Pentagon Personnel On Site to Investigate Loose Blimp

(CNN)Some 40 personnel from the home base of the military blimp that broke loose Wednesday are now at the site where it landed, a U.S. military official told CNN.

The blimp, associated with NORAD's surveillance of the East Coast, became untethered from its mooring station at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.

I have never seen this type of blimp before. Have any of you? It's roughly 243 feet long! Is this blimp 'classified?' I would suspect not, given it's size.

The blimp landed Wednesday afternoon in northeast Pennsylvania, according to NORAD, which described the landing site as "in a rugged, wooded area." The military took no kinetic action to bring it to the ground, according to the Pentagon.

The loose JLENS blimp had been in the air over Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, and caused power outages before it came down, Columbia County Department of Public Safety Director Fred Hunsinger said.

The NORAD spokesman did not give a reason why the blimp got loose. Heads going to roll on this one??

NORAD BLIMP

a reply to: Cosmic911

I am interested to know if EADS is involved in the operations of these blimps, given they are responsible for monitoring the East Coast, and it's parent commander is NORAD. To do their job, EADS does rely on the Tethered Aerostat Radar System Balloons, among others.

a reply to: Cosmic911

Turns out it was just Michael Moore dressed as a ghost, shooting another fake documentary.

a reply to: Cosmic911

…and caused power outages before it came down…

I was waiting for that. Yesterday while it was still in the air, the news announced it was "dragging a mile long cable" behind it, shorting hi tension lines as it went.

Interesting, they claim its NORADs balloon to "surveil the East Coast".

These kind of tethered balloons are used to monitor large areas in Afghanistan for ground traffic and "terrs". Sophistcated optics, IR and thermal included can see afar and zoom close. Who needs drones?

Wasn't there a thread about a helicopter tangling with a cable of one there, recently?

How does it feel East Coast to be monitored 24/7 from the air?

a reply to: Cosmic911

It's called an Aerostat. They've been using them for many years. They lost two in one day to weather in 2011. One had to be shot down by an F-16 over Afghanistan.

Weather wreaks havoc with them. It takes hours to get them up and down, so if a sudden wind or storm blows in there's not a lot they can do about it. If the wind is strong enough, the cable will snap and off it goes.

a reply to: intrptr

JLENS is an airborne surveillance system. It's watching airborne objects, not the ground. It doesn't care about the people on the ground, it's watching for missiles and incoming aircraft. It's not the same system as PGSS. It also isn't watching the entire East coast. It has a range slightly better than a ground based radar.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The image i saw looked like it had a ray dome on the bottom of it. not surprising as it has radar.....but i thought that there were land based systems to track boats and aircraft? is this just a cheap quick way to fill in the radar bubbles? i want to think there is AESA type system getting into or targeting whatever targets but thats probably just crazy.

a reply to: penroc3

Ground based systems top out at between 250 and 275 miles depending on conditions, due to the horizon. An OTH system can't see closer than 3-400 miles because of the way the beam is sent out (at least they couldn't). An airborne radar at 10,000 feet has a horizon closer to 350 miles.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The "surveillance balloons" tethered over Afghanistan don't surveil the ground?

Tell me "NORADS" balloon doesn't have incredibly powerful optics aboard that aren't capable of being trained on the ground, at all.

Whatever the official story, people can do their own research on theses "types" of balloons by looking at the "surveillance" balloons used over Afghanistan.

There are oodles of googles on the subject.

a reply to: intrptr

The Aerostat system in Afghanistan is designed to survey ground targets. It's not the same system as this one is. This system is designed to detect cruise missiles and other airborne targets approaching the DC area. It's not designed to track targets on the ground.

An Aerostat is not an Aerostat is not an Aerostat. They perform different missions and have different sensors mounted.

Even if it has optical systems and aimed them at the ground they're not going to see very far. They would be designed to look out at long range to identify targets in the air. At 10,000 feet they won't see very far looking down. JLENS however only has radar installed right now though. They may eventually get an EO/IR system but only if the Army wants it.

a reply to: intrptr

That's like saying you can learn about an F-15 by reading about a C-5. One Aerostat is NOT the same as every other Aerostat. Reading about the system in Afghanistan will teach you about PGSS which is completely different from JLENS.

a reply to: Zaphod58

This system is designed to detect cruise missiles and other airborne targets approaching the DC area. It's not designed to track targets on the ground.

Detects and tracks ground targets, too.

Image

a reply to: intrptr

JLENS detects ground targets the way an air to air radar does. Just about any radar can detect something moving, which is exactly what the operator will see if the display is set up to show it. SOMETHING moving. It's not designed for ground surveillance the way PGSS does and the way you're talking about. The system is setup to not display targets traveling below a certain speed, because an aircraft or missile can't fly that slow.

Good idea .
And while they're at it , investigate why they had to
scramble jets to intercept it , that did nothing , as it caused a lot
of damage to local power infrastructure ...

Don't these things have a remote control 'deflate' button ?
If not , WHY NOT ?

a reply to: radarloveguy

Because it was, obviously, traveling over a well populated area.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And it was trailing a very long , steel cable ,
that caused a lot of damage and could have injured people.
Kinda like a hijacked airliner .... shoot it down BEFORE it creates a bigger problem .

a reply to: radarloveguy

So shoot it down over heavily populated areas and almost guarantee making things worse, and cause injuries and potential deaths.

a reply to: Zaphod58


And bringing down high voltage powerlines is the safer option ?

Mitigate , not procrastinate !

a reply to: radarloveguy

When the odds are good that you could kill people then hell yes losing power lines is the better option.