BREAKING: US military shoots down 'high altitude object' over Alaskan waters

[Michie]

“The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight."

On Friday, National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby said in a press conference that the United States military downed "a high altitude object" that had traveled into US airspace over Alaska.

"So I can confirm that the Department of Defense was tracking a high altitude object over Alaska airspace in the last 24 hours," Kirby said. "The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight. Out of an abundance of caution at the recommendation of the Pentagon, President Biden ordered the military to down the object and they."

Continued below.

BREAKING: US military shoots down ‘high altitude object’ over Alaskan waters

“The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight.”

thepostmillennial.com

 

[chevyontheriver]

“The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight."

On Friday, National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby said in a press conference that the United States military downed "a high altitude object" that had traveled into US airspace over Alaska.

"So I can confirm that the Department of Defense was tracking a high altitude object over Alaska airspace in the last 24 hours," Kirby said. "The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight. Out of an abundance of caution at the recommendation of the Pentagon, President Biden ordered the military to down the object and they."

Continued below.

BREAKING: US military shoots down ‘high altitude object’ over Alaskan waters

“The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight.”

thepostmillennial.com

I didn’t see what they shot this one down with. The other one they used a Sidewinder missile. It probably cost 20 times or more the cost of the balloon. At least a few of our fighter jets still have 20 mm guns on board. It would be much cheaper target practice.

How much would it cost to shoot down 10,000 cheap Chinese balloons with quarter million dollar Sidewinders?

 

[Michie]

I didn’t see what they shot this one down with. The other one they used a Sidewinder missile. It probably cost 20 times or more the cost of the balloon. At least a few of our fighter jets still have 20 mm guns on board. It would be much cheaper target practice.

How much would it cost to shoot down 10,000 cheap Chinese balloons with quarter million dollar Sidewinders?

They’ve shot another one down too. I just heard they think they are more. Taiwan has said they have been dealing with them for years.

 

[PsaltiChrysostom]

I didn’t see what they shot this one down with. The other one they used a Sidewinder missile. It probably cost 20 times or more the cost of the balloon. At least a few of our fighter jets still have 20 mm guns on board. It would be much cheaper target practice.

How much would it cost to shoot down 10,000 cheap Chinese balloons with quarter million dollar Sidewinders?

First, In 1998, British, Canadian, and American forces failed to bring down a genuinely rogue meteorological balloon over the Arctic.
The Canadian air force pumped more than a thousand 20mm cannon shells into it, yet it still did not deflate. - How did the US successfully shoot down China's 'spy balloon' with a single missile - and what was on it?

Second, The military official gave some detail of the engagement. The F-22 fired the Sidewinder at the balloon from an altitude of 58,000 feet. The balloon at the time was between 60,000 and 65,000 feet. The F-22 only has 480 rounds, with a range of 2,000 feet. So the plane was short 5,000 feet to even use its cannon.

 

[Michie]

They’ve shot another one down too. I just heard they think they are more. Taiwan has said they have been dealing with them for years.

Just heard the total is up to 4 now.

 

[timewerx]

I didn’t see what they shot this one down with. The other one they used a Sidewinder missile. It probably cost 20 times or more the cost of the balloon. At least a few of our fighter jets still have 20 mm guns on board. It would be much cheaper target practice.

How much would it cost to shoot down 10,000 cheap Chinese balloons with quarter million dollar Sidewinders?

A high altitude balloon envelop that can carry a couple kilos (enough for a spy package) costs up to $1,000. The surveillance equipment, can be had for as little as $5,000 (never underestimate the Chinese ability to make things A LOT Cheaper than Americans can!). Total estimated balloon cost = $6,000

Hourly cost of flying the F-22 is ~$44,000. The total cost of Sidewinder + license + taxes = ~$600,000. Total interception cost (success or fail) = $644,000

We're talking 100X more expense in shooting down those balloons than the estimated cost of those balloons!!

At least a few of our fighter jets still have 20 mm guns on board.

The jet fighters used are so fast and against a very slow moving object, there's barely enough time to aim and fire the gun. The thin air at high altitude makes it even harder to maneuver and aim the gun. And if you fail to shoot it down, it takes awful lots of time to turn around for another pass due to the thin air at high altitudes. At supersonic engagements, you might even run out of fuel before you can complete the turn for another pass!

Slower aircraft are far more effective at shooting down things with gun. Unfortunately, there's only a handful of aircraft that can fly slow at high altitudes. We do have UAV / drones that can reach those altitudes and fly at those altitudes at much slower speeds. None of them had guns though.

So it may only take a few modifications to have some existing drones be able to shoot down balloons at high altitudes. Ofc, you can never underestimate Uncle Sam's ability to make such simple tasks become obscenely expensive!

In case you're wondering, they're facing the same dilemma over at Ukraine, costing A LOT more to shoot down those suicide drones than the cost of the suicide drone itself! I knew this would happen! At some point, some clever enemy will force USA and its allies to commit valuable resources to defend against a threat that's only a chump change to the enemy! The west really have to change the way they do things eventually if they're doing to deal with enemies that are potentially more efficient at using their resources.

