Chinese spy balloon over US
The following users liked this post:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...trump-thought/
Summary: Yes, there were incursions by spy balloons in the prev administration. Yes, they were detected by the US intelligence community incl the armed forces. NO they did NOT advise the prev WH admin or president, for apparent political purposes.
A bit more detail is in order.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...trump-thought/
Summary: Yes, there were incursions by spy balloons in the prev administration. Yes, they were detected by the US intelligence community incl the armed forces. NO they did NOT advise the prev WH admin or president, for apparent political purposes.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...trump-thought/
Summary: Yes, there were incursions by spy balloons in the prev administration. Yes, they were detected by the US intelligence community incl the armed forces. NO they did NOT advise the prev WH admin or president, for apparent political purposes.
The former US president could have destroyed the balloon simply by thinking about it.
As an aside don’t some folks install ADS-B on high altitude WX balloons? Seems like a safe/friendly thing to do if your intentions are honourable.
Plus if your WX Balloon is blown off course and outside your national boundaries wouldn’t it be a good idea to advise other countries under potential flight paths of such an event?
The Chinese seem to repeat endlessly that the balloon “Went off course”. However, no so called ‘reporter’ I have seen ever asks: “Where was the balloon bound for when it ‘went off course’ and how were you controlling its movements?” It seems to be a very obvious question to ask.
As an aside don’t some folks install ADS-B on high altitude WX balloons? Seems like a safe/friendly thing to do if your intentions are honourable.
Plus if your WX Balloon is blown off course and outside your national boundaries wouldn’t it be a good idea to advise other countries under potential flight paths of such an event?
The Chinese seem to repeat endlessly that the balloon “Went off course”. However, no so called ‘reporter’ I have seen ever asks: “Where was the balloon bound for when it ‘went off course’ and how were you controlling its movements?” It seems to be a very obvious question to ask.
Last edited by albatross; 6th Feb 2023 at 20:49.
"Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL): My office has been briefed by the office of the Secretary of Defense of the current Pentagon that it happened over Florida, it happened over Texas, and that it’s happened before. We have more detailed questions but what is unclear, Stuart, at this point is, did the Pentagon under the Trump Administration brief the Trump White House and give them the option to take action or did they decide not to brief them for whatever reason? And there is some speculation, I talked to Trump administration officials over the weekend, that the Pentagon deliberately did it because they thought Trump would be too provocative and too aggressive. So that’s what we need to get to the bottom of and one person that I’m waiting to hear from that we haven’t heard from that list is former Secretary of Defense, General Mattis who was the secretary during this time period. What did he know and what did he decide to pass on and brief to the president."
So far, Gen Mattis has been incommunicado WRT this official statement of previous incursions. Some perspective is in order, as the named Gen Mattis is also the same poltroon who decided to call the good ole buddy Chinese Chairman Xi after the 2020 election to warn the Chairman that he would interfere with any action taken by the Trump WH directed at China. So, we already know he's a traitor, just at this point if he has always been a traitor. And, if there were overflights by China during the prev administration, given the general hatred by everyone of Trump - wouldn't it have made a huge, massive, giant media splash at the time to discredit the then current prez? So, they didn't publicize if for anti-Trump messaging, and they didn't tell Trump for their own political ends, or they in fact did tell Trump and he did nothing about it. Given his well stated political views on relations with China? hmmmmm.
....Not to forget, the (near vacuum) atmosphere between 60-70K feet and 300+km gives (how minimal) optic distortion, which is avoided, when the optics+camera are dangling under a balloon.....
Surely most distortion will occur in the lower atmosphere where man-made effects (rising heat etc) and natural turbulance exist?
Surely most distortion will occur in the lower atmosphere where man-made effects (rising heat etc) and natural turbulance exist?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 70
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
At 58,000’ air density is thin such that the F-22 would need about 220 KEAS to stay airborne and have any maneuvering capability. That equivalent airspeed equals M 1.2 and 260-ish calibrated. All boils down to a true airspeed of around 670 knots. So, a gun attack, if the gun opened, would be closing on the target at about 1200 feet per second and would open fire around 2,000’ range. No room for safe escape, high risk of collision.
the next problem with the gun is projectile dispersion, risk of hitting the payload. 50,000’ is limit for opening the gun door.
The AIM-9X can guide of light contrast in addition to IR, and can be targeted by datalink from the F-22 radar.
The PRC/CCP will seek to be outraged about anything it can and certainly won't thank the US. Most of what its spokespeople say is to please The Big Boss or is for domestic consumption...or to be disingenuous and play the victim card. They knew what could happen with this 'weather balloon, they've certainly done it before and now they are manufacturing outrage to save face and avoid feeling shame. If they think they can get away with it they will keep doing it. There is no concept of 'wrong & right' as you or I may conceive it. The nearest you will get is 'As long as I'm not found out it doesn't matter'.
At 58,000’ air density is thin such that the F-22 would need about 220 KEAS to stay airborne and have any maneuvering capability. That equivalent airspeed equals M 1.2 and 260-ish calibrated. All boils down to a true airspeed of around 670 knots. So, a gun attack, if the gun opened, would be closing on the target at about 1200 feet per second and would open fire around 2,000’ range. No room for safe escape, high risk of collision.
the next problem with the gun is projectile dispersion, risk of hitting the payload. 50,000’ is limit for opening the gun door.
