Merged Chinese balloon raises hackles in US

[lpetrich]

‘Significant’ debris from China spy balloon retrieved, says US military | US national security | The Guardian - "Sensors and electronics pulled from waters off South Carolina, says military, after White House says Beijing’s surveillance program dates back years"

The US Northern Command said in a statement: “Crews have been able to recover significant debris from the site, including all of the priority sensor and electronics pieces identified as well as large sections of the structure.”

...
However, China’s surveillance program, according to John Kirby, the US national security council spokesperson, dated back to at least the administration of Donald Trump, which he said was oblivious to it.

“It was operating during the previous administration, but they did not detect it,” Kirby said.

“We detected it, we tracked it. And we have been carefully studying to learn as much as we can. We know that these PRC [People’s Republic of China] surveillance balloons have crossed over dozens of countries on multiple continents around the world, including some of our closest allies and partners.”

...
Separately in Japan, the Fuji News Network reported on Tuesday that Tokyo had concluded that the object that flew over Japanese waters near the south-western region of Kyushu in January last year was mostly likely a Chinese spy balloon.

No further details, however.

But that should be an intelligence goldmine - it will give away a lot of details of the Chinese military's capabilities.

I'm guessing that that balloon was remote controlled with the help of Chinese military communications satellites. I'd be very surprised if communications with that balloon were not encrypted, so we would get a hint about Chinese military encryption.

 

[Elixir]

I can’t wait til they find out that most of them are plastic Chinese dry cleaning bags that got caught up in a breeze.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So have the Chinese figured out that they can get us to use up a $400,000 air-to-air missile by launching a $400 balloon at us?

Balloons like what we shot down aren't $400. You'll pay a lot more than that just for the balloon, let alone the electronics package it carried.

What we shot down off South Carolina, sure; but they haven't told us what the thing in Canada was yet. More important, we appear to be shooting stuff down first and trying to figure out what it was afterwards. If I were the CCP and I saw the U.S. do that I'd be launching $400 balloons to see how many AIMs I could take out.

A Sidewinder will not home on a balloon. I could accept it homing on the equipment package since given the size of that solar array it had a fair amount power. Your hypothetical $400 balloon won't provide a target.

It's a balloon. It's point and shoot.

Sidewinders require something warm. No power source = nothing for the missile to see.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Let's see who can come up with the best idea for a live capture of one of these things.
How about... shoot it with a shotgun instead of a missile and let it come down slowly in one piece?
The USAF probably thinks of them as clay pigeons.

I don't think you can ensure live capture because it could have an anti-tamper.

That being said, my first inclination would be to hook a long wire to an aircraft (wound up on a spool), trail it down and fly over the balloon. The F-15 seems to have the service ceiling to do it. They're little stronger than tissue paper, it should be easy to rip the balloon and the remains of the balloon would at least slow the falling payload somewhat.

 

[Copernicus]

So have the Chinese figured out that they can get us to use up a $400,000 air-to-air missile by launching a $400 balloon at us?

Balloons like what we shot down aren't $400. You'll pay a lot more than that just for the balloon, let alone the electronics package it carried.

What we shot down off South Carolina, sure; but they haven't told us what the thing in Canada was yet. More important, we appear to be shooting stuff down first and trying to figure out what it was afterwards. If I were the CCP and I saw the U.S. do that I'd be launching $400 balloons to see how many AIMs I could take out.

A Sidewinder will not home on a balloon. I could accept it homing on the equipment package since given the size of that solar array it had a fair amount power. Your hypothetical $400 balloon won't provide a target.

It's a balloon. It's point and shoot.

Sidewinders require something warm. No power source = nothing for the missile to see.

Nevertheless, the enhanced Sidewinder AIM-9X was used to shoot down balloons. Not being an expert on the technology, I can only go by what I read in news stories. For example, this one:

Was 'Sidewinder' Missile Biden's Best Option Against Unidentified Objects?​

Jodi Vittori, a professor of practice and co-chair of the Global Politics and Security program at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, told Newsweek that the missile was likely used on Sunday because of its pilot-friendly capabilities.

"It's also relatively cheap, as far as air-to-air missiles go," said Vittori, who also is a non-resident fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "It's made to be used within visual range, so it's well-designed to have a pilot get up close to the balloon, visually observe and confirm what it is, fire at it at relatively close range, and stay close to confirm that the balloon was hit."

The most recent versions can also allow the pilot to lock onto a target before firing so he or she can designate the target, she said, even if there is not a great deal of heat signature from the balloon.

 

[bilby]

If anyone in this thread actually had detailed knowledge of the exact capabilities of currently in service air to air missiles, they wouldn't be allowed to post that information.

So speculation is idle. If the military says it used a sidewinder, then we know what the military is saying. Why they're saying it, and whether it's the truth, we are not in any position to know - and if we were, we wouldn't be permitted to discuss it.

It seems highly unlikely that they failed to shoot down the balloon, because it would be easy to check. There's no easy way to confirm or refute their claims about how they did it though. So the details are a matter of whether we trust an organisation that has strong motives to mislead, and little or no chance of being caught in a falsehood (should they have decided that a lie best serves their wider purposes).

Sure, it was a sidewinder. Why not. Maybe that's even the truth. The one certainty is that we won't be proving (or disproving) it here.

 

[Oleg]

Hobby Club’s Missing Balloon Feared Shot Down By USAF | Aviation Week Network

Although the club is not pointing fingers, there are suspicions among other prominent members of the small, pico-ballooning enthusiasts community.

aviationweek.com