49 Replies to “Was the $400,000 worth it?”

    1. They’ve called off the search for all of the ‘UFO’s’ that were allegedly shot down. Quel suprise!

      1. Kenji, doncha know that hot shot pilots get a bigger kick out of launching a $400,000 missile than they get out of firing a three second burst from an MG. Besides look how many Americans that might have been injured from all of those untrackable shells falling from the sky, whereas a $400,000 missile can be tracked with NORAD after all you can’t loose a missile can you. /s.

        1. Alright. Nevermind. Say … does anyone know what gas fills these high altitude balloons? I know helium is a rather inert gas and doesn’t explode. But is that what fills these high altitude balloons? Perhaps we need a “better weapons thru chemistry” solution … and fire a reactive agent into these balloons? And it would give Raytheon a whole new $ B contract (+ cost overruns) to fill.

      3. Give him a tall enough ladder, a 12 year old with a .22 would bring it down gently into waiting investigator’s hands.

        1. Probably there was. There are two best before dates in fact. One, is a shelf life and if you want to prolong it, you need to replace components after some time and the process tends to be about as expensive as a new missile. Two, there is an underwing best before date. Once a missile is strapped under the wing and subjected to changes in pressure, drag and G-forces its lifespan is greatly reduced. That’s why you rarely see air policing or exercises done with a full combat load, typically only a pair of missiles is carried. Dunno how the life is affected when the missile is stored inside an aircraft like F-22 or F-35. I suspect it slightly prolongs its life.

          Those following events in Ukraine probably heard about NASAMS SAM system. What it is, is effectively an AMRRAM recycling system. It uses standard NATO mid range missiles that still have a valid shelf life but cannot be carried underneath a wing anymore. They can be fired from a ground launcher, although their effectiveness and range is much lower than when launched at speed and altitude.

    1. That was how the accounting looked, the truth may have been somewhat different. Billing enormous expenses against trivial items would allow the money to be diverted into secret “black” programs, like stealth fighters and revolutions in other countries. Is that what happened? We’ll never know.

  3. Expect to see a rash of balloon ‘kills’ over the next few weeks as teenagers all over America start launching ‘UFOs’ at Saturday night parties. It’ll be the next big trend.

    Looking at this I remember way back in the early Eighties when my two kids were youngsters I bought a kite balloon for them. It was a simple black plastic bag, about eight feet long and two feet in diameter, and had a picture of an cartoon alien in a flying saucer on it. The plastic was very thin and when inflated and left in the direct sun for a time it became airborne. The kids had a good time with it until one of them let go of the string and away it flew.

  8. Please tell me they didn’t go around shooting down hobby balloons because they looked like complete morons letting a Chinese spy balloon trapeze across the country.

  10. “And thus the whirligig of time brings in his revenges.”
    -William Shakespeare
    Renowned libertarian author Vernor Vinge wrote a story called “The Whirligig of Time” in which the USA, with a massive space-based missile defense system, is defeated by a few suitcase nukes.
    Perhaps a few trillion on a “Balloon Defense Initiative” to appease the terrified masses?

  11. https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104506/f-22-raptor/

    480 rounds of 20 mm cannon in each F22 I’m guessing they’re quite a bit less expensive than 1 Sidewinder, but the thrill of letting one of these go may be too much to resist.

    I think they could have sent V-22 Ospreys up to see exactly what these were, it’s not like these don’t have “enough ammo” to take down weather balloons, and chances are good the items being carried would be salvageable to see who’s they were.

    2. A 20mm, shot from the flight ceiling of an F-22 (around 60 000 feet) will not be able to hit a weather balloon at around 80 000 feet, and I have severe doubts about a 20mm even being able to hit something only 10 000 feet above it.

      1. Why wouldn’t an F22 go to 100,000 feet? Many fighters were doing it 60 years ago. I guess they don’t want a high altitude flame out. In 1977 a Mig 25 went to 123,520 feet. Prop planes have gone to 96,863 feet.

