U.S. shoots down car-sized unidentified object flying above Alaska

originally posted by: horatio321
The object was detected by ground radar, then intercepted by F22 fighters which 'identified the object'.

Not of your doing……but I think ‘identified the object’ is a play on words…….like “Hey! there it is, I see it”….….not like “Hell!…..I know what that object is”

Imo…

👽

...

Human Nature is funny!

An observation…….

My Op in part has to do with …..why isn’t the government using the acronym UAP for what in my opinion is what this “object” is.

We’re 2 pages deep into this thread……and not one reply/post, (other than my own) used the UAP acronym and instead continue to use “object”

One member used the traditional “UFO” acronym.

Just goes to show you……it appears no one…..like the media, government, ourselves here on ATS…….are keen or care on using UAP over UFO.

Long Live the acronym “UFO”

Hmmmm

👽

The current military is very political.

Shooting something down just after it enters U. S. airspace offsets the pathetic weakness we saw last week with the Chinese spy balloon.

The fact that the military is portraying it as a "mysterious" object, makes the shootdown look more bold and brave.

They think we are idiots.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
Human Nature is funny!

An observation…….

My Op in part has to do with …..why isn’t the government using the acronym UAP for what in my opinion is what this “object” is.

We’re 2 pages deep into this thread……and not one reply/post, used the UAP acronym and instead continue to use “object”

One member used the traditional “UFO” acronym.

Just goes to show you……it appears no one…..like the media, government, ourselves here on ATS…….are keen or care on using UAP over UFO.

Long Live the acronym “UFO”

Hmmmm

👽

UAP is Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. it may very well be ball lightning or anything else that has natural origin.

so this wasn't it, since they shot it down - it was identified enough to narrow it down to something way more concrete than UAP. it was either manmade or alien, and since UFO is usually used to describe something alien in origin, don't count on the government using such term unless one day before disclosure.

an object it is then. physical object that can be influenced by conventional weaponry.

a reply to: jedi_hamster

I would infer from this, that UAP is all inclusive….based on …..”take any incursions”

It doesn’t matter that the organization names change over time (AARO being the current)….the acronym UAP …aka Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon….is now in the lexicon of the U.S. Government.


👽

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1

Ryder said American pilots who flew alongside the latest object before it was downed determined that no human was aboard.
He added it was incapable of maneuvering and did not resemble an airplane.
Ryder and other officials would not say whether it could simply be a weather balloon or another type of balloon.
"It wasn't an aircraft per se," Ryder told a news briefing.

Here’s the rub…….what happened to naming unidentified objects UAP’s ???

This has all the hallmarks of an unidentified flying object.

General Ryder is making the mundane incident 'Tantalizing'...for a purpose !

my best guess using the info from the OP snippet ----- is that the unmanned object the size of a compact car without steering capability ----- was a Advertising Blimp (like the half dozen such blimps tethered 500 feet above Phoenix Az immediately before the Phoenix-Lights encounter in March 1997)

the General as info-officer, is being coy and deceptive... i say the pilot of F22 was given absolute permission to down-the-object because it was completely ID'd as not UAP-UFO and just harmless junk

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask


…..Like ive said ive seen some pretty crazy things in the sky, but with the number of balloons that have come up recently it wouldnt surprise me if this was another,…….What I DO know is weve got both flying around out there lol

It’s probably the Chinese……..just add helium to one of these….and voila!

👽

Ha!! This is pretty cool. Imagine being on a plane in the middle of nowhere and this thing comes floating by 😂

a reply to: St Udio

is that the unmanned object the size of a compact car without steering capability ----- was a Advertising Blimp

An Advertising Blimp ? At 40,000 feet.

No.

a reply to: St Udio


update: (from hal turner web page)

Alaska National Guard, FBI, participated.

The object shot down was about the size of a small car. Not similar in size or shape to surveillance balloon.

The object shot down over Alaska did not appear to be "self-moving and was at the mercy of the wind"

The US aircraft involved in the shoot down was an F-22 fighter jet which fired an A-9X "Sidewinder" missile

the tracking pattern of the object is haphazard, see graphic at hal turner site. not a recommended fact site...

Re: halturnerradioshow.com...

originally posted by: St Udio
originally posted by: Ophiuchus1

i say the pilot of F22 was given absolute permission to down-the-object because it was completely ID'd as not UAP-UFO and just harmless junk

I’m going to beg to differ on this point your making above….

The UAP was headed northeast towards the pole ….it was close to getting over international waters.

Why not just let it keep going if it were harmless junk?

Our munitions stockpiles are getting low do to the supplying of Ukrainian armaments….overall.

You really think the government ok’d using an expensive missile to duck shoot junk aka garbage?

I can’t believe their that stupid.

