[HN Gopher] Unidentified balloon belongs to amateur balloonist: ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unidentified balloon belongs to amateur balloonist: US official
        
       Author : ironyman
       Score  : 19 points
       Date   : 2024-02-24 19:16 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nbcnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nbcnews.com)
        
       | Wingman4l7 wrote:
       | Very click-bait of them to use a still video thumbnail of the
       | massive Chinese surveillance balloon of last year.
        
         | pelagicAustral wrote:
         | Completely memoryholed that incident. Was it Chinese then, I'm
         | guessing they confirmed that after all.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | It was Chinese and (eventually) admitted such - the dispute
           | was over what exactly it was doing.
        
         | 1letterunixname wrote:
         | Mainstream media both needs outrage for engagement and to stoke
         | "yellow menace" flames to characterize 2 billion people as a
         | "threat" and manufacture consent to appease the powers that be
         | to make the case for expanded military-industrial complex
         | spending instead of healthcare.
        
           | wakawaka28 wrote:
           | Well there is some positioning going on for a possible war.
           | The Chinese balloon was part of it. Stop trying to act like
           | China is innocent and minding their business. They are not.
           | They have a hundred year plan for global supremacy and the US
           | has been falling for it, unwittingly. How many factories were
           | sent overseas so we could have a "service economy" of
           | OnlyFans and Uber?
           | 
           | For all this talk of healthcare, we don't even make most of
           | our own medicine. Much of it comes from China and friendly
           | countries in the vicinity of China. I'm frankly amazed that
           | the geniuses in Washington allowed this to happen. Someone
           | must have warned them it was a bad idea.
        
       | mikequinlan wrote:
       | If they have identified it, doesn't that mean it is no longer
       | "unidentified"?
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | Yes.
         | 
         | The title probably should have used "formerly unidentified."
         | 
         | Although most people would be capable of inferring that from
         | the context clues.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | > Although most people
           | 
           | oof, you have really high expectations of most people. most
           | people on this forum or most people in general? there's a
           | wide gap there
        
       | markx2 wrote:
       | The balloon is therefore identified.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | How does one operate a balloon like that in US airspace, both
       | legally, and otherwise without being a threat to other aircraft?
        
         | rolph wrote:
         | Amateur radio high-altitude ballooning:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_balloon#Amateur_...
         | 
         | https://arhab.org/
        
         | reactordev wrote:
         | You contact the FAA...
         | 
         | Anytime you do weather balloons, rockets, anything that goes
         | above 500ft AGL, you need to notify FAA ahead of time. Get
         | permits. Approval. And on launch day, have them on the phone.
         | 
         | If it will show up on radar, you better believe they will
         | scramble the fighters.
        
           | bozhark wrote:
           | Oh sweet local rocketry club Jesus. It's only 500ft?
        
             | cj wrote:
             | I could be wrong, but 500ft is the minimum recommended
             | altitude for helicopters. That might have something to do
             | with it.
        
             | reactordev wrote:
             | depending on where you are. Yes. That's the moment you
             | enter controlled airspace. Obviously it depends on where
             | you are. In NYC, it's 500ft. In NM, it's FL10 or 10,000 ft.
             | Either way, you should get the FAA involved so they don't
             | waste tax payer dollars on F-16s. If you're flying an
             | amateur rocket above minimums, it must adhere to Part 101
             | or be waived by FAA.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Everything below 500 is Class G (the G is for ground!)
               | except right near airports, where controlled airspace
               | goes down to the ground.
               | 
               | Class G can go much higher than 500 feet in some places.
        
               | reactordev wrote:
               | I know, but someone in Class A, or B, that gets a drone
               | for christmas might want to do some research before
               | flying (some will prevent you from flying at all!). As
               | too with amateur rockets (not the little model hobby
               | kind) but anything that would show up on radar. ATC
               | doesn't like it when things magically appear.
        
           | reachableceo wrote:
           | Please provide the citation for this requirement? What laws
           | or regulations have this requirement?
        
             | reactordev wrote:
             | 7400.2P - https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpu
             | bs/pham_htm...
             | 
             | They list the air space requirements, the MSL's, the
             | procedures, etc. 500ft AGL isn't set in stone but it's the
             | moment when you would enter an airspace should you be in
             | one. This is why people go out to the deserts where there's
             | no airspace and the minimums are FL10.
        
         | ianburrell wrote:
         | Balloons are exempt from the ADS-B requirements to broadcast
         | location. Most balloons are above 60,000 ft, away from all
         | airplanes. Larger ones need to get exclusion zone when they
         | launch. Small ones are assumed to be safe from small size.
         | 
         | To launch balloons you buy balloon, build tiny payload, inflate
         | it, and launch. Most balloons transmit location in other ways.
         | They also explode when get too high, and then payload
         | parachutes back to Earth, where it is collected.
        
