Chinese spy balloon floating over the US

[Arjen]

The jury is still out on the sensors carried by the balloon. More news to follow when the remains are dredged up?

 

[jeffb]

Wow. So a balloon with the ability to direct its course (there were maneuvering units onboard), with a giant array of sensors, just happens to pass over numerous military installations and that qualifies as "zero evidence"? Really?

Who says it has the ability to direct it's course? Show me its engines.

And the ignorance continues to pour forth. Is it because you don't see Chinese mushroom clouds over the US? If so that's a cartoonish way of looking at the world.

Ignorance? Cartoonish?

I wasn't aware that China had threaten to attack CONUS without provocation. They've certainly not said anything as silly as Mike Minihan's comments on Friday, Jan 27th, that war was likely with China by 2025, to prepare by firing a clip at a target and to aim for the head. Many scoffed at the time saying Minihan had gone too far (or lost it altogether frankly). Then, miraculously, on Feb 2nd, a Chinese "spy balloon" was identified floating over the United States.

The jury is still out on the sensors carried by the balloon. More news to follow when the remains are dredged up?

Will be interesting to see. Blowing it up and then letting it fall 60,000 feet into the Atlantic sure won't help though.

I don't really understand the logic for not shooting it down over land. It's not like Montana and Wyoming are densely populated. Once the balloon is popped it's going to fall pretty much straight down. You'd think they'd have been able to pick a spot where it could be shot down reasonably safely.

 

[sferrin]

Who says it has the ability to direct it's course? Show me its engines.

Chinese Spy Balloon Has Unexpected Maneuverability

An expert explains why it’s so odd that the suspected Chinese spy balloon can change course

www.scientificamerican.com

Ignorance? Cartoonish?

I wasn't aware that China had threaten to attack CONUS without provocation. They've certainly not said anything as silly as Mike Minihan's comments on Friday, Jan 27th, that war was likely with China by 2025, to prepare by firing a clip at a target and to aim for the head. Many scoffed at the time saying Minihan had gone too far (or lost it altogether frankly). Then, miraculously, on Feb 2nd, a Chinese "spy balloon" was identified floating over the United States.

Thanks for proving my point.

I don't really understand the logic for not shooting it down over land. It's not like Montana and Wyoming are densely populated. Once the balloon is popped it's going to fall pretty much straight down. You'd think they'd have been able to pick a spot where it could be shot down reasonably safely.

They could have (and should have) shot it down over the Aleutians.

 

[TomS]

This will probably end up being one of the strangest events to happen this year, and the annoying part is the wait for all of this to be declassified at least 20 years later.

Don't the Chinese have space planes? Couldn't they've used one instead of a balloon? There are just so many questions.

No one has "space planes." And even if they did, flying an aerospace vehicle into US sovereign airspace would be even more provocative than a balloon.

China does have satellites, but maybe theirs aren't that good?

I don't really understand the logic for not shooting it down over land. It's not like Montana and Wyoming are densely populated. Once the balloon is popped it's going to fall pretty much straight down. You'd think they'd have been able to pick a spot where it could be shot down reasonably safely.

Still non-zero risk, and it was moving into more populated areas rather quickly. Over water, it's much easier to see where the people (boats) are (hence the P-8 in the orbit with the RC-135s and other aircraft around the balloon when they did drop it) Plus, payload recovery for exploitation is likely to be more successful if it hits water.

Who says it has the ability to direct it's course? Show me its engines.

So, this press release for a US remote sensing company just dropped today (ironically). One of the bullet points for their own stratospheric balloon offering is "altitude control for dynamic navigation, provides for persistent coverage over high-value assets." So, you don't necessarily need propulsion for direction control, just altitude control.

World View emphasizes remote sensing as it prepares to go public

World View, the stratospheric ballooning company that announced plans to go public last month, is emphasizing remote sensing and not tourism.

spacenews.com

 

[jeffb]

I'll repeat: show me its engines.

The Scientific American article gives an opinion by a professor of electrical engineering of statements made by the US DoD claiming the balloon has the ability to maneuver. Where's the evidence? The Youtube video just repeats the same DoD claims.

Thanks for proving my point.

Not sure what point you were trying to make or how my reply proved it for you. Maybe you could take us through it.

