Chinese spy balloon hovering over Montana

#827
#827
OrangeTsar said:
In most classical tragedies, the downfall of the hero is a direct result of hubris. Trump has that fatal flaw in buckets.
We Conservatives don’t need to let him drag us down with him like Captain Ahab. Time to cut him loose IMHO.
Click to expand...

Amen. Really hoping for a better option
 
#828
#828
AirVol said:
He doesn’t know the difference.
Click to expand...
A large number of people in America seem to share this problem if Twitter is any indication. I blame the failure of our education system to teach STEM over the past few decades. I actually saw someone in all seriousness speculating that the balloon was meant to lift a satellite into orbit. I once wondered if that would work. Then I turned 8 years old 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, tbwhhs, EasternVol and 2 others
#829
#829
NorthDallas40 said:
There was an already a multinational framework agreed upon that all space at altitudes outside the atmosphere are non sovereign multinational use.
Click to expand...
And there is a good practical reason behind it. Outside the atmosphere and in orbit, you are traveling over 17000 mph and pretty much confined to the orbital plane into which you were launched. Most spy satellites have fuel reserves to change their orbit within narrow constraints; but you can’t exactly turn 20 degrees to port or starboard like you can in an aircraft. That is why movies like Gravity BURN ME UP when they decide to use a rocket backpack to stroll on over to another space station (in a totally different orbital plane) like they are walking to the post office 😡😡😡
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, GroverCleveland and NorthDallas40
#830
#830
NorthDallas40 said:
There was an already a multinational framework agreed upon that all space at altitudes outside the atmosphere are non sovereign multinational use.
Click to expand...


Despite the insults to me, my larger question is whether the concept is due for re-thinking. Put it this way, if we had not already agreed to it way back then, would we now?

I suppose in a way it's a good thing. It's part of early warning, which in theory contributes to stability and predictability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#831
#831
Vol8188 said:
Amen. Really hoping for a better option
Click to expand...
We have several. My fear is that Trump will burn the party down before he lets go. I never trusted Trump and refused to vote for him in 2016. I am thankful for much he did, especially his three excellent picks for SCOTUS; but we are about to have to pay up for our deal with the devil as it were. Trump will have his pound of flesh even if it results in blowing our best opportunity for long term power since Reagan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, SuzyVol and Vol8188
#832
#832
lawgator1 said:
That's a concept from the 1960s. Should it be reconsidered?
Click to expand...
It can’t be from a practical standpoint. Again, watch a few tutorials on orbital mechanics. Unless you use a special mode of polar or equatorial orbit; it is almost impossible to launch a satellite from the United States that doesn’t pass over China or Vice versa. Once you are in orbit, you are traveling in a simple circle or oval and the earth rotates BENEATH you.
I would recommend one of the excellent ISS tracking apps for your phone if you want to see this in practice
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#833
#833
lawgator1 said:
Despite the insults to me, my larger question is whether the concept is due for re-thinking. Put it this way, if we had not already agreed to it way back then, would we now?

I suppose in a way it's a good thing. It's part of early warning, which in theory contributes to stability and predictability.
Click to expand...
Look you earned those LG. It was a really dumb question and based upon your body of work everyone expects you are covering for the current Dem admin.

When the time came to came to consider it a multinational group put rules in place. A result of those rules is our ceasing satellite shootdown tests as well as everyone else was supposed to do. Turns out others haven’t been so disciplined in their actions to those agreements.

It’s been agreed upon. And based on the number of countries currently with or planned to have orbiting satellites with the capacity for signals intelligence in space nobody is going to want to change the agreement
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeTsar
#835
#835
Vol8188 said:
No because of the difference in risk. Aircraft over our land = threat. Satellite not so much.
Click to expand...
Oh you’d be shocked at the capability of the telescopes parked up there right now even. The mitigating factor is they fly highly predictable flight paths.
 
#836
#836
Vol8188 said:
No because of the difference in risk. Aircraft over our land = threat. Satellite not so much.
Click to expand...
And because you just can’t choose NOT to fly over a particular country. Once you are in low earth orbit, every point on the surface of the earth between the latitudes of your Lauch latitude plus the orbital inclination WILL be overflown. It is an unavoidable result of physics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and Vol8188
#837
#837
lawgator1 said:
Despite the insults to me, my larger question is whether the concept is due for re-thinking. Put it this way, if we had not already agreed to it way back then, would we now?

I suppose in a way it's a good thing. It's part of early warning, which in theory contributes to stability and predictability.
Click to expand...
Would you want to extend it or lower it? Sounds like you want to lower it.
 
#838
#838
NorthDallas40 said:
Oh you’d be shocked at the capability of the telescopes parked up there right now even. The mitigating factor is they fly highly predictable flight paths.
Click to expand...
And they only are overhead for a few minutes per pass. An adversary will have ample time to move weapons around and hide them again before your next pass. Signals collection satellites or launch detection satellites in geostationary orbit can stay overhead constantly but they are almost 25,000 miles high. If you need pictures from ANY camera, no matter how advanced, you have to be in an orbit of a couple of hundred miles max and those don’t give you much time over target
 
#840
#840
I wonder if that explosion yesterday was the USAF frying the electronics via laser or Electronic Warfare.

Edit: Probably not..Doubt it has the voltage and it would of blew up the ballon
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and davethevol
#841
#841
Another practical reason we don’t shoot down satellites is that the resulting debris become uncontrollable shrapnel that can take out everything in similar orbits. Even a tiny sliver of metal can destroy a spacecraft when traveling at orbital speeds. Once you start taking out satellites kinetically, you run the risk of eventually denying that orbital shell to EVERYONE including yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, lawgator1, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#842
#842
Has anyone thought about why China would use the claim this is a weather balloon? They know the West's obsession with climate change. By using such a blatant lie, a weather balloon is something Progressives in the West can relate to. Like China cares about climate change.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and W.TN.Orange Blood
#845
#845
BreatheUT said:
Has anyone thought about why China would use the claim this is a weather balloon? They know the West's obsession with climate change. By using such a blatant lie a weather balloon is something Progressives in the West can relate to. Like China cares about climate change.
Click to expand...
They are openly mocking us. They know that we know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and BreatheUT
#850
#850
OrangeTsar said:
And they only are overhead for a few minutes per pass. An adversary will have ample time to move weapons around and hide them again before your next pass. Signals collection satellites or launch detection satellites in geostationary orbit can stay overhead constantly but they are almost 25,000 miles high. If you need pictures from ANY camera, no matter how advanced, you have to be in an orbit of a couple of hundred miles max and those don’t give you much time over target
Click to expand...
We time systems testing outdoors by the satellite flyover timing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top