So the F-22 is now 3-0 against balloons? And people had the audacity to call this plane a "failure"!
The F-22 was never called a failure. The main criticism is that we didn't make enough of them.
US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
51–60 of 526 posts
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#52Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#53Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#54I think China erred by sending such a large balloon that was visible to the naked eye, causing the American public to demand it be shot down. There's no hard rule about where national airspace ends and space begins.. a lot of times they fly too high for planes to reach, and under certain circumstances balloons are allowed through national airspace.. so if the balloon isn't causing a problem (like being a hazard to ai…
They are probably going to keep making blunders like this, now that internal leadership (source of many internal blunders in recent years) has been consolidated / stabilized, and they are still aiming for more international power.
The degree of de facto stabilization will dictate whether e.g. the US may be able to transform this opportunity into an effective new policy framework aimed at leverage in rather obvious blind spots. That could be pretty huge.
I have a hunch that we'll also see an increasing number of opportunities for the US or other nations to effectively call out China's future tendency toward expeditionary blunders in South America, Africa, etc.
Right now Chinese leadership does not want to be seen "bending" in this way or that, by their internal audience. But not doing so is a huge risk factor for them in international diplomacy.
Whether the US or any other country really takes advantage of the opportunity and resulting partial leadership vacuum in the international space will be interesting to see.
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#55I think China erred by sending such a large balloon that was visible to the naked eye, causing the American public to demand it be shot down. There's no hard rule about where national airspace ends and space begins.. a lot of times they fly too high for planes to reach, and under certain circumstances balloons are allowed through national airspace.. so if the balloon isn't causing a problem (like being a hazard to ai…
And might I add, their reaction after it was shot down was anything but reassuring (that it was just a weather balloon)
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#56I think China erred by sending such a large balloon that was visible to the naked eye, causing the American public to demand it be shot down. There's no hard rule about where national airspace ends and space begins.. a lot of times they fly too high for planes to reach, and under certain circumstances balloons are allowed through national airspace.. so if the balloon isn't causing a problem (like being a hazard to ai…
> If China never sent that large balloon.. they could have sent a dozen more small ones and no one would have cared.. just like we never cared about the 3 during the previous administration.
As evidence to this claim, you'll see that many articles are actively discussing the fact that these balloons are relatively common. The big difference here, American citizens could see this object with just their eyes (uncommon for a balloon). I do buy the argument that China overplayed their hand.
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#57...with Canada's permission; I think that should be said explicitly.
article states that it was on Canada's orders.
I didn't know that was a thing, Canadian PM having the power to command US jets.
Can anyone who knows more about NORAD weigh in with an ELI5?
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#58Surely this is not the world's slowest declaration of war? Whoever country is sending whatever these artificial objects are, what can they possibly gain from this?
I don’t know exactly how fast the air currents at 40,000-60,000 feet will drive a balloon, but I would assume that this most recent balloon was already airborne by the time the previous one was discovered. As long as they don’t launch anymore starting last week, this particular episode should wind down peacefully.
As to why use balloons instead of satellites, the most reasonable speculation I’ve seen is that they’re collecting signals intelligence (radio traffic, etc.) which is not accessible from orbital distances.
Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#59Re: US aircraft shoots down new airborne object over Canada
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how China would willfully continue send these balloons without expecting a symmetrical escalation. Sure, they managed to send a few relatively undetected until the past recent weeks, but continued attempts would surely produce a physical response from NATO states, whether that's sending balloons of their own or overflying Chinese territory with other aircraft, or increased signals intelligence operations.
>symmetrical escalation So like what, a similar but bigger balloon?
No, more like X-37B, but perhaps one that can skim the atmosphere, i.e. with scramjet propulsion.