12 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

I saw the photo but I wasn't sure if it was genuine.

At least one of the photos I've seen floating around was a photoshop based on an older photo of an F-22.

This whole thing is bizarre.  I don't know who or what to believe.  I am certainly skeptical of anything that comes from govt. sources, and the media is doing it's usual hype and sensationalizing of the issue.

The most plausible explanation is that these are surveillance balloons and craft, likely Chinese, Russian, or North Korean.  Their spy satellites are probably not as good as ours, so this is a cheap and easy way for them to get low-level high-res pictures and video of our territory.

There seems to be evidence that these surveillance flights have been occurring for some time, yet all of the sudden the public finds out about them and now they've shot down 4 in a few days.  Is this a "oops, they know about them now so we better do something", or something else?  Who knows?

My guess is that either the military didn't detect these craft before, which is very concerning, or that they knew about them but decided for some reason to do nothing and also not tell the political leadership about them, which is just as concerning.

More bizarre stuff, which I'm actually kinda getting used to lately.

Dave

45 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

The most plausible explanation is that these are surveillance balloons and craft, likely Chinese, Russian, or North Korean.  Their spy satellites are probably not as good as ours, so this is a cheap and easy way for them to get low-level high-res pictures and video of our territory.

This makes perfect sense to me, with the addition that the balloons would also allow for things like gathering radio communications and other electronic intelligence as well. One other possible use is that in the case of a major war, someone might start shooting down or disabling satellites and these balloons would make for a good back-up plan.

I suspect them not being noticed could well be as simple as no one was really expecting them, and thus weren't actively  looking for them. NORAD was formed to watch for, and defend against, bombers, ICBMs and, more recently, hijacked aircraft. Tuning radars to exclude slow moving balloons (how many innocent weather balloons are there floating around?) would thus make sense. It wouldn't be the first time anyone, including the military, got too focused on one mission and missed something else. Hindsight is (almost) always 20/20. To me the big question is how do they go about dealing with these in the future (this might be getting a little too close to politics though)?

6 hours ago, jon b said:

Wow you fly the space shuttle !

No but I do have a license to fly the Shuttle in Canadian airspace and it wouldn't be a lie.😁

Is it really all that surprising that the aliens love Alaska? Wide open spaces. Fewer civil authorities sticking noses into daily lives. Low pollution. Nice scenery !

Listen very ,very carefully to these lyrics ……….it’s a false flag event in preparation for something nasty and distinctly man made, nothing alien to see here in my opinion.

God, I wish I was back in 1984.

Edited February 13, 20233 yr by jon b

13 hours ago, birdguy said:

Is 'baloon' the British way of spelling what call a 'balloon' or did you misspell the word?

Noel

He misspelled the word. It is usually you Americans that start canceling letters in words (example provided)

Edited February 14, 20233 yr by Christopher Low

What a waste of Sidewinders at about $300,000 per shot - at balloons probably costing a fraction of the price. It all seems to be a bit over-dramatic to me.
F-22's and F-35's have 20mm and 25mm cannons respectively, with plenty of rounds.
A quick burst from these would surely bring them down, whether they are all balloons or not.
And giving one of these balloons a 'slow puncture'  might bring it down under control to enable more debris to be collected, or be more intact.

I have to say, listening to the formal top level reporting from the top of the government and air force, whoever it is doing this must be laughing at the amount of fuss it has caused.
And the way they have 'congratulated' the pilots for bringing down a balloon with a missile, when they train at a much harder level (9G dogfights etc. against potential enemy fighters etc.) is also a bit sickly - it isn't exactly a heroic task for them. 

Not putting the pilots down by the way, just the usual show-boating officials at the top that seem to make a meal out of everything without giving any meaningful information.
They love their time in the limelight don't they?

 

Edited February 14, 20233 yr by bobcat999

36 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

What a waste of Sidewinders at about $300,000 per shot - at balloons probably costing a fraction of the price. It all seems to be a bit over-dramatic to me.
F-22's and F-35's have 20mm and 25mm cannons respectively, with plenty of rounds.
A quick burst from these would surely bring them down, whether they are all balloons or not.

