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

US jet shoots down unknown object flying off Alaska coast

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 864 posts

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

#491

Post by _boffin_ »

jcrites wrote: post #399
cm2187 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but none of those things are cheap. A cannon is.

True, but the max effective range of the F-22’s 20mm M61A2 Vulcan cannon is about 2000 feet (600m), which isn’t nearly enough to engage these balloons — assuming an F-22 is flying at 40,000 ft. vs. a balloon at 60,000 ft. Even if the ceiling of the F-22 is substantially higher than 40,000 ft. (which I think is plausible), and is close enough to effectively engage these balloons, then I doubt that the Air Force would…

You may what to change up your definition of a 20mm round against a balloon. The statistics you reference is about accuracy and penetration. Take a look at distance until subsonic.

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

#492

Post by doodlebugging »

timeon wrote: post #456
doodlebugging wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many Olympic-sized swimming pools is that?

For better picture, Olympic-sized swimming pool is 50 meters long.

Thanks. It's also half as wide as it is long and 2 meters deep. That still is not a useful comparison if the audience has never seen one. It's a comparison without a useful reference. I always thought it funny and nearly worthless for an author or announcer to describe the volume of something in terms of Olympic swimming pools as if everyone listening or reading had a useful frame of reference in that comparison.

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

#493

Post by hinkley »

ok_computer wrote: post #475
irrational wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe Japanese fire balloons during WWII? "One of the most unusual military actions of World War II came in the form of Japanese balloon bombs, or “Fugos,” directed at the mainland United States. Starting in 1944, the Japanese military constructed and launched over 9,000 high-altitude balloons, each loaded with nearly 50 pounds of anti-personnel and incendiary explosives. Amazingly, these unmanned balloons originated…

Geologists were able to reduce the search area for the origin of these balloons using the mineral composition of sand in the sand bags. The airforce then bombed hydrogen generating facilities nearby the suspected launch sites. Section offense and defense https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu-Go_balloon_bomb

Did we have operatives taking sand samples or was that some over-exuberant librarian who got to say "I told you so" to their bosses?

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

#494

Post by lamontcg »

kylehotchkiss wrote: post #232
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?

Buy a K cylinder from Airgas in Fairbanks and ship it to wherever you are.

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

#495

Post by Server6 »

PaulWaldman wrote: post #490

Is there a reason F-22s are being used to take these balloons down? Is it to take advantage of a training opportunity? I would think less advanced aircraft may be more cost effective to operate.

Probably to send a message to China more than anything.

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

#496

Post by LgWoodenBadger »

jcrites wrote: post #399
cm2187 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but none of those things are cheap. A cannon is.

True, but the max effective range of the F-22’s 20mm M61A2 Vulcan cannon is about 2000 feet (600m), which isn’t nearly enough to engage these balloons — assuming an F-22 is flying at 40,000 ft. vs. a balloon at 60,000 ft. Even if the ceiling of the F-22 is substantially higher than 40,000 ft. (which I think is plausible), and is close enough to effectively engage these balloons, then I doubt that the Air Force would…

There are regular competitions at sea level with .30 cal rounds at ranges of 1000 yards.

600m is likely the default battle-zero, but it is nowhere near the maximum range of a 30mm round.

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

#497

Post by supercheetah »

jasmer wrote: post #461
tsimionescu wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your own government has a much higher ability to affect your life than China does, so what you're saying is completely irrational. Not that it's OK for the Chinese to spy on us, mind you, or to claim that they don't have nefarious purposes.

Moral relativism between US and China is unfathomable. They are not remotely comparable on the whole. China has a Dictator, a total absence of a Justice System, total surveillance and censorship, and large swaths of the population of some regions in concentration camps, a large number of individual dedicated to holding in place that apparatus. Meanwhile you're free to walk down the street and tell the US President he…

No such comparison was being made. The issue is whether or not the US or Chinese government affect our lives more, and since there's no danger of China trying to invade the US anytime soon, it's obviously the former. The Chinese don't care about watching the average person.

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

#498

Post by CydeWeys »

PaulWaldman wrote: post #490

Is there a reason F-22s are being used to take these balloons down? Is it to take advantage of a training opportunity? I would think less advanced aircraft may be more cost effective to operate.

The F-22s are the most capable and are thus what are actually on-station as a reaction force, plus they have the highest flight ceiling which is relevant for taking out some of these balloons.

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

#499

Post by timeon »

jffry wrote: post #366
anigbrowl wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American no abstract good

I could tell you the Curiosity rover is 2.9m × 2.7m × 2.2m and 899kg, but it's far more immediately evocative to say it's about the size and mass of a typical sedan.

Even if typical sedan is something that is quite common I still prefer actual measurements so I can reference it to something that I am personally more familiar with. I know that one can fit typical sedan inside 2.5m x 5m parallel parking spot but so does SUV and Fiat Punto.

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

#500

Post by justapassenger »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #470
WestCoastJustin wrote: post #441

I feel sorry for the pool soul who decided to send up their DIY weather balloon with gopro to get that space shot. Who knows he might even have a video of a F-22 sending a missile over.

How much does a weather baloon cost? ...compared to a F22 flight, a missle + all the logistics? If it's cheap enough, there will probably be youtubers and tiktokers buying them en-masse just "for the lulz".

Add cost of SWAT team raiding your home, getting on the terrorist watch and few other fun things.
Post reply on HN