Ok so I can see taking it down so it doesn’t interfere with air traffic that might get into the 40k ft level of airspace……….but then would you think that the government will always use expensive munitions on airborne garbage.

I’m sure taking out a piece of junk with a Missile will prevent it from being harmful…..but is that true?

Wouldn’t exploding the junk create a widespread debris field in the air causing more obstructions that would interfere with general aircraft?

Jus sayin


👽

a reply to: alldaylong

Advertising blimp at 40,000FT - Possible, if it were to perhaps have broken free from its tether somewhere. There is really no structural limitation that would have prevented a well made gas envelope, especially one designed to stand up to repeated inflation/deflation cycles as it is displayed, deflated, packed for storage, transported, unpacked, re-inflated for display in all kinds of weather, pulled down, and deflated, again and again.

But.

Advertising blimps are, by their purpose and definition, easily identifiable. Elsewise what would be the purpose of making and flying them? What would be the purpose of an advertisementthat didn't advertise anything for anyone?

Yet, it remains "an object". Unidentified (but not a UAP/UFO?). And unattributed .


And...

We were told this "object" was first detected on radar as it crossed into US territory.

Balloons, lacking any purpose-built radar reflectors or transmitters, are virtually invisible to radar. The payloads they may carry often provide a significant radar return (or not), but the balloon itself...nada.

So, if this was any kind of balloon, why did it show up on radar? Unless it was meant to show up on radar (why?).


If it was not a balloon, how did it remain aloft for so long without, as we have been told, any means of self-guidance or propulsion?


Based on the fact that there have been no pictures of the "object" published to the media, and the very fact that officials are even still referring to this thing as an "object", with no more definitive description than its relative size and unmanned nature, I am pessimistic about ever learning much more.



It's the age-old UFO conundrum:

If it's ours, we'd know and never have mentioned it in the first place. If it's from another country, they would know we now have it, and there would be no reason not to mention it (and lot of reasons to "shout it from the rooftops" ie: $$$!).

But if it is truly unidentifiable, maybe even, "unearthly", we'll never hear about it again, except to be told that "it is being analyzed" by government specialists.

Top men!

originally posted by: St Udio
a reply to: St Udio


update: (from hal turner web page)

Alaska National Guard, FBI, participated.

The object shot down was about the size of a small car. Not similar in size or shape to surveillance balloon.

The object shot down over Alaska did not appear to be "self-moving and was at the mercy of the wind"

The US aircraft involved in the shoot down was an F-22 fighter jet which fired an A-9X "Sidewinder" missile

the tracking pattern of the object is haphazard, see graphic at hal turner site. not a recommended fact site...

Re: halturnerradioshow.com...

MSN now has a record of radar-tracking:

see: www.msn.com... 5833b56f


same graphic that turner radio published 2 or so hours earlier !

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

definitely. i caught a blip on abc news that it was cylindrical and silver/gray looking. unmanned. space probe maybe? could be...

Here's a little bit more of a description of events:

One official told ABC News that the object was “cylindrical and silver-ish gray” and gave the “balloon-like” appearance of floating without “any sort of propulsion”. Another official from the Department of Defense told the New York Times that the object broke into pieces when it hit the frozen sea

The object was flying at an altitude of 40,000ft, about the same level as commercial planes, and was travelling at about 20 to 40 miles per hour before it was struck down. Officials say the object had flown over parts of Alaska but was heading toward the north pole before it was struck down

www.theguardian.com...

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Makes one wonder how a heat-seeking missile locked onto a very cold target with no propulsion.

Information is missing or distorted in these reports.

Cheers

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Makes one wonder how a heat-seeking missile locked onto a very cold target with no propulsion.

Information is missing or distorted in these reports.

Cheers

All it needs is a radar cross section. At least we know it wasn't the same type of balloon as last week.

a reply to: TheGoondockSaint

That doesn't sound like a heat-seeking missile, which is what I saw mentioned.

Check, I understand there are other kinds of air-to-air missiles that actively or passively use radar returns.

Or are there now missiles that use both tracking technologies ?

Cheers

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: TheGoondockSaint

That doesn't sound like a heat-seeking missile, which is what I saw mentioned.

Check, I understand there are other kinds of air-to-air missiles that actively or passively use radar returns.

Or are there now missiles that use both tracking technologies ?

Cheers

Who knows. Zaphod58 will probably tell us though!

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

So, "heat-seeking" is a bit of a misnomer, and without going into a detailed discussion, a missile like the A9X has a very high image resolution, and a well cooled seeker - the object need not be "hot", just a slightly different temp from the background of the sky will give an excellent picture. Also, depending on it's reflectivity and position of the sun, kind of like sun glare from certain angles on your car in daylight, even a small reflection could show up very well. And for clarification the A9X doesn't have dual-mode radar/IR guidance, but more and more missiles are in fact adopting this tech.