"The Balloon !"

[toucana]

 

One stated reason for the initial reluctance of the US Airforce to shoot down the Chinese balloon spotted over Montana was the risk of debris falling onto populated areas below. This wasn’t simply a matter of being concerned about the risk of heavy bits of metal or plastic landing on the heads of hill farmers.

A more specific worry was that the object appeared to be dirigible to some degree, which raised the possibility that it might be equipped with reaction thrusters of some type, which in turn raised the possibility that there could be highly explosive and very dangerous hypergolic rocket fuels onboard.

Photos indicated that the balloon clearly had outboard communications equipment and electronic scanners attached to its gondola, which in turn means that it must have had some sort of electrical power supply on board. Satellites and drones of this type don’t rely on Lithium ion batteries, (Lithium batteries function very poorly in low temperatures). It is much more common for long-range reconnaissance units of this type to be equipped with an RTG (Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator) which uses thermal energy produced by the radioactive decay of Plutonium 238 to generate electricity via a thermocouple system.

Shooting down a dirigible with a large lump of Plutonium in its PS probably didn't seem like a good idea to the USAF, so they waited until the balloon had cossed the Atlantic coast and was safely out to sea before bringing it down in a controlled manner into about 40 of water where the debris can easily be recovered by divers and reassembled for further examination.

Rhetoric by MAGA extremists like Donald Trump jr. who was urging Montanans to shoot it down themselves (the ballon was well over 10 miles high) were deflated almost as rapidly as the balloon when a Pentagon spokesperson confirmed that 3 similar dirigible incursions had occurred during the Trump presidency, and that the POTUS had declined to authorise shooting them down.

A humorous take by Vlogger Fran Blanche:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2Z8-qxTQ-A

[studiot]

3 minutes ago, toucana said:

One stated reason for the initial reluctance of the US Airforce to shoot down the Chinese balloon spotted over Montana was the risk of debris falling onto populated areas below. This wasn’t simply a matter of being concerned about the risk of heavy bits of metal or plastic landing on the heads of hill farmers.

 

I am not convinced that the US government really cares about ordinary people any more than our UK one does, or about the damage that could be caused to them.

I wonder if they were really wanting the thing to land on water, rather than land so that the bits would be less damaged by the impact.

They are certainly scrambling to find them in the nearshore ocean.

[toucana]

7 hours ago, studiot said:

 

I am not convinced that the US government really cares about ordinary people any more than our UK one does, or about the damage that could be caused to them.

I wonder if they were really wanting the thing to land on water, rather than land so that the bits would be less damaged by the impact.

They are certainly scrambling to find them in the nearshore ocean.

According to this source, the USAF chose to use an optically guided AIM-9X Sidewinder missile without any warhead fitted to puncture the envelope of the balloon and bring it down in a controlled  manner within the USA 12 mile territorial water limit. Cannon fire would have been cheaper but less accurate, and would have inflicted greater damage on the payload they wished to examine.

One nice touch was the use of the operational code name 'Frank', a nod to Frank Luke jnr. a WW2 fighter ace who shot down 14 enemy reconnaissance  balloons and became known as  the 'Arizona Balloon Buster'.

 

 

[iNow]

The balloon collected intelligence about how the U.S. responds. 

They watched the ballon cross into Alaska and how we responded. They watched how the government and military responded the entire next week. 

They watched the news coverage and national freak out on social media. The conspiracy theories that were most cited. The anger and disappointment at Biden. They watched family members sniping at each other.

They watched what other things and places we stopped watching while watching this.

Now the next time when they want to deploy a virus against our banking system or energy grid, or just want more leverage in a negotiation over carbon credits and trade… they’ll just float a balloon across the continental US so we look up and watch it like wide-eyed children. 

“Oooohhh… shiny!”

[exchemist]

12 hours ago, toucana said:

According to this source, the USAF chose to use an optically guided AIM-9X Sidewinder missile without any warhead fitted to puncture the envelope of the balloon and bring it down in a controlled  manner within the USA 12 mile territorial water limit. Cannon fire would have been cheaper but less accurate, and would have inflicted greater damage on the payload they wished to examine.

One nice touch was the use of the operational code name 'Frank', a nod to Frank Luke jnr. a WW2 fighter ace who shot down 14 enemy reconnaissance  balloons and became known as  the 'Arizona Balloon Buster'.

 

 

The pictures indicate this balloon has solar panels. So I'm not sure the plutonium story stacks up - unless for some reason it is the practice to provide both, which would seem to be a big weight penalty. 

But it makes sense to bring it down in shallow water for recovery and analysis of the bits, rather than have it smashed to smithereens after hitting the ground. No doubt the analysis will get used for political purposes, to put pressure on the Chinese.

[TheVat]

 

I was surprised there was no try for a more gradual descent, perhaps by shooting a small hole with a BB gun.  (perhaps those are hard to mount on an F-22)

Our next step is clear:  obtain a Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade float and release it from an allied nation that's upwind of China.  Mickey Mouse would get my vote.  

[geordief]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

 

I was surprised there was no try for a more gradual descent, perhaps by shooting a small hole with a BB gun.  (perhaps those are hard to mount on an F-22)

Our next step is clear:  obtain a Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade float and release it from an allied nation that's upwind of China.  Mickey Mouse would get my vote.  

Oh no Micky sounds like President MiXi.They would  surely take offense.Donald Duck may have more legs.

 

But filled with agricultural  fertiliser  by all means.

Edited February 6, 2023 by geordief

[toucana]

10 hours ago, exchemist said:

The pictures indicate this balloon has solar panels. So I'm not sure the plutonium story stacks up - unless for some reason it is the practice to provide both, which would seem to be a big weight penalty. 

But it makes sense to bring it down in shallow water for recovery and analysis of the bits, rather than have it smashed to smithereens after hitting the ground. No doubt the analysis will get used for political purposes, to put pressure on the Chinese.

Yes - Those do look like solar panels, but the problem is that photovoltaic panels normally have to be used in tandem with a battery system of some sort, and the storage capacity of Lithium ion batteries tends to fall off a cliff at stratospheric subzero temperatures. So it’s quite possible that this balloon also uses a Plutonium RTG source in order to provide some thermal buffering for the storage batteries, and to provide power when it’s dark.

A number of reports say that the debris field was up to 7 miles wide, which doesn’t leave much room for error if you want to bring such an object down in the sea, but within the 12 mile territorial waters limit as well. I suspect that a good deal of intensive computer modelling was done within the last few days to make sure they got this right.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

 

I was surprised there was no try for a more gradual descent, perhaps by shooting a small hole with a BB gun.  (perhaps those are hard to mount on an F-22)

A problem with shooting an unguided projectile is ensuring you hit the balloon, and not they payload. It also means getting fairly close, and you have a large closing speed. Even if an F-22 could get to 66,000 feet and maneuver well*, it would need to fire and then veer off. 

* it can’t, according to https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/history/f-22.html
They say ~10 miles, which is ~52,000 feet. But I would imagine the actual value is classified

11 hours ago, exchemist said:

The pictures indicate this balloon has solar panels.

They are facing up, meaning the balloon would be blocking the sun to a large extent

44 minutes ago, toucana said:

Yes - Those do look like solar panels, but the problem is that photovoltaic panels normally have to be used in tandem with a battery system of some sort, and the storage capacity of Lithium ion batteries tends to fall off a cliff at stratospheric subzero temperatures.

Unless you used the system to heat the batteries. 

 

[MigL]

The F-22 is the only aircraft in US inventory that is somewhat stable at 60000ft ( other than the unarmed, former SR-71 and U-2 reconnaissance platforms ), the F-15 is right on the edge of its flight envelope.
Even the F-22 would need to close at M-1 or better to remain maneuverable.
The F-22 carries the M-61 Vulcan cannon, which fires at 6000 rounds/minute, so its drum of 480 rounds would be done in 4.8 seconds ( disregarding wind-up time ), and would have an effective range of a few miles.

It is not particularly easy  to fly towards a target at approx. 600 mi/hr, shoot off a couple of seconds worth of cannon rounds while heading straight at the target ( it's a fixed cannon, remember ? ), and evade the 200 ft ballon you're flying towards, while only being able to pull 1 or 2 Gs in the rarified air at that altitude.

And thse 20mm cannon rounds are explosive. The balloon won't provide enough resistance to detonate them; they'll simply punch 20 mm holes in it.
It will take a long time for that balloon to come down; even with 480 20 mm holes in it.
And those unexploded cannon shells will still detonate on impacting the ground, or pose a danger to anyone finding them.

So the USAF decided to use a $400000 AIM-9X Sidewinder without IR detector, but using semi-active radar guidance from the F-22 radar.

Incidentally, Canadian CF-18, or even the future F-35, could not bring it down, even had they tried.

Edited February 8, 2023 by MigL

[iNow]

So what you're saying is all those right-wing loonies mad at Biden for not using a BB gun from the ground to take down the evil China balloon are ignorant loonies we can  basically ignore? Good to know!  

