It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: asabuvsobelow
Ok, sure. We’ll just let a great opportunity to gather extremely valuable Intel, in our own back yard, because we want to make people feel better. That makes perfect sense. Screw the guys that may have to actually fight China, it’s far more important that Ma and Pa Kettle feel good.
As for the rest, whatever you say. You’re the expert.
At 66,000 feet, at night time, you're saying it's reflecting the sun?
The American people don't care about some intelligence gathering
originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: SrWingCommander
Fascinating!
I've been talking about the use of high-altitude lighter than air vehicles (LAV's) as potential ISR platforms for years.
Actually proposed an extremely high-altitude, long duration powered airship/divisible as an early waring defense/weapons platform against hypersonic weapons.
Was told it wasn't practical. Go figure.
I note that the Pentagon is calling it a balloon, and have, so far, refrained from shooting it down out of concern for the "risk to the safety and security of the people on the ground from the possible debris field".
That's bullsh#t.
If it were really just a "balloon", as they claim, the debris field would be rather small (likely less than an American football field) and most of the debris would consist of the balloon envelope itself. The payload (the ISR equipment suite), could weigh a couple tons, depending on the size of the balloon, and could pose a danger if it fell on a densely populated area.
But EVERY balloon launch I've ever been a part of had an altitude-triggered parachute recovery system integrated into the payload system.
Because you can't "land" a balloon that is "just a balloon"!
Nope!
My money is on this intruder being more than a balloon.
I think it is actually an autonomous, long distance/duration stratospheric self-propelled airship.
And that, if you read, and understood what I had mentioned as a proposal earlier, is worrisome.
originally posted by: Fairtrade141
Truthfully, after my belief that it was photographed behind the ISS, I think my brand of idiocy held more water. What I cannot stand about our media is at first they have these low resolution photographs of things, and then boom, you get the whole picture and it makes people like me look retarded. Short bus retarded.
So when I see people tilting at windmills I try to give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe one day they’ll realize they were in error. I mean, I’m actually a pretty smart guy but without intellectual honesty it makes someone look like a moron. a reply to: McGinty
originally posted by: stormbringercompanion
Even the Brits could have downed this in the 1970's if they had wanted to. The BAC Lightning by mid 70's could be above 60,000 feet in under four minutes from take-off. Whatever it is, there are multiple solutions to bring it down. what surprises me is that it wasn't splashed over the Pacific.
C'mon Zaph you know any tech in there is already stolen from the US.