Recovering a high altitude balloon
 

I've been wondering, and I've never heard this asked in the media -- why is it necessary to use a $400,000 missile to take down a high altitude balloon? Couldn't a small puncture using a low caliber bullet be more effective to provide a slow descent with a soft landing thereby providing easy recovery of relatively intact evidence?

Off the top of my head...I'd say...first, you have to get there. Balloons can fly in excess of 170,000 feet. Weather balloons (such as what these chinese gasbags are reported to be) regularly fly in the neighborhood of 100,000 feet. In contrast, the SR-71 Blackbird, America's high-flying spy plane (no longer in service) flew at about 85,000 feet. In other words, you'd be burning a whole lot of Jet fuel to get within maybe three miles of the thing, and then have to shoot a projectile accurately from a vehicle moving at probably well over the speed of sound, to hit the balloon.

Bottom line: missiles are MUCH cheaper. And more accurate.

because it would then land outside territorial waters

Any issue with that besides making recovery more difficult? Didn't all the Apollo capsules splash down outside of territorial waters?

The Apollo capsules were US property so the US had every right to recover them.

Recover it anyway. What are they going to do? Did the Chinese ever admit it was their property?

This scenario was tried by the Canadian Royal Air Force 1998 on a Canadian weather balloon.
Since the balloon went rogue, over 1,000 rounds were fired at it by two Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) CF-18 fighter planes after they spotted it over Newfoundland. The balloon was finally struck by the aircraft, but instead of popping or exploding and falling to the earth, it leaked helium very slowly and remained suspended in the air.

The first one, yes. They claimed very early on that it was one of their weather balloons gone astray. I don't think they've claimed ownership of the later ones.

Yes it was a scheduled return and recovery vessels were nearby the expected water landing. Just like the last unmanned moon launch where the recovery area was shifted 250 miles south of San Diego due to weather conditions.

Maybe one of the owners.

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

The missile will make the balloon into many little pieces. Harder to put back together.

Just my thoughts
 

It's easy to play armchair quarterback. I would venture to guess once this balloon was spotted there was a team put together figuring the best way to deal with this.

What I do believe was the decision not to shoot it down until it was over water had more to do with recovering the payload than the safety of the public.

This balloon was at 60000 feet, not a problem getting to it. I suspect they used a missile to be sure it came down in American waters. Shooting holes in it and hoping for a slow descent might have put the balloon outside of our waters. Just a guess.

Why not a little hole from a laser beam fired from the ground?

Balloons
 

Short answer: Absolutely, we had cheaper alternatives!!

I have no idea why we did bot use them. This action was like using a shotgun to swat a fly!!!

Why a balloon anyway?
 

With current satellite images that can read a car's license plate.. why does any nation need a balloon? Maybe the balloon is just for showing other nations they CAN hoover over their territory. Sort of a visible middle finger.

As I put in a previous posting, I'm sure they must have thought this out before it was shot down to where and how, but if I'm wrong there used to be a saying. What is an elephant? It a mouse built to government's specifications.

new bite
 

new bite political image priceless - well with your money

I’m thinking the same thing. Why would they use a missile to down a balloon.The machine guns they have on these jets could tear it in half with a burst from their machine guns. I guess they use missiles because we the tax payers are paying for them. Personally me as a U. S. citizen with very young family members , I know they are safe & there’s no doubt it’s down. But I agree with you!

This article answers all your questions.

Spy balloons: what are they and why are they still being used? | China | The Guardian

A previous post in this thread and two additional posts from another thread.

the answer to your question is they did not want to demonstrate their airborne laser systems for the sake of 400g. A pittance by any military standard of valuation.

Hey it’s the military, cost isn’t an issue and it’s good target practice. 😆 Agree with you. 100 rounds of 50 caliber will bring it down fast enough to control where it comes down, plus help preserve the package they want to evaluate.

We might as well use the missiles for something. Every year the military creates weapons. And their budget only increases. So the military makes more weapons the following year whether a weapon was used or not.

So let's use as many weapons as we can. Maybe that'll help with storage fees.

Why did the government spend $118,000 ...
 

... to see if Thanos (Marvel comics) really could snap his fingers inside of a metal glove.

once the decision was made to bring it down over our territorial waters small caliber weapons were no longer a viable option. You may have noticed there was no fiery explosion. A dummy missile sans warhead was deployed

Now you've went and done it. Facts can be so inconvenient and just get in the way of an uninformed/clueless rant...so knock it off! LOL

yes. Outside territorial waters everything is salvageable eg china could have deployed attack sub to torpedo the spying equipment. The waters would have been deeper. The chinese subs are loitering outside all of our coasts just like ours do to russia and china for a potential first strike option.

10 items or less line
 

We were looking to scan the barcode

Pearl harbor and the trojan horse redux
 

as i've said in previous posts they could have lulled us into thinking it's just another balloon who cares?
Balloon at right apogee could have deployed mini nuke warheads to encompass our silos and strategic air bases. Don't forget the baloon's payload was depicted as to be the size of 3 city busses more than enough to deploy enough warheads to eliminate 1/3 of our nuclear triad

Another question I haven't seen discussed: why be so worried about the payload of a balloon as a potential safety hazard to someone on the ground but not worry about a potential safety hazard of a missile when it comes down? Presumably, guided missiles are not being used, so there's little control as to where it lands. Just asking -- I don't know about these things and haven't heard anyone discussing them.

And one other question that comes to mind -- with the military completely inept at taking down these high altitude 'objects' in a salvgeable way, shouldn't this be a job for the Space Force?

That’s exactly what I said!

Take the time to click on the links (underlined words) provided in Post #21 - and you will have your answer.

Shotgun to kill a fly? Cool! Indoor skeet shooting.

Cheaper?
 

OK, I’ll bite…what are the cheaper options?

I believe the first balloon, the giant spy balloon, was at an altitude of 65,000 ft. The F-22 Raptor was able to achieve an altitude of about 58,000 ft at which point it fired the Aim-9x missile. The 20mm cannon carried by the Raptor would not have had the range to hit the balloon. The smaller balloons shot down later seem to have been an overreaction by the defense department. I doubt they will do that again anytime soon. As a side note, no matter what the altitude, the balloons are a very difficult target to hit in the air. They are moving at a very slow speed relatively speaking. The fighters, even when flying slow, are closing in on the nearly stationary target at 150 to 200 miles an hour. To get close enough to use their cannon, they risk hitting the balloon. Shooting at an opposing fighter usually from behind is easier in some ways because the opposing fighter is moving at a speed somewhat close to that of the attacking fighter. A head on snap shot where both fighters are approaching each other at a high rate of speed is extremely difficult.

What is the range of 50 cal.
 

100 rounds of 50 cal at a distance of more than 9 miles????

Well, the air -IS- thinner up there... :icon_wink:

Still in the atmosphere. No Space Farce. And if you really consider the military inept why not let them get some practice? Better yet, sign up an show 'em how it's done, TopGun.