 

[chevyontheriver]

A high altitude balloon envelop that can carry a couple kilos (enough for a spy package) costs up to $1,000. The surveillance equipment, can be had for as little as $5,000 (never underestimate the Chinese ability to make things A LOT Cheaper than Americans can!). Total estimated balloon cost = $6,000

Hourly cost of flying the F-22 is ~$44,000. The total cost of Sidewinder + license + taxes = ~$600,000. Total interception cost (success or fail) = $644,000

We're talking 100X more expense in shooting down those balloons than the estimated cost of those balloons!!


The jet fighters used are so fast and against a very slow moving object, there's barely enough time to aim and fire the gun. The thin air at high altitude makes it even harder to maneuver and aim the gun. And if you fail to shoot it down, it takes awful lots of time to turn around for another pass due to the thin air at high altitudes. At supersonic engagements, you might even run out of fuel before you can complete the turn for another pass!

Slower aircraft are far more effective at shooting down things with gun. Unfortunately, there's only a handful of aircraft that can fly slow at high altitudes. We do have UAV / drones that can reach those altitudes and fly at those altitudes at much slower speeds. None of them had guns though.

So it may only take a few modifications to have some existing drones be able to shoot down balloons at high altitudes. Ofc, you can never underestimate Uncle Sam's ability to make such simple tasks become obscenely expensive!

In case you're wondering, they're facing the same dilemma over at Ukraine, costing A LOT more to shoot down those suicide drones than the cost of the suicide drone itself! I knew this would happen! At some point, some clever enemy will force USA and its allies to commit valuable resources to defend against a threat that's only a chump change to the enemy! The west really have to change the way they do things eventually if they're doing to deal with enemies that are potentially more efficient at using their resources.

A drone with a razor blade sounds like it might be the ticket. Come up to it slowly, slice it, and move on. There is no need to blow it up, but just cut a small opening so the Helium starts to leak out. So it takes a few hours to sink and crash.

The Chinese would be smart to launch thousands of balloons with just a few rocks as payload to bankrupt us if we are stupid enough to use Sidewinders in every one. Hmmm. It might be part of a strategerie to have us use up our Sidewinders in advance of invading Taiwan. Get Sidewinders on back-order waiting on some obscure little Chinese part. I wouldn't put it past them.

Of course maybe our pilots really really need the target practice. I donno. It just seems a million dollar solution to a thousand dollar problem.

 

[timewerx]

A drone with a razor blade sounds like it might be the ticket. Come up to it slowly, slice it, and move on. There is no need to blow it up, but just cut a small opening so the Helium starts to leak out. So it takes a few hours to sink and crash.

The Chinese would be smart to launch thousands of balloons with just a few rocks as payload to bankrupt us if we are stupid enough to use Sidewinders in every one. Hmmm. It might be part of a strategerie to have us use up our Sidewinders in advance of invading Taiwan. Get Sidewinders on back-order waiting on some obscure little Chinese part. I wouldn't put it past them.

Of course maybe our pilots really really need the target practice. I donno. It just seems a million dollar solution to a thousand dollar problem.

I agree about the razor blade 'weapon'. I mentioned it on a thread I started earlier concerning the ridiculous cost of interception against dirt cheap balloons.

Small and lightweight laser hardware that can be mounted on aircraft may also provide economical solution but we don't have one at the moment and development might actually be quite expensive.

A super lightweight UAV may provide a cheap solution for slow-flying high altitude platform. Traditionally, combat UAVs are not built to those specs due to 'high speed' requirement. But a UAV that only has to fly real slow and carry a single gun or a blade or even 'harpoon' can be built with much lighter structure and materials enabling slow flight at very high altitudes and with minimal electronics suite to keep costs and weight low.

The harpoon like weapon is just like the razor sharp blade but in an arrow-like projectile with retractable razor-sharp fins that can cut two big "X"s on the balloon.

The crude and simple UAV itself can be developed within two months. They should probably let universities and students work on the project to avoid getting things sky high expensive.

It might be risky for fighter planes to use gun to try to shoot down those balloons. At those high altitudes, fighter planes have VERY poor maneuverability. And if they must use the gun means they will have to get closer and with the high speed approach, they only have few seconds to try to score a fatal hit and maneuver out of the way which may prove quite difficult and high collision risk with the balloon. They are simply not the right tool for bringing down cheap balloons.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The harpoon like weapon is just like the razor sharp blade but in an arrow-like projectile with retractable razor-sharp fins that can cut two big "X"s on the balloon.

One possibility is to just harpoon the balloon, hold on, and turn off. The added weight would make for an eventual soft landing and recovery.

The crude and simple UAV itself can be developed within two months. They should probably let universities and students work on the project to avoid getting things sky high expensive.

Brilliant. Engineering students like a challenge on a shoestring.

It might be risky for fighter planes to use gun to try to shoot down those balloons. At those high altitudes, fighter planes have VERY poor maneuverability. And if they must use the gun means they will have to get closer and with the high speed approach, they only have few seconds to try to score a fatal hit and maneuver out of the way which may prove quite difficult and high collision risk with the balloon. They are simply not the right tool for bringing down cheap balloons.

Risking a billion dollar plane on a thousand dollar balloon.