         | 1letterunixname wrote:
         | It varies around the world. In the US, Class E begins at FL600.
         | Most of Europe, it's FL660.
         | 
         | It would be best if all objects in the sky that could harm
         | aircraft had transponders, including vintage aircraft without
         | electrical systems and balloons.
         | 
         | See also: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-
         | news/2017/january/19...
        
       | ShakataGaNai wrote:
       | Amateur balloonists have been running these sorts of things for a
       | really really long time without issue. Unfortunately due to China
       | (Spying? Meteorology? we'll never know), now every time there is
       | a balloon spotted there _will_ be an issue.
       | 
       | While I'm not a fan of regulation, we should have some sort of
       | optional transponder/beacon system that can be voluntarily
       | registered. ADSB-like, which I know balloons can do...but true
       | ADSB is expensive.
       | 
       | That way hobbits can continue doing their thing, the cost per
       | balloon goes up by some minor amount, and we don't scramble jets
       | and make national news constantly.
        
         | jcrawfordor wrote:
         | The large balloon was definitely from China, China never denied
         | that. The dispute was over its intention, which China maintains
         | was meteorological research.
         | 
         | For example, here is a BBC article that takes a skeptical tone
         | but correctly summarizes the statements made by the Chinese
         | government. Under a more charitable interpretation, one could
         | assume that the Chinese government remained silent for some
         | time because they had to determine which research agency had
         | launched it.
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64633990
        
           | ShakataGaNai wrote:
           | You're right, incorrect implication on my part. Fixed.
        
           | squarefoot wrote:
           | > The dispute was over its intention, which China maintains
           | was meteorological research.
           | 
           | I seem to recall the US military were able to recover it
           | after shooting it down. If that's the case, analysis of the
           | remains should dispel any doubt about its purpose: sensors
           | used in meteorological research are quite different from
           | those used say for monitoring radio waves or taking photos of
           | terrain.
        
             | jcrawfordor wrote:
             | Yes, and there has been pretty extensive reporting that
             | based on analysis of the wreckage the balloon was
             | determined to be an ELINT (electronic intelligence)
             | collection platform with a real-time C2 connection using a
             | commercial US ISP (I assume a cellular carrier). I think
             | that's pretty much what anyone with some general knowledge
             | of modern military intelligence would have guessed, it's
             | just the obvious thing to use such a balloon for.
             | 
             | However, to my knowledge, this is all based on "sources
             | within the intelligence community" and has not been
             | formally acknowledged by any government official. So take
             | it with a grain of salt, even on top of what you might
             | usually apply to determinations by US intelligence.
        
         | cyanydeez wrote:
         | I'm confused. Why is china to blame for america's paranoia?
         | 
         | I know china's doing some shit, but that doesn't really excuse
         | the paranoia being exhibited by balloons.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | even amateur balloonists are supposed to contact ATC so that
         | NOTAMs can be issued. i launched one to about 90,000'. ATC
         | asked me if we had any kind of radio beacons for them to
         | follow, but we were way too small for that. we did have a GPS
         | that we could get some altitude updates on, and ATC asked we
         | update them at every 10,000' for as long as it could be
         | tracked.
         | 
         | if someone is operating a balloon and _NOT_ contacting ATC,
         | they deserve to have there thing shot down. that 's just highly
         | irresponsible. it's a simple phone call, and then there's no
         | confusion on if your balloon is a foreign spy platform or not
        
           | patrickwalton wrote:
           | I'll bet the main problem here is that they flew over
           | restricted airspace. Basically the entitled Western half of
           | Utah is restricted for Dugway and the salt flats, which is
           | unfortunate, because it's the area that would be easiest to
           | recover your balloon from. I did a high-altitude balloon in
           | Utah a few weeks ago and had no problems, but we stuck to
           | Eastern Utah (https://twitter.com/mpatrickwalton/status/17600
           | 0350831999008...).
        
       | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
       | Well, at least they didn't fire a $400,000 rocket from
       | $65,000,000 fighter jet that costs $50,000 minimum to start and
       | get in the air, only to miss... this time.
        
       | cjbenedikt wrote:
       | "Pentagon press secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said that the
       | balloon not only did not transmit data back to China -- it never
       | collected any." https://abcnews-go-
       | com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/abcnews.go.com...
        
         | wakawaka28 wrote:
         | You need to stay on top of things. It was later reported that
         | it was in fact transmitting.
         | https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/china-spy...
         | 
         | As I recall, the spying case was suspected from the start. The
         | Navy cleared out a port just before the balloon passed
         | overhead, just to be safe. I can only assume that's why the
         | ships were evacuated, anyway. The media is not going to tell
         | you the truth, especially not about stuff like this. They
         | wouldn't have told us even if they knew it carried a bomb,
         | probably.
         | 
         | As a matter of fact, you should take anything the government or
         | media says with a healthy dose of salt. Seek out alternative
         | sources. It might save your life. For example, people in
         | Ukraine were told that Russia was not invading up to the day it
         | started. Then they closed their borders and conscripted just
         | about all the men.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-24 23:01 UTC)