 

[jeffb]

So, this press release for a US remote sensing company just dropped today (ironically). One of the bullet points for their own stratospheric balloon offering is "altitude control for dynamic navigation, provides for persistent coverage over high-value assets." So, you don't necessarily need propulsion for direction control, just altitude control.

This is what I'd assumed when they claimed it was "maneuverable" but it's completely at the mercy of the winds still. If there's a wind at a different altitude that will bring you back over a certain point , great. If not...

 

[sferrin]

I'll repeat: show me its engines.

The Scientific American article gives an opinion by a professor of electrical engineering of statements made by the US DoD claiming the balloon has the ability to maneuver. Where's the evidence? The Youtube video just repeats the same DoD claims.

Thanks for proving my point.

Not sure what point you were trying to make or how my reply proved it for you. Maybe you could take us through it.

Not interested.

 

[edwest4]

Zero evidence or logic in claim that this was an intelligence gathering platform. Areas it flew over would be essentially random.

Yes, and? If the goal was to get photos of a specific map coordinate, sure, balloons are silly. But there are far more goals than that:
1) Recording radar signatures from ground transmitters.
2) Recording radar emissions form intercepting aircraft.
3) Recording all manner of electronic emissions, military and civilian.
4) Simply seeing what the US would do.

There are now claims that the Chinese have multiple balloons up now, multiple balloons int he past. A single spy balloon does little. blanket the skies with them and you can map the electronic emissions of a continent.

Oh... oh pleeez.

The following is NOT an actual transmission:

"Base to all units in the following zones. Turn off everything until the you know what passes overhead. And no cell phones! That means you Bob."

 

[edwest4]

And China reacts:

China accuses US of indiscriminate use of force over balloon

BEIJING (AP) — China on Monday accused the United States of indiscriminate use of force in shooting down a suspected Chinese spy balloon , saying it “seriously impacted and damaged both sides’ efforts and progress in stabilizing Sino-U.S.

apnews.com

 

[GK Dundas]

Good old fashioned Chinese middle finger diplomacy. The rules apply to thee but not to me.

 

[edwest4]

The following did not happen.

U.S. Weather Balloon Accidentally Drifts Off Course - Ends Up Over China

(AP) A U.S. weather balloon veered off course and ended up over southern China. It was immediately shot down. The Chinese government lodged a formal protest and issued the following statement: "This incident seriously impacted and damaged both sides' efforts and progress in stabilizing Sino-U.S. relations." China also demanded an apology. A spokesman from the State Department stated that no apology was necessary. That the balloon was a weather balloon, nothing more. He offered to provide complete tracking information for the balloon up to the point where it went off course.

 

[Nigelhg]

So, this press release for a US remote sensing company just dropped today (ironically). One of the bullet points for their own stratospheric balloon offering is "altitude control for dynamic navigation, provides for persistent coverage over high-value assets." So, you don't necessarily need propulsion for direction control, just altitude control.

This is what I'd assumed when they claimed it was "maneuverable" but it's completely at the mercy of the winds still. If there's a wind at a different altitude that will bring you back over a certain point , great. If not...

Wind direction and force varies greatly with altitude- it may have been maneuverable but only in a limited capacity

 

[TomS]

The size of this balloon may not have been fully realized. From a briefing by NORTHCOM, the payload "gondola" was roughly the size of a regional jet airliner and weighed a couple of thousand pounds. Also, it may have contained an explosive self-destruct package. The debris field on impact was about 1500 yards across. That's a big footprint, even over "empty" land. I think these factors are pretty suggestive of why the US military wanted to wait and bring this thing down over water.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622661180715302912

View: https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1622661180715302912

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622660526860865537

View: https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1622660526860865537

 

[uk 75]

What now puzzles me is why some sort of US fighter was not sent to investigate this large object while it was still over the Pacific.
I naively hope that even the cash strapped RAF would despatch a Typhoon to give this a look if it approached UK over the North Sea.

 

[TomS]

What now puzzles me is why some sort of US fighter was not sent to investigate this large object while it was still over the Pacific.