        1. Scar, don’t bother with the trolls. When this whole thing started the Chinese weather balloon was photographed over Montana on a bunch of cell phones. There is no way that these phones photographed a balloon at 100,000 feet at most the balloon was at 40,000 feet above Montana for the pictures to be taken. I’d be willing to bet that the balloon didn’t make it much above 50,000 feet well within fighter range. To be a danger to commercial air traffic the balloon would have to be below 50,000 feet. As usual the administration is lying again. Whether the method of dispatching it was 50 calibre or 20mm either result would have allowed a slow release of gas and a slower softer descent. The Pentagon messed up big time and the whole world is laughing.

          1. Indeed… an F15 can easily cruise at 60k ft, and has been officially recognized as going from brake release to 90k ft in under 3.5 minutes, then “coasting” to over 100k ft.

            The problem with hobby balloons is they have almost nothing for sensors to lock on to. No heat signature, nothing to reflect radar, only an image-guided munition would really be reliable.

            The Chinese balloon was big enough that it could have easily been taken down with aircraft 20mm cannon. The thing is, by using that method, it would just puncture the envelope, and it does take a long time for one of those huge balloons to leak out and then slowly descend. Those things do not go “pop!”

  12. Given all the proximit land purchases the ChiComs are making near our bases what’s to say the pico balloon isn’t a great intelligence tool?
    At 50,000′ it’s apparently quite difficult to bring down. Sure we’ll spend 400k to do it and billions more to respond to the new hypersonic missile threat; but there will be nothing for the scud across the fence.
    We’re so stupid.

  13. Yeah …
    Politicians, left, right and centre are there to exhibit themselves.
    They will do anything and everything to show how they “care”.
    If they look like real assholes, though never mind, they have well paid spoxes to cover their idiocy.
    They mostly went to school for a long time and so they are ‘experts’ at nothing.

    And after all that, the proletariat will vote them in again and again.
    They got nothing to lose.

    And this is where we are at this point in history.

  14. 400 k plus
    4 jets in the sky $$$$$
    Fuel and maintenance $$$$$$$$$$
    Ground crew $$$$$
    Operations $$$$$$$$
    Admin $$$$$
    Publicity $$$$$$$$$
    Weapons contracts $$$$$$$$$
    North of 5 million.

  15. It’s the sidewinder that missed over Lake Huron that has me curious.

    Given that it hasn’t been found and the potential for it to show up near a large central Canadian city or NE US Democratic bastion…well…I’m worried.

    Was it labeled “not for internal use?”

  18. For all the mathematicians out there, the maximum range of a 20mm round fired at 45 degrees is roughly 4800 yards. That’s 14,400 feet. Sideways, to make it clearer.

    Nobody is going to hit something with guns at 80,000 feet when they are flying at 60,000 feet. Not even if they shot straight up, risking having the rounds fall straight down on them. Do you hold the water hose pointing straight up? No you don’t.

    Service ceiling of the F22 is ~60,000 feet. As it is for most other military aircraft.

    The XB-70 Valkyrie flew at 77,000. Anything higher is SR-71 and U-2 territory. Both retired. Neither were armed with guns. Or anything else, for that matter.

    The only things still in the air that fly at 80,000 are space-planes, experimental hypersonic drones, and missiles.

    That’s why they fired a missile at it.

    As to it being a mylar hobby balloon, that’s speculation. It was well beyond visual range when the pilot pulled the trigger, and nobody knows a damn thing beyond that it had a radar return.

    On the whole, I’d rather air force pilots got air time and trigger time shooting stuff down potential hobby balloons at 80,000 feet than have #LetsGoBrandon and #Shiny Pony let the Chicom military fly stuff the size of a school-bus over my house at will.

    And by the way, a reminder that the Canadian Armed Forces probably could not shoot down any balloon at 80,000 feet, not even if the nation’s future depended on it. CF-18 service ceiling is 50,000 feet.

    Okay? Are we learning yet?