Always appreciate you sharing your advanced aviation knowledge, btw. Learn something new and interesting every time you do. +1

[TheVat]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

And thse 20mm cannon rounds are explosive. The balloon won't provide enough resistance to detonate them; they'll simply punch 20 mm holes in it....
And those unexploded cannon shells will still detonate on impacting the ground, or pose a danger to anyone finding them.

This was helpful, and clarifies more the dangers of shooting a balloon down over land, especially with the small holes method.

The balloon certainly demonstrated the capacity of the Right Wing news bubble to take a rational, measured response and warp it into Biden dithering and being foolish.  It's appalling to see what's in some of the RW feeds re the balloon.  

[iNow]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

It's appalling to see what's in some of the RW feeds re the balloon.  

Especially considering just how much of that content was intentionally inserted there by China themselves (and Russia, Iran, likely the Saudis, and potentially even KJUs NK cartel)

[exchemist]

34 minutes ago, iNow said:

Especially considering just how much of that content was intentionally inserted there by China themselves (and Russia, Iran, likely the Saudis, and potentially even KJUs NK cartel)

What cartel is that?

[iNow]

9 hours ago, exchemist said:

What cartel is that?

Whatever group of high placed minions he’s appointed as his lieutenants to cyberattack his perceived enemies. The ones who have his blessing to actually touch a computer and who are sanctioned to pull teams together to logon and use the internet while executing social wedge PsyOps campaigns. 

“Cartel” allowed me to say the same thing more efficiently in one word. 

[NTuft]

On 2/6/2023 at 1:08 PM, swansont said:

[...]
* it can’t, according to https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/history/f-22.html
They say ~10 miles, which is ~52,000 feet. But I would imagine the actual value is classified
[...]

 

22 hours ago, MigL said:

[...]
Incidentally, Canadian CF-18, or even the future F-35, could not bring it down, even had they tried.

Cool beans. I wonder if all the pooh-poohing about the shit can the F-35 is is an Art of War tactic. "Oh, this thing can't fly. Oh, we can't figure out it's HUD or radar." You tellin' me I can't fly right below that there baloon and fire off me sidewinder, set my jet on autopilot, and fly that missile by wire straight up into that balloon? What, I need some extra propellant?

 

On 2/6/2023 at 10:49 AM, TheVat said:

[...]Our next step is clear:  obtain a Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade float and release it from an allied nation that's upwind of China.  Mickey Mouse would get my vote.

On 2/6/2023 at 11:46 AM, geordief said:

Oh no Micky sounds like President MiXi.They would  surely take offense.Donald Duck may have more legs.

But filled with agricultural  fertiliser  by all means.

..It's got to be Pooh.. that last part is a Pooh reference! Peter Pan is probably most offensive, especially if we use the Wuhite verion.

[exchemist]

5 hours ago, iNow said:

Whatever group of high placed minions he’s appointed as his lieutenants to cyberattack his perceived enemies. The ones who have his blessing to actually touch a computer and who are sanctioned to pull teams together to logon and use the internet while executing social wedge PsyOps campaigns. 

“Cartel” allowed me to say the same thing more efficiently in one word. 

Sorry, I'm still not with this. Who is "he"?

[iNow]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Sorry, I'm still not with this. Who is "he"?

KJU = Kim Jong Un and NK = North Korea

16 hours ago, iNow said:

Especially considering just how much of that [chumming the right-wing social media waters] content was intentionally inserted there by China themselves (and Russia, Iran, likely the Saudis, and potentially even KJUs NK cartel)

 

They’re surely still collecting intel even now around which memes are being most liked and shared. It’s a never ending back and forth when it comes to this type of spycraft. 

[exchemist]

12 minutes ago, iNow said:

KJU = Kim Jong Un and NK = North Korea

 

They’re surely still collecting intel even now around which memes are being most liked and shared. It’s a never ending back and forth when it comes to this type of spycraft. 

Ah thanks, now I understand. I was not familiar with the abbreviations.

[iNow]

Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), Communications Intel (COMINT), and Electronic Intel (ELINT) have really gone both wide and deep these last several years given the ubiquity of social information being shared online.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence_operational_platforms_by_nation

[MigL]

16 hours ago, NTuft said:

Cool beans. I wonder if all the pooh-poohing about the shit can the F-35 is is an Art of War tactic. "Oh, this thing can't fly. Oh, we can't figure out it's HUD or radar." You tellin' me I can't fly right below that there baloon and fire off me sidewinder, set my jet on autopilot, and fly that missile by wire straight up into that balloon? What, I need some extra propellant?

The F-35 is a very good interdictor/strike aircraft, but its networking capabilities give it great situational awareness and make it a good BVR ( beyond visual range ) figter also.

Shooting a sidewinder, or any other type of missile, from well below, will destroy the suspended payload, yielding no intelligence.
Better to attck it at similar altitude and taget the balloon.

[Intoscience]

10 hours ago, MigL said:

The F-35 is a very good interdictor/strike aircraft, but its networking capabilities give it great situational awareness and make it a good BVR ( beyond visual range ) figter also.

Shooting a sidewinder, or any other type of missile, from well below, will destroy the suspended payload, yielding no intelligence.
Better to attck it at similar altitude and taget the balloon.

very informative, thanks

What about sending Maverick (Tom Cruise) to shoot it down?  I'm sure he would have sorted it no problem 😝

[toucana]

2 hours ago, Intoscience said:

very informative, thanks

What about sending Maverick (Tom Cruise) to shoot it down?  I'm sure he would have sorted it no problem 😝

In 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini the new leader of the freshly installed Revolutionary government in Iran after the overthrow of the Shah ordered the Iranian airforce to shoot down US spy satellites orbiting in space over  their territory. It apparently took some while to explain to the mullahs that this was not an achievable mission - no doubt Tom Cruise would have sorted it somehow !

CNN reports that in a Congressional briefing given on Thursday, US Intelligence sources identified the balloon as part of a fleet of surveillance devices built and operated by the PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) for military intelligence gathering purposes. The also said that Chinese Leader Xi Jin Ping may not have been fully briefed on the  day-to-day operational details of the program, which helps to explain the puzzling anomaly of why China took such a risk right on the eve of an important visit by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken which was immediately cancelled because of the political fall-out.

A precedent can be found in the Gary Powers U2 incident of May 1960 when a very important summit meeting between US president Eisenhower and the Soviet Leader Nikita Khruschev was abruptly cancelled after the U2 was shot down by a SAM. The USA claimed the plane was ‘a meterological research’ flight until the USSR produced the captured pilot Powers, and put the wreckage with its high power camera systems on public display.

Intelligence gathering misssions of this type always involve a cost-benefit risk analysis. In 1960 the USA took the high risk of running the U2 overflight mission because they consdered it to be of paramount importance to have accurate information about Soviet missile sites and long range bomber bases ahead of the summit. They also believed that the U2 flew too high to be intercepted or shot down.

It is not yet clear why the Chinese leaders regarded their ballon program to be of such importance.

Edited February 10, 2023 by toucana
edited out redundant 'in' an 'a'

[exchemist]

8 minutes ago, toucana said:

In 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini the new leader of the freshly installed Revolutionary government in Iran after the overthrow of the Shah ordered the Iranian airforce to shoot down US spy satellites orbiting in space over  their territory. It apparently took some while to explain to the mullahs that this was not an achievable mission - no doubt Tom Cruise would have sorted it somehow !

CNN reports that in a Congressional briefing given on Thursday, US Intelligence sources identified the balloon as part of a fleet of surveillance devices built and operated by the PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) for military intelligence gathering purposes. The also said that Chinese Leader Xi Jin Ping may not have been fully briefed on the  day-to-day operational details of the program, which helps to explain the puzzling anomaly of why China took such a risk right on the eve of an important visit by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken which was immediately cancelled because of the political fall-out.

A precedent can be found in in the Gary Powers U2 incident of May 1960 when a very important summit meeting between US president Eisenhower and the Soviet Leader Nikita Khruschev was abruptly cancelled after the U2 was shot down by a SAM. The USA claimed the plane was ‘a meterological research’ flight until the USSR produced the captured pilot Powers, and put the wreckage with its high power camera systems on public display.

Intelligence gathering misssions of this type always a involve a cost-benefit risk analysis. In 1960 the USA took the high risk of running the U2 overflight mission because they consdered it to be of paramount importance to have accurate information about Soviet missile sites and long range bomber bases ahead of the summit. They also believed that the U2 flew too high to be intercepted or shot down.

It is not yet clear why the Chinese leaders regarded their ballon program to be of such importance.

Making clear that Xi may not have been aware of the flight also lays the ground for a later rapprochement, by offering him a ladder to climb down. He can fire a few military people and get back to the agenda. (I too was struck by the similarity to the Gary Powers affair.)  

[iNow]

4 hours ago, toucana said:

It is not yet clear why the Chinese leaders regarded their ballon program to be of such importance.

Really? According to the Department of State, they've an entire fleet of these balloons performing similar operations in 40 different countries across five continents right now. This was hardly a one-off.