 

 

I explained why a missile was used earlier. Cannons don't work. Missiles have been shown to be the way to go.

 

Quote

 

Not live missiles though. They used a Sidewinder Aim9X for the Chinese balloon which is TV guided and it had no warhead. Like archery practice. 😄

The Canadians did try using cannon to take balloons down a while back, and it was a disaster, despite hitting the balloon multiple times, the helium just slowly leaked and the balloon stayed aloft. Then there's the problem of having to approach a 200 foot wide balloon (recent Chinese balloon take down) to cannon range and be able to bank away in time, despite being at 60,000 feet and at Mach 1.3. Stall speed for an F22 at 60,000 is a fraction under the speed of sound. 650 MPH I recall. 65,000 is the F22 claimed max altitude. 

Not sure about these new objects, I heard it was still an Aim9X but not sure if it was equipped with a warhead. 

 

 

 

14 hours ago, goates said:

I suspect them not being noticed could well be as simple as no one was really expecting them, and thus weren't actively  looking for them.

 

I read the other day, that helium balloons have a very low radar return, after all, its just a gas bag. And that it was after a recent radar technology update that they started to notice them. 

So I read anyway, and of course I cant vouch for the veracity. 

4 minutes ago, martin-w said:

I explained why a missile was used earlier. Cannons don't work. Missiles have been shown to be the way to go.

Thanks for the clarification - I must have missed that.  It makes sense.  

15 hours ago, dave2013 said:

The most plausible explanation is that these are surveillance balloons and craft, likely Chinese, Russian, or North Korean.  Their spy satellites are probably not as good as ours, so this is a cheap and easy way for them to get low-level high-res pictures and video of our territory

 

China has a very sophisticated and capable spy satellite capability. And we know that the first balloon was Chinese. I suspect Russia has some pretty sophisticated tech in regard to satellites too. However there are advantages to balloons, and even the US over the past few years has spent money on the technology according to the article below. 

https://time.com/6252673/chinese-spy-balloon-satellite/

 

Quote

 

Yet even with satellite technology surpassing some abilities of balloons, James Char, a research fellow with the China Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, tells TIME that spy balloons have some operational advantages. For example, balloons can weather extreme conditions, he says, and are less expensive to deploy and operate compared to satellites. Chinese Academy of Science scholars found in 2020 that, despite harsh environments at more than 68,000 feet above ground, “the high-altitude balloon has long endurance time, which can achieve sustained and wider coverage for regional observation and detection.”

“It is harder to be spotted by radar as well, given the fact that they’re simpler in terms of technology,” Char adds. U.S. officials admitted the balloon flying over North America this week was first spotted by civilians on a plane.

High-altitude balloons can also be “trucks for any number of platforms, whether it be communication and data link nodes, ISR, tracking air and missile threats — and without the predictable orbits of satellites,” Tom Karako, senior fellow for the International Security Program and director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Politico.

And though the technology is old, says Bec Shrimpton, director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, balloons can complement surveillance technology in orbit, while they can be built and deployed at a fraction of the cost. According to a 2020 analysis in defense publication Armada International, the development, launch, operation, and insurance of a single satellite can cost up to $300 million.

 

 

Sometimes old tech still has its uses. 

Edited February 14, 20233 yr by martin-w

5 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

Thanks for the clarification - I must have missed that.  It makes sense.  

 

Guess how many cannon rounds the Canadians fired at a balloon, and it still remained aloft?

 

1000! 😄

Embarrassing. 

 

Edited February 14, 20233 yr by martin-w

56 minutes ago, martin-w said:

Guess how many cannon rounds the Canadians fired at a balloon, and it still remained aloft?

1000! 😄

Embarrassing. 

Wow!  I suppose if the rounds enter but only make 20mm holes, the helium will take a long time to leak, but also, the helium trapped at the top of the balloon will still help to keep it aloft; even if it is only the top half or even top third of the balloon.  I suppose they only use kinetic rounds these days.  They may need to go back to incendiary! 

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

China has a very sophisticated and capable spy satellite capability.

They are not as good as what we have, and that's all I can say.  Trust me on that.

Dave