/2013/12/20/5231006/nsa-paid-10-mill...
Are the primary sources on this story from the Snowden leaks available somewhere? Even the article here points to another Reuters article which isn't available any more, and I've never been able to find out which documents people were referencing about this?
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#345F-22 entered service 2005
Air to air kills since entered service:
2005-2022: 0
2023: 2
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pringles cans have never been observed to move in ways that violate Newton's laws
Given the possibilities of an alien spacecraft observed on Earth violating the known laws of physics, or some error on the part of the observer, I'm going with the latter every time. First, prove that everything we know about physics is wrong at a fundamental, irreconcilable level. Then explain why our completely wrong models of physics still work as well as they do. Then explain the Fermi Paradox in light of the app…
> Given the possibilities of an alien spacecraft observed on Earth violating the known laws of physics, or some error on the part of the observer, I'm going with the latter every time.
You know, it isn't (physically) necessary to choose anything.
> First, prove that everything we know about physics is wrong at a fundamental, irreconcilable level.
Why does everything have to be wrong, in an irreconcilable manner?
> Don't get me wrong, I want it to be true.
I dunno man, the opposite seems to be the case - are you not at least suffering from motivated reasoning, to some degree?
> I want some fate for humanity other than us slowly choking to death on our own poison, alone on this island in the midst of vast seas of infinity.
Me too!! Consider this idea: our cultural tendency to form beliefs absent of proof (therefore: faith based, which is usually considered a big no no) causes substantial harm, and our tendency to write it off as "that's just people" or (begrudgingly) as "well, of course I'm only expressing my opinion, that's what everyone is always doing" are not proper common sense and reasonableness, but rather are emergent behaviors that cause humanity to be permanently stuck in a local maxima (on certain dimensions, while ongoing successes in specific domains like science, engineering, computing, etc make it appear like we have our shit substantially together comprehensively).
Of course, this is speculation - but what if it is actually true to a non-trivial degree?
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#347Cheap balloon vs expensive missile, seems a good way to bankrupt us by sending continuous balloons.
The USAF pops off live missiles while training from time to time, so these could just come from that supply, and not really cost anything. Shooting down balloons is a good enough training exercise.
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s definitely not their limit since they can shoot down satellites at the altitude of the International Space Station. And that’s the stuff we’re allowed to know about.
Could they shoot down the ISS, if they wanted? Isn't that thing moving insanely fast? haha. Not a space guy but always found it interesting.
The SM-3, which is launched from ships for ballistic missile defense, can be used as anti-satellite missile. Its ceiling is supposed to be 1000 km. Which means could reach ISS.
It was tested in 2008 to destroy failed recon satellite.
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#349I’m releasing a high altitude balloon soon for a prize competition. Whoever guesses the closest landing zone of the balloon wins a new cybertruck. Just a silly promotion for my startup. I really hope my balloon gets shot down by a US jet, the free pr would be great for us. Unlikely my balloon will cross the pond though.
Re: US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast
#350> Daytime temperatures Friday were about minus 17 degrees Fahrenheit (27 degrees Celsius).
Oops.. minus 27 degrees Celsius. Yes, you might assume the `minus` applies to both, you only have to go up 17 degrees Fahrenheit for the signs not to match (better to be specific).