It seems quite possible that we did not actually see it. NORTHCOM also acknowledged that at least four other balloons have overflown parts of the US (including Guam) in recent years without being detected. We only found out about them after the fact via other intelligence sources.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622706311245824000

View: https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1622706311245824000

 

[southwestforests]

Hmm, interesting from The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/05/us/politics/balloon-china-spying-united-states.html

It is not yet clear what that “mission” was, or whether the risk of letting it proceed truly outweighed the risk of taking the balloon down over land, as Mr. Turner seemed to imply. It is only a small part of the increasingly aggressive “Spy vs. Spy” moves of superpower competitors. That has only intensified as control of semiconductor production equipment, artificial intelligence tools, 5G telecommunications, quantum computing and biological sciences has become the source of new arms races. And both sides play.

Yet it was the obviousness of the balloon that made many in Washington wonder whether the intelligence community and the civilian leadership in Beijing are communicating with each other.
“Whatever the value of what the Chinese might have obtained,” said Gen. Michael Rogers, the former director of the National Security Agency during the Obama and Trump administrations, “what was different here was the visibility. It just has a different feel when it is a physical intrusion on the country.” And once it was detected, China “handled it badly,” he said.

 

[aim9xray]

https://www.kltv.com/2019/01/06/high-altitude-balloon-crashes-upshur-county/

This was a domestic crash of a high altitude balloon with fire and small explosions from the payload. Now imagine 20x more Li batteries and an impact even in unpopulated rangeland. Now put that fire out in the middle of nowhere (with the RDF of trained attack lawyers close on the heels of the Hotshot firefighters).

Likely better to mitigate the payload and wait to splash the payload in shallow coastal waters (which is precisely what they did).

 

[quellish]

China does have satellites, but maybe theirs aren't that good?

I recently purchased commercial satellite imagery of several.... interesting places. The imagery was advertised as <1M resolution, and sourced from a Chinese satellite constellation.

It is. SO. BAD.

It's not that it's low resolution (and it probably is not the advertised resolution). The overall quality is terrible. Blurry, terrible smearing, artifacts and more. It's unusable. So bad you can't even discern wether a 737 is a 737. SPOT images of like 20m resolution I bought in the early 1990s were better than this.

 

[VTOLicious]

Wow. So a balloon with the ability to direct its course (there were maneuvering units onboard), with a giant array of sensors, just happens to pass over numerous military installations and that qualifies as "zero evidence"? Really?

Who says it has the ability to direct it's course? Show me its engines.

Is this CGI or real photography?

 

[TomS]

Wow. So a balloon with the ability to direct its course (there were maneuvering units onboard), with a giant array of sensors, just happens to pass over numerous military installations and that qualifies as "zero evidence"? Really?

Who says it has the ability to direct it's course? Show me its engines.

Is this CGI or real photography?

CGI

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622724228733718530

View: https://twitter.com/boltondynamics/status/1622724228733718530?t=eupbVQTS3ZS0D3GOrnmzVA&s=19

 

[jeffb]

Whoops.

I think I meant to post this one that was reportedly seen over Japan in 2020. In my haste I posted the wrong one.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1273749224174190592

View: https://twitter.com/JohnMPowell1/status/1273749224174190592?t=ji6BQtlj43sBvLrL4mH0xA&s=19

 

[lostcosmonauts]

In the above and referenced discussions I’m a bit confused as to why there is a binary choice between “do nothing” and “shoot it down”

Wouldn’t letting it fly on give the US a week long opportunity to orbit with electronic intelligence and warfare platforms and gather signal intelligence in both directions, study what the capabilities are, spoof or jam signals where they stray into sensitive areas and then gather the physical remains when all that is done? Is there anything meaningful the Chinese could learn from doing this that is worth so comprehensively showing their hand as to their current surveillance structures and capabilities?

 

[publiusr]

Was there also some confusion with HBAL617 or N257TH "Aerostar Thunderhead balloons?" As to previous overflights-is there a way to check their paths against early Covid outbreak maps?

 

[TomS]

As to previous overflights-is there a way to check their paths against early Covid outbreak maps?

That's absolute nonsense, right up there with chemtrails and moon landing hoax theories.

COVID spread naturally, just like many other viruses. There is no credible evidence that it was deliberately spread.

 

[Archibald]

Between paranoid jingoism and conspiracy, I'm surprised this thread is still alive and kicking. Considering the fate of too many Ukraine war threads...
Countdown to oblivion probably has already started.
Resistance is futile. Prepare to be nuked.