The AIM-9X can guide of light contrast in addition to IR, and can be targeted by datalink from the F-22 radar.
the next problem with the gun is projectile dispersion, risk of hitting the payload. 50,000’ is limit for opening the gun door.
The AIM-9X can guide of light contrast in addition to IR, and can be targeted by datalink from the F-22 radar.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....Not to forget, the (near vacuum) atmosphere between 60-70K feet and 300+km gives (how minimal) optic distortion, which is avoided, when the optics+camera are dangling under a balloon.....
Surely most distortion will occur in the lower atmosphere where man-made effects (rising heat etc) and natural turbulance exist?
Surely most distortion will occur in the lower atmosphere where man-made effects (rising heat etc) and natural turbulance exist?
Edit: Have a look at a Chinese spy expert, explaining the advantages of spy balloons (including better resolutions):
CNN reporter asks Chinese official about suspected spy balloon.
Last edited by WideScreen; 7th Feb 2023 at 06:41. Reason: Added third-party source.
The following users liked this post:
That's why I was asking about the computer aided targeting - one could set up the target based on radar from several miles back, line up as if to pass the balloon on one side (or below), and then turn (or pull up) so the gun sweeps across the target and the firing solution computer pulls the trigger when the round would pass through the target space. The plane's path would not line up for more than a fraction of a second and would carry off to the side. Collision and a 2000ft approach is clearly a problem if it requires Skywalker to decide when to pull the trigger, but not for HAL. Even better if HAL was told the plan and handled the maneuver from the initial line-up. The balloon, being the target, should offer a large enough margin for the timing to work out.
Simpler way would be pilot points the aircraft in the direction of the balloon, designates the target in suitable way, pulls the trigger at a suitable distance. missile launches, senses target (see below), meanwhile pilot rolls aircraft away and heads off home for tea, toast and medals. I'm not sure why guns would enter into the thinking...
And to emphasise the point made by myself earlier and another poster upthread, the likes of Raytheon have moved on from using dumb seeker heads that sense something pushing out a lot of energy at the longer IR wavelengths (e.g. produced by an object at jet pipe temperature). They're now using imaging arrays capable of working in the near visual IR and possibly the visual range ....The balloon would probably be an easy target, especially against a contrasting (in both visual and in the IR ) background.
Last edited by wiggy; 7th Feb 2023 at 14:51. Reason: Fixing a hot v cold error
One defuser tactic might be for the USA to publically state that the status of the wreckage that was recovered was indeterminate regarding providing positive proof of the balloon's function as a reconnaissance or a meteorological platform.
Then behind the scenes give the full story of any documented proof to the appropriste Chinese agency.
Then behind the scenes give the full story of any documented proof to the appropriste Chinese agency.
I find it funny that the “media” is reporting that 3 times during the Trump administration, Undetected Chinese ballon’s crossed the U.S. If they were undetected how did they know it happened 3 times.
I love this word “Undetected”. Sounds just like a Who’s On First skit.
“How did you know it even happened if it was undetected?”
-“Because we didn’t see it.”
“Then you detected it.”
-“No, it was undetected because we didn’t see it”
“So how did you know it was there?”
-“Because we didn’t see it.”
I love this word “Undetected”. Sounds just like a Who’s On First skit.
“How did you know it even happened if it was undetected?”
-“Because we didn’t see it.”
“Then you detected it.”
-“No, it was undetected because we didn’t see it”
“So how did you know it was there?”
-“Because we didn’t see it.”
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd be thinking more in term of KISS, or in other words, why even think of making it that complicated? I'd also be wondering how much RF associated stuff, especially related to fire control, you'd want to be squirting at a possibly intelligence gathering balloon.
Simpler way would be pilot points the aircraft in the direction of the balloon, designates the target in suitable way, pulls the trigger at a suitable distance. missile launches, senses target (see below), meanwhile pilot rolls aircraft away and heads off home for tea, toast and medals. I'm not sure why guns would enter into the thinking...
And to emphasise the point made by myself earlier and another poster upthread, the likes of Raytheon have moved on from using dumb seeker heads that sense something pushing out a lot of energy at the longer IR wavelengths (e.g. produced by an object at jet pipe temperature). They're now using imaging arrays capable of working in the near visual IR and possibly the visual range ....The balloon would probably be an easy target, especially against a contrasting (in both visual and in the IR ) background.
Simpler way would be pilot points the aircraft in the direction of the balloon, designates the target in suitable way, pulls the trigger at a suitable distance. missile launches, senses target (see below), meanwhile pilot rolls aircraft away and heads off home for tea, toast and medals. I'm not sure why guns would enter into the thinking...
And to emphasise the point made by myself earlier and another poster upthread, the likes of Raytheon have moved on from using dumb seeker heads that sense something pushing out a lot of energy at the longer IR wavelengths (e.g. produced by an object at jet pipe temperature). They're now using imaging arrays capable of working in the near visual IR and possibly the visual range ....The balloon would probably be an easy target, especially against a contrasting (in both visual and in the IR ) background.
The reason for trajectory planning for a gun? Because not every problem benefits from an air-to-air missile. To recover the instrument package with the least damage a few shots (they can make multiple passes) would ventilate the balloon to a suitable descent rate.