    1. Thanks Phantom, I was about to post something similar, glad you did it and I don’t have to bother now.

      There is only one thing worth adding. Radars are not calibrated to spot those balloons at this altitude. They move very slow, they are stationary as far as most radars are concerned and they are well above air traffic, hence they are filed as glitch or anomaly. We really don’t know haw many such balloons have managed to drift over US unnoticed until we started paying attention.

      1. I am not a pilot, but I read a lot about aircraft and guns. I know the only things with an effective range of over 20,000 feet are howitzers. Because 20K feet is nearly four miles, right? You can get a bullet to go farther sometimes, but impact on arrival is the same as throwing the bullet at something.

        You’re not going to shoot a 20mm cannon shell FOUR MILES straight up and expect to hit something. They don’t work like that that.

        Calculator again, 80k feet is ~fifteen miles. The U-2 routinely flew at 75-85,000 feet. If you look at a U-2, it looks kinda different than an F-22. A U-2 is essentially an F-104 with a different engine and really, really long wings. Even with the huge glider wings it can barely stay up there at 80K, it is at the very limit of lift.

        Because there’s no air, basically.

        A quick Google of atmospheric pressure on the ground compared to altitude reveals 1 ATM at sea level and 0.058 ATM at 80,000 feet. U-2 pilots wore a space suit like an astronaut. So did SR-71 pilots.

        For comparison, the atmosphere on Mars 0.0058 ATM. They flew a helicopter on Mars, right? But could a Blackhawk fly on Mars? No. How about a U-2? No.

        So, can an operational bone-stock F-22 get to 80K? Maybe. Should it? Probably not, because the pilot doesn’t have a space suit and his pressurized cockpit specification is for 65,000 feet.

        Can the F-22 do much once it gets to 80K? No, not really, because it flew up on a ballistic arc and its engines are getting ready to flame out. Maybe it can fire a missile, if the pilot is still awake, before falling back down to where the engines work properly. Airplanes are not magic. They are constrained by air pressure and gravity just like everything else.

        Okay boys? There’s a limit to the lies that can be told by government or anybody. Physics bends for no one.

  19. Thee only Bah-Loon that may have been at 80K feet was thee Chinese spy bah-Loon. the rest were substantially lower, and posed a threat to commercial traffic, or so was said. The Pico bah-Loon for sure. As to miliary plane elevation limitations, the info stated in here has caused me to consider selling my BRIDGE, any buyers?

        1. JawKnee
          People google info , and then post in here. Do ewe really think military info that appears on google is accurate. First off, the military under rates their capabilities, so the “enemy” thinks they have built the proper count force, second, there would be a lot fewer military secrets to sell by politicians. It’s when I read that an F-14 could not tail stand and blow up through the sound barrier, butt that is exactly what happened in Winterpig at the airport, which is used by both commercial, and military craft. It blew out so many windows it cost the USAAF a small fortune to repair them. So when I was in San Diego I asked a military mechanic about F-14 capabilities, and he told me not to believe any info publicly available. So I don’t!
          A 22 and 35 ceilings are not available on google, what is there in BS, just as all info on SR-71 is all restricted, even today, and that is to stop Russia, and China , from being able to identify past spy flights.

          1. As I said above, just about every fighter in the last 60 years should be able to pop over 100,000 feet. The F4 Phantom and the F104 Lawn Dart each did it in 1959 and then they seem to have quit reporting. I suspect ceiling information is now classified.

          2. “So when I was in San Diego I asked a military mechanic about F-14 capabilities, and he told me not to believe any info publicly available. ”

            Instead you just make up your own. The mechanic probably figured out you’re a nutcase and decided that the easiest way to kae you go away ois to tell what you want to hear. So he did.

          3. Scar, I have no idea where you are getting your numbers from, F-4 celling was in mid 50K, F-104, don’t know from the top of my head, and depends on the version and payload but probably a bit less than that.

  20. JawKnee
    Just read some of the links the COLON drags in here at times, all bullshit , all the time. That should give you a heads up to publicly available info’s reliability, as well as the COLON’s understanding of the REAL world!

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation