https://youtu.be/DJusB7MnReE

Anyone else feel super confident in our government now? (Chortle)

I've heard some fairly convincing arguments that the government let it go the whole distance because it allowed us to gather more intelligence about the Chinese than what the balloon was able to gather about us.  The balloon wouldn't really get anything more than what could be seen in regular satellite photos, so no risk there.  However, as long as it was talking back and forth with whomever launched it, we were able to listen in on that and potentially use that information going forward with code breaking or interpreting other communications.  After gathering as much counter-intel as we could, we then shot it down at a time/place where we could both minimize the risk to people, and maximize the likelihood of retrieving the pieces. 

Basically, it posed very little risk to us, but gave us some significant intelligence about them.  One of those, "never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" situations.

You'd think with all the technology China has, they'd have better ways to surveil the US than a bunch of balloons, right ?

I mean the Chinese would be better off just letting Americans willingly hand over their user data via TikTok instead of wasting time with balloons or spy satellites.

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on February 22, 2023, 03:49:31 PMYou'd think with all the technology China has, they'd have better ways to surveil the US than a bunch of balloons, right ?

I mean the Chinese would be better off just letting Americans willingly hand over their user data via TikTok instead of wasting time with balloons or spy satellites.

True, but you're assuming that every decision maker there is logical.  For all we know, it could've been a "brilliant" idea cooked up by someone in their government/military who set it up and did it on their own, without approval from higher up.  To them, it might've made sense and it simply didn't get overruled, because nobody higher up even knew about it.

Large organizations, like governments, militaries, big companies, etc. have always had problems like that.  We studied some of them in college in poli-sci classes.  The classic example is the Challenger explosion.  The issue with the o-rings was widely known to the engineers.  But the people above them either didn't know, or didn't think it was as big of an issue as it turned out to be.  There were just too many levels between the people who knew something, and those who were in charge.  Oops.

And something that I've wondered about is whether this was intended for us at all, or if it was targeted closer to home, like South Korea, Japan, or even North Korea (the Chinese and N. Korea aren't exactly on great terms right now).  Maybe there was supposed to be a way for them to down the balloon themselves (like a charge that would blow out the balloon so that they could crash it into the sea once it was done), but it failed and the balloon kept going.  If you look at a map of the believed path of the balloon, it went over both S. Korea and Japan. 

The potential scariest option of all is that maybe it was a test flight / proof-of-concept for using a balloon like this to float an EMP-device over the US.  The height is just about optimal, and a real EMP device wouldn't need to be anywhere near as large as the payload on that first balloon...

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on February 22, 2023, 03:49:31 PMYou'd think with all the technology China has, they'd have better ways to surveil the US than a bunch of balloons, right ?

I mean the Chinese would be better off just letting Americans willingly hand over their user data via TikTok instead of wasting time with balloons or spy satellites.

If spy sats were the best answer then we wouldn't still be flying recon aircraft.  This is China's version of a long-range recon aircraft.  It's closer to the ground than a sat, has less atmosphere to try and peer through and can take better pictures.

Quote from: NT2C on February 22, 2023, 04:12:54 PM

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on February 22, 2023, 03:49:31 PMYou'd think with all the technology China has, they'd have better ways to surveil the US than a bunch of balloons, right ?

I mean the Chinese would be better off just letting Americans willingly hand over their user data via TikTok instead of wasting time with balloons or spy satellites.

If spy sats were the best answer then we wouldn't still be flying recon aircraft.  This is China's version of a long-range recon aircraft.  It's closer to the ground than a sat, has less atmosphere to try and peer through and can take better pictures.

I thought China already had a long-range recon aircraft ?

I could've sworn they had their own version of our SR-71 or the U2. Not sure if the Russians shared any info on the U2 with the Chinese when the Russians shot one down back in the 60's.

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on February 22, 2023, 05:24:34 PM

Quote from: NT2C on February 22, 2023, 04:12:54 PM

Quote from: 12_Gauge_Chimp on February 22, 2023, 03:49:31 PMYou'd think with all the technology China has, they'd have better ways to surveil the US than a bunch of balloons, right ?

I mean the Chinese would be better off just letting Americans willingly hand over their user data via TikTok instead of wasting time with balloons or spy satellites.

If spy sats were the best answer then we wouldn't still be flying recon aircraft.  This is China's version of a long-range recon aircraft.  It's closer to the ground than a sat, has less atmosphere to try and peer through and can take better pictures.

I thought China already had a long-range recon aircraft ?

I could've sworn they had their own version of our SR-71 or the U2. Not sure if the Russians shared any info on the U2 with the Chinese when the Russians shot one down back in the 60's.

It's one thing to have long range recon aircraft.  It's something entirely different to have long range aircraft that can safely operate in hostile airspace.  There's a reason why we're not flying SR-71s over Russia anymore.  And it's not just because satellites can can do the job just as well.

China does have long range aircraft more than capable of conducting surveillance daily. They have several state owned airlines that routinely fly from the PRC to several points in the US. There is no reason to assume that these cannot be (& likely have now) fitted with ELINT equipment. They do not need a U-2 or SR-71. A Boeing 777 or Airbus 350 is a much better platform for this type of activity. 

While these and all airline flights are closely monitored by ATC a pilot has discretion to change the route of the flight at his/her discretion. 

It would also be easy to schedule a specially fitted airliner on a "repositioning or R&M flight" to anywhere in the US as long as it is not a commercial passenger flight. 

The reason to use balloons is for loiter time. 

https://onemileatatime.com/chinese-airlines-banned-from-flying-to-us/

Quote from: Raptor on February 23, 2023, 12:21:58 PMChina does have long range aircraft more than capable of conducting surveillance daily. They have several state owned airlines that routinely fly from the PRC to several points in the US. There is no reason to assume that these cannot be (& likely have now) fitted with ELINT equipment. They do not need a U-2 or SR-71. A Boeing 777 or Airbus 350 is a much better platform for this type of activity.

While these and all airline flights are closely monitored by ATC a pilot has discretion to change the route of the flight at his/her discretion.

It would also be easy to schedule a specially fitted airliner on a "repositioning or R&M flight" to anywhere in the US as long as it is not a commercial passenger flight.

The reason to use balloons is for loiter time.

https://onemileatatime.com/chinese-airlines-banned-from-flying-to-us/

Fitting out such an airliner for ELINT duty would require some rather obvious changes to the airframe and control panels.  Even if some clever attempts were made to conceal the changes the plane would have to undergo inspection by US Customs and Border Protection.  No, I can't see such a project going unnoticed by the US. 

As for loiter time, yes, the balloon has that advantage but getting it directly over the target is a little problematic.

A lot would depend on what they were monitoring. The BIZJET below has a visible canoe to hide the antenna mainly for fuel efficiency. Yes that may raise some eyebrows but we let a freaking balloon the size of the below jet float over the CONUS

A larger airliner is already an antenna farm. It would be very easy to fit and fare in place antennas all over both flat and vertical (empennage) types. They could even be carried inside the cabin as long as it was a cargo plane or a plane enroute to a R&M facility.

Also note that as long as the plane is operating with an air worthiness certificate issued by it registrar (PRC) that is also recognized by the US they are good to go. If they are not carrying passengers for hire and/or en-route to an R&M facility there not much more scrutiny that can be done other than a search for contraband. 
You cannot view this attachment. You cannot view this attachment.

That and since it may be en-route to an R&M facility the Transponders may malfunction and then they would have to descend to uncontrolled airspace (below 18,000 ft) to continue the flight. They may have to circle a few times in the same area.  

At some point though they will have to land and be inspected by CBP.  It is no secret that CBP officers are well-trained in what things should look like and that anything that looks "odd" or unusual is going to get extra scrutiny.  Anything that appears to entail espionage is going to be reported to the FBI, etc.

Perhaps my point is being missed. An SR 71 and a U 2 is needed only if they have to dodge missiles. The US has an open sky policy as long as you follow FAA rules.

That and airliners make cod recon platforms. Why spend the money to develop a complex airframe?


 

Quote from: Raptor on February 23, 2023, 08:51:13 PMPerhaps my point is being missed. An SR 71 and a U 2 is needed only if they have to dodge missiles. The US has an open sky policy as long as you follow FAA rules.

That and airliners make cod recon platforms. Why spend the money to develop a complex airframe?


 

Interesting.  And when it comes to defeating missiles, 150 - 250 civilian passengers onboard are a lot more effective than chaff, flares or ECM.

Quote from: Raptor on February 23, 2023, 08:51:13 PMPerhaps my point is being missed. An SR 71 and a U 2 is needed only if they have to dodge missiles. The US has an open sky policy as long as you follow FAA rules.

That and airliners make cod recon platforms. Why spend the money to develop a complex airframe?


 

And my point is that such a modified airframe is going to get grounded and dismantled by our various security agencies & military shortly after its capabilities are detected.

Oh, and then there's the small problem of restricted airspace around sensitive locations.  Enter it and get to see fighter jets up close and personal, and explain your actions when you land.

I think the thing with the balloons is it's cheap, easy, effective, and they can do a ton of them and be disposable.

Heck, we knew about their balloon and it got the entire country West to East.

Plus, there's a bunch of stuff up there that no one pays attention to, so it's easy to slip "under the radar".

How long until there's an anthrax or EMP balloon that we shoot down??

Quote from: JeeperCreeper on February 24, 2023, 11:13:27 AMI think the thing with the balloons is it's cheap, easy, effective, and they can do a ton of them and be disposable.

Heck, we knew about their balloon and it got the entire country West to East.


Plus, there's a bunch of stuff up there that no one pays attention to, so it's easy to slip "under the radar".

How long until there's an anthrax or EMP balloon that we shoot down??

Well, yes, we generally just keep an eye on these things.  This wasn't our first international wandering balloon, it was just the first one the media decided to make a big deal over.  These balloons have been wandering all over the world from various countries for decades. 

Quote from: Anianna on February 24, 2023, 12:22:08 PM

Quote from: JeeperCreeper on February 24, 2023, 11:13:27 AMI think the thing with the balloons is it's cheap, easy, effective, and they can do a ton of them and be disposable.

Heck, we knew about their balloon and it got the entire country West to East.


Plus, there's a bunch of stuff up there that no one pays attention to, so it's easy to slip "under the radar".

How long until there's an anthrax or EMP balloon that we shoot down??

Well, yes, we generally just keep an eye on these things.  This wasn't our first international wandering balloon, it was just the first one the media decided to make a big deal over.  These balloons have been wandering all over the world from various countries for decades. 

The US spied on Merkels cell phone and it didn't damage diplomatic relationships on a long term basis. Denmark helped the US in spying on Germany, Germany itself supposedly helped the US spying on other EU leaders. So I'm not sure why everyone is surprised on China spying (if that even was a spying attempt) on the US.

If they really want to launch something all they need is something similar to the club k missile system.

This selfie above China's balloon was taken over Missouri.

Airborne Lasers would be the preferred method. Someone said it outloud. Lt. Col Tony Schaffer ret. [after UFoZS did of course]


https://youtu.be/pBp6YuTQ0q4?t=249