 

[sferrin]

The size of this balloon may not have been fully realized. From a briefing by NORTHCOM, the payload "gondola" was roughly the size of a regional jet airliner and weighed a couple of thousand pounds. Also, it may have contained an explosive self-destruct package. The debris field on impact was about 1500 yards across. That's a big footprint, even over "empty" land. I think these factors are pretty suggestive of why the US military wanted to wait and bring this thing down over water.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622661180715302912

View: https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1622661180715302912

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622660526860865537

View: https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1622660526860865537

There was plenty of empty land over the Aleutians.

 

[sferrin]

What now puzzles me is why some sort of US fighter was not sent to investigate this large object while it was still over the Pacific.

It seems quite possible that we did not actually see it.

That would surprise me. I've seen sources saying we've been watching it since it was over the Aleutians. That we would station F-22s up there, and NOT be able to see something like this doesn't make sense.

 

[sferrin]

In the above and referenced discussions I’m a bit confused as to why there is a binary choice between “do nothing” and “shoot it down”

Wouldn’t letting it fly on give the US a week long opportunity to orbit with electronic intelligence and warfare platforms and gather signal intelligence in both directions, study what the capabilities are, spoof or jam signals where they stray into sensitive areas and then gather the physical remains when all that is done? Is there anything meaningful the Chinese could learn from doing this that is worth so comprehensively showing their hand as to their current surveillance structures and capabilities?

Bad idea. Best case they learn something, we learn something. There is no scenario where we learn something, and they learn nothing by us letting the balloon cross many military facilities. Should have just shot it down the minute it crossed into our airspace.

 

[TomS]

In the above and referenced discussions I’m a bit confused as to why there is a binary choice between “do nothing” and “shoot it down”

Wouldn’t letting it fly on give the US a week long opportunity to orbit with electronic intelligence and warfare platforms and gather signal intelligence in both directions, study what the capabilities are, spoof or jam signals where they stray into sensitive areas and then gather the physical remains when all that is done? Is there anything meaningful the Chinese could learn from doing this that is worth so comprehensively showing their hand as to their current surveillance structures and capabilities?

Bad idea. Best case they learn something, we learn something. There is no scenario where we learn something, and they learn nothing by us letting the balloon cross many military facilities. Should have just shot it down the minute it crossed into our airspace.

OK, so they saw it but didn't think it was a big deal. I would say that Northcom has not covered themselves in glory here, but if the mitigation efforts they talk about were in place, the likelihood of real significant damage this time around was probably pretty low.

DOD did not think the spy balloon was a military threat when it was first detected

The Pentagon didn't shoot down the Chinese balloon as it approached Alaska in January because it did not pose a military threat , a top commander said.

www.usatoday.com

 

[sferrin]

In the above and referenced discussions I’m a bit confused as to why there is a binary choice between “do nothing” and “shoot it down”

Wouldn’t letting it fly on give the US a week long opportunity to orbit with electronic intelligence and warfare platforms and gather signal intelligence in both directions, study what the capabilities are, spoof or jam signals where they stray into sensitive areas and then gather the physical remains when all that is done? Is there anything meaningful the Chinese could learn from doing this that is worth so comprehensively showing their hand as to their current surveillance structures and capabilities?

Bad idea. Best case they learn something, we learn something. There is no scenario where we learn something, and they learn nothing by us letting the balloon cross many military facilities. Should have just shot it down the minute it crossed into our airspace.

OK, so they saw it but didn't think it was a big deal. I would say that Northcom has not covered themselves in glory here, but if the mitigation efforts they talk about were in place, the likelihood of real significant damage this time around was probably pretty low.

DOD did not think the spy balloon was a military threat when it was first detected

The Pentagon didn't shoot down the Chinese balloon as it approached Alaska in January because it did not pose a military threat , a top commander said.

www.usatoday.com

I wonder about it. Given its altitude it's a safe bet they knew, if it was seen, an F-22 might have been used to shoot it down. Have they ever had opportunity to collect information from an operating F-22? And then the F-22 uses a weapon that doesn't require its radar to be operating. (And apparently the AIM-9X didn't have a warhead, or didn't detonate the one it had, intentionally.) Would be interesting to know all the details.

 

[Dreamfighter]

NORAD Missed Previous Chinese Spy Balloons: ‘A Domain Awareness Gap We Have to Figure Out’ | Air & Space Forces Magazine

Chinese balloons have previously entered U.S. airspace but went undetected by the Pentagon, NORAD commander Gen. Glen D. VanHerck said.

www.airandspaceforces.com

 

[TomS]

(And apparently the AIM-9X didn't have a warhead, or didn't detonate the one it had, intentionally.) Would be interesting to know all the details.

