12 hours ago, nauseus said:

Newt's quoted words here are actually correct, because he uses the past tense. The Skyhook and Fulton recovery systems were used by the US until 1996.

 

Maybe they kept a set of kit in the museum, Just for posterity of course.

Newt's quoted words were ridiculously incorrect.  No nation has the capability to snatch balloons or their payloads out of the sky at anything close to the altitude the balloon was at. 

 

The maximum service ceiling of the C-130, the aircraft used with the Skyhook,  is 28,000 feet.  https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/1555054/c-130-hercules/  The balloon was at more than twice that altitude.

9 hours ago, heybruce said:

Newt's quoted words were ridiculously incorrect.  No nation has the capability to snatch balloons or their payloads out of the sky at anything close to the altitude the balloon was at. 

 

The maximum service ceiling of the C-130, the aircraft used with the Skyhook,  is 28,000 feet.  https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/1555054/c-130-hercules/  The balloon was at more than twice that altitude.

Well effectively that's what I said. They used to do it but not anymore.

9 hours ago, heybruce said:

Newt's quoted words were ridiculously incorrect.  No nation has the capability to snatch balloons or their payloads out of the sky at anything close to the altitude the balloon was at. 

 

The maximum service ceiling of the C-130, the aircraft used with the Skyhook,  is 28,000 feet.  https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/1555054/c-130-hercules/  The balloon was at more than twice that altitude.

If Sean Connery was still James Bond we could do it. Or was it Roger Moore?

On 2/7/2023 at 5:45 PM, Longwood50 said:

Hint:  Fighter Aircraft have 50 caliber machine guns 

 

It fires standard M50 ammunition at 6,000 rounds per minute (rate selectable in certain installations).

Now whether it traveled 1 mile or 500 miles, it could be tracked, and it certainly in any case would be far less than the 3,700 miles from Montanta to the Atlantic Ocean. 

 

That is 100 rounds PER SECOND. Is that possible?  And how many rounds does the plane carry?

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

That is 100 rounds PER SECOND. Is that possible?  And how many rounds does the plane carry?

13 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

The F22 which was the fighter used has:

 

"one M61A2 20-millimeter cannon with 480 rounds"

 

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

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

That is 100 rounds PER SECOND. Is that possible?  And how many rounds does the plane carry?

 M61 Vulcan Gatling-style rotary cannon - 20mm - 6,000 rounds per minute.

 

Only 480 rounds so all gone in less than 5 seconds.

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

If Sean Connery was still James Bond we could do it. Or was it Roger Moore?

Sean Connery

6 hours ago, nauseus said:

Well effectively that's what I said. They used to do it but not anymore.

As I explained, we do not have, and never had, the ability to catch a balloon or payload at anything close to the altitude the Chinese balloon was at. 

 

You said Newt's words were correct.  His words were:  “We had plenty of capacity to scoop that balloon out of the air,”

 

Newt's words were incorrect, and shows a willingness to speak authoritatively on a subject of which he is clearly ignorant.  You claiming the words were correct shows the same willingness.

On 2/8/2023 at 6:35 PM, Hummin said:

They already scored when looking at all the dividing news, and how much time this already consumed from everyone in a position one or the other side.

True, true. Distract everyone with something of little importance while doing something they don't want reported.

Typical political trick.

On 2/8/2023 at 11:21 PM, SpaceKadet said:

F22, as most US fighters, carries M61A2 Vulcan 20mm six-barreled internal cannon. Effective range is just under 2 miles. Now, please tell me how would you put a "small hole" in something that is hovering 25,000 feet (over 4 miles) above you?

And remember that bullets do not have internal propulsion or guidance and are purely ballistic, i.e. obeying the gravity.

The US has the capacity to go into space, which is higher than the balloon, and neither you nor I know of everything in the US military equipment.

If they could build the X1 in 1945, a plane capable of reaching the balloon would be a doddle now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1

If they don't have that ability, perhaps they should.

IMO if nothing else, this episode has exposed that the US is vulnerable to an attack using balloons, and it should not have been if the thousands of guys in the Pentagon had been doing their job.

On 2/8/2023 at 11:52 PM, Hummin said:

So pure provocation then?

Perhaps a test run for something more sinister, or just a weather research balloon that went astray. Hopefully they can recover the payload and are able to find out.

On 2/9/2023 at 12:03 AM, SpaceKadet said:

Now imagine a stationary object loitering at 25km with the same camera.

Has anyone claimed the balloon was stationary? A balloon by definition does not have that ability unless there just happened to be no wind in the exact required location.

On 2/9/2023 at 1:18 AM, billd766 said:

I very much doubt that.

 

IMHO it was probably tracked all of the way as the US intelligence agencies would be interested in its flight path, to be ready for the next one.

If that were true, why all the fuss? Seems to me that it's been milked for public consumption, and if it was known about all the time, why wasn't that the first thing put out by the media?

6 hours ago, nauseus said:

Sean Connery

Yeah, Moore was a bad joke in comparison.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps a test run for something more sinister, or just a weather research balloon that went astray. Hopefully they can recover the payload and are able to find out.

Payload recovered and confirm as spying equipment

 

Voice of America
https://www.voanews.com › us-chin...
US: Chinese Military Likely at Center of Balloon-Spying Operation

 

 

What's more concerning is that this is and has been happening over all countries as China has flown and continues to fly these balloons over all other countries while collecting data.

1 hour ago, ThailandRyan said:

Payload recovered and confirm as spying equipment

 

Voice of America
https://www.voanews.com › us-chin...
US: Chinese Military Likely at Center of Balloon-Spying Operation

 

 

What's more concerning is that this is and has been happening over all countries as China has flown and continues to fly these balloons over all other countries while collecting data.

If important communications are encrypted we have nothing to worry about.  I suspect that this is just a low-cost way for China to do random fishing expeditions, test our defenses and pull our chain at the same time.

49 minutes ago, heybruce said:

If important communications are encrypted we have nothing to worry about.  I suspect that this is just a low-cost way for China to do random fishing expeditions, test our defenses and pull our chain at the same time.

Most likely was the collection of high resolution photos and true GPS Lat/Long pinpointed locations to fine tune any missle platforms or whatever....

Edited February 10, 20233 yr by ThailandRyan

On 2/5/2023 at 11:56 PM, nauseus said:

Once again - no evidence - just hearsay with no detail. If there were truly three previously under Trump then at least one of them would have made the news. I expect that The Billings Gazette will know. But will they tell?!

They where most likely weather balloons, and as Joe would say nothing to see here.

5 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

They where most likely weather balloons, and as Joe would say nothing to see here.

But then you would be wrong. Better look at the recent developments.

22 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

But then you would be wrong. Better look at the recent developments.

Like this one? It's even on CNN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPzbkTBK_QI

 

2 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

Like this one? It's even on CNN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPzbkTBK_QI

 

That's John Bolton claiming exactly the opposite. He said it should have been shot down sooner because it did pose a potential threat. 

4 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

Like this one? It's even on CNN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPzbkTBK_QI

 

War monger, thats what he is

 

Chemical and nuclear weapons i  a tagged ballon from China, says it is Chinese?

 

???? Who believes such, as well being on the phone with officials from China admitting it is their property.

 

FS it is a bull pie show, and hopefully more than 50% of the voters  understands it

35 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

They where most likely weather balloons, and as Joe would say nothing to see here.

Likely not. Invitation by the Biden administration has been offered to brief former Trump officials about the spy balloons that they failed to detect during his administration. So far, Trump officials have not responded probably saving them from further embarrassment. 

Chinese balloon wasn’t downed over Alaska due to ‘dangerous’ recovery

 

"A senior Pentagon official on Thursday tried to justify the military’s decision not to shoot down a Chinese balloon as soon as it entered Alaskan airspace by highlighting the dangers doing so would have posed to the recovery and examination of its surveillance equipment.
She noted that bursting the balloon over Alaskan waters would have translated into “a very different recovery operation.” The Bering Sea can reach depths exceeding 13,000 feet, with below-freezing winter temperatures and ice cover in its northern portion, and all of that “can be extremely dangerous” and “induce additional risk,” she said."

 

Well, who knew!*

 

*Sarcasm alert.

A post with trolling comments has been removed.

10 hours ago, heybruce said:

As I explained, we do not have, and never had, the ability to catch a balloon or payload at anything close to the altitude the Chinese balloon was at. 

 

You said Newt's words were correct.  His words were:  “We had plenty of capacity to scoop that balloon out of the air,”

 

Newt's words were incorrect, and shows a willingness to speak authoritatively on a subject of which he is clearly ignorant.  You claiming the words were correct shows the same willingness.

Yes, at that altitude. You add in qualifiers to suit yourself. But balloons were "snagged" using the old method at lower altitudes and at slower speeds.

 

Gingrich is living in the past and should have been more careful with what he said. 

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yeah, Moore was a bad joke in comparison.

Connery was a hard act to follow in that role. Moore was different but I thought he was great, especially as The Saint before that. 

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

That's John Bolton claiming exactly the opposite. He said it should have been shot down sooner because it did pose a potential threat. 

I think VV may have included a wee bit of sarcasm in his comment.

18 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Yes, at that altitude. You add in qualifiers to suit yourself. But balloons were "snagged" using the old method at lower altitudes and at slower speeds.

 

Gingrich is living in the past and should have been more careful with what he said. 

I added a qualifier to fit the situation.  I could have gone further; the recovery system you refer to can only be accomplished at very low altitudes and low airspeed and with a payload attached to a line specially designed to stretch rather than jerk the payload to pieces.

 

We have never had the ability to snatch the balloon or its payload out of the sky at anywhere near the altitude the balloon was at.  That is what Gingrich claimed we could do and you agreed with him.  Just admit you are wrong, and consider not commenting on subjects you know nothing about.

 

Just because you've seen it in a movie doesn't mean it's real.

Edited February 10, 20233 yr by heybruce