Where are you getting the idea that it didn't have a live warhead? The intercept video shows a pretty distinct bang before the balloon envelope shredded. Also, NORTHCOM says they selected AIM-9X in part because the warhead was smaller to minimize damage to the target (and improve recovery chances).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622661792509079558

View: https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1622661792509079558
.

 

[sferrin]

(And apparently the AIM-9X didn't have a warhead, or didn't detonate the one it had, intentionally.) Would be interesting to know all the details.

Where are you getting the idea that it didn't have a live warhead? The intercept video shows a pretty distinct bang before the balloon envelope shredded. Also, NORTHCOM says they selected AIM-9X in part because the warhead was smaller to minimize damage to the target (and improve recovery chances).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622661792509079558

View: https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1622661792509079558
.

I saw the bang too. I thought the lack of a fireball/blast might have been due to the altitude. Then the Ward Carroll video I posted up the page a ways indicated it didn't have a warhead.

 

[aonestudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622988429045776385

View: https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1622988429045776385

 

[edwest4]

Gentlemen, please -

We need a global Balloon Overflight Treaty. A list of instructions about what to do if one of THEIR balloons overflies your country.

Here's an excerpt from a draft version:

1) First, determine if it's one of ours.
2) If not, shoot it down.

That about covers it.

 

[Moose]

The tracks I've seen on this had it traveling North as it crossed the Aleutian chain before hanging a Roger and crossing over mainland Alaska. If this was the first time a PRC balloon made that route change, it seems likely the change caught them off guard. I'm wondering if China has sent legitimate science balloon missions along that path to the pole recently specifically to set up the expectation that a balloon on that route wasn't a concern.

 

[sferrin]

The tracks I've seen on this had it traveling North as it crossed the Aleutian chain before hanging a Roger and crossing over mainland Alaska. If this was the first time a PRC balloon made that route change, it seems likely the change caught them off guard. I'm wondering if China has sent legitimate science balloon missions along that path to the pole recently specifically to set up the expectation that a balloon on that route wasn't a concern.

It's not like it was an SR-71 and didn't give them time to react.

 

[Orionblamblam]

A proposal:
1) Take a C-17...
2) Build a liquid propellant rocket stage that *just* fits within the C-17. Simple, reusable, basic controls...
3) Design a payload fairing that can open, release payload, close again...
4) Install a simple recovery system. Lift jets, rotors, parafoil, retroburn... don't care. Whatever works, and works well and cheap. Maybe air-snatch by the very same C-17.

Now, you need a payload: A blimp. designed for high altitude work, is stowed compact within the rockets payload fairing. The rocket stage delivers the payload to the vicinity of a spy balloon. It delivers the payload at low relative velocity, *not* "bat outta hell" speeds. When released, the blimps envelope is quickly filled with, say, hydrogen. During this time it will doubtless descend, so it will have to be delivered *above* the balloon. Once the blimp is deployed, it rendezvous with the balloon. Gets in close, does a detailed visual examination. Then it deployed Negation Systems. These can be something as simple as a shotgun that blasts bits of steel cable at the envelope; a laser that slashes at it; sharp pointy knives or hooks dragged below the blimp to snag and shred the balloon; a hose that spritzes flaming thermite droplets or acid or a cryogenic fluid that will shatter the balloon.

 

[edwest4]

I suggest a Multiple Spear Launcher. Fit an F-22 with the MSL to cut costs. Since we have the remains of an actual Chinese Weather/Spy balloon, tests can start immediately.

 

[Moose]

The tracks I've seen on this had it traveling North as it crossed the Aleutian chain before hanging a Roger and crossing over mainland Alaska. If this was the first time a PRC balloon made that route change, it seems likely the change caught them off guard. I'm wondering if China has sent legitimate science balloon missions along that path to the pole recently specifically to set up the expectation that a balloon on that route wasn't a concern.

It's not like it was an SR-71 and didn't give them time to react.

They weren't tailing it with a MiG-25, either. The thing crossed from the Mississippi river to the coast of South Carolina in a day. It was fast enough that by the time whatever station was monitoring it realized the thing was diverting, the window to safely set up a shoot over water was closed.