Chinese Spy Balloon Flying Over the U.S.

Status
Not open for further replies.
At a briefing this week, senior military and national security officials confirmed that the downed balloon was connected to a major surveillance program operated by China's military. The program uses dated balloon technology along with modern signal surveillance techniques.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Better late than never
 
Llk said:
At a briefing this week, senior military and national security officials confirmed that the downed balloon was connected to a major surveillance program operated by China's military. The program uses dated balloon technology along with modern signal surveillance techniques.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Big surprise! There were a few here a week ago who refused to believe that it could be surveillance equipment. I wonder if they have changed their view?
 
The next step is for the EPA to levy a fine on China for causing a “massive” release of “dangerous Helium” into the US atmosphere. Or will they levy it on the USAF?

Cheers
 
It was one of those cylindrical UFOs. Had to be.
 
X3 Skier said:
The next step is for the EPA to levy a fine on China for causing a “massive” release of “dangerous Helium” into the US atmosphere. Or will they levy it on the USAF?

Cheers
Click to expand...

Yes, in todays political climate the thought of a few cubic feet of helium released into our atmosphere might bring more outrage than a simple breach of security. Sad.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Can you highlight those posts? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Llewtrah381 said:
Zilch - which is why I haven’t claimed any knowledge and haven’t dabbled in nonsensical conspiracy theories.

But my 24 years as an Air Force officer taught me a whole lot - including that there are things outside my expertise that are outside my expertise.

Hey - I’m open to recalibrating my knowledge. But not just based on tin-hat conspiracy theories
Click to expand...

Here’s a good example, one of many, of someone who BEFORE it was confirmed that it was carrying surveillance equipment was accusing others of having “tin hat conspiracy theories.” Was that something that came from an Officer Efficiency Report?
 
X3 Skier said:
The next step is for the EPA to levy a fine on China for causing a “massive” release of “dangerous Helium” into the US atmosphere. Or will they levy it on the USAF?
Click to expand...

MBDiagMan said:
Yes, in todays political climate the thought of a few cubic feet of helium released into our atmosphere might bring more outrage than a simple breach of security. Sad.
Click to expand...

"Is helium harmful to humans or the environment?
Helium is an inert gas that is not harmful to the environment or to humans. However, asphyxiation can result from its
use in an oxygen-poor environment, and liquid helium is cold enough to 'burn' human skin."

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Helium Fast Facts_508.pdf
 
MBDiagMan said:
Here’s a good example, one of many, of someone who BEFORE it was confirmed that it was carrying surveillance equipment was accusing others of having “tin hat conspiracy theories.” Was that something that came from an Officer Efficiency Report?
Click to expand...
OK - so no posts that say people “refused to believe it could be surveillance equipment”. Thanks!
 
Llewtrah381 said:
OK - so no posts that say people “refused to believe it could be surveillance equipment”. Thanks!
Click to expand...

So….., you are truly unable to see that implying that believing there was surveillance equipment equates to tin hat conspiracy theory is not the same as not believing that it’s true? Come on, a retired US Air Force Officer can SURELY figure that out.
 
MBDiagMan said:
So….., you are truly unable to see that implying that believing there was surveillance equipment equates to tin hat conspiracy theory is not the same as not believing that it’s true? Come on, a retired US Air Force Officer can SURELY figure that out.
Click to expand...
With no supporting information either way at that time, yeah. The only thing any of us here knew at that time was that a big balloon was floating over the country.
 
About today’s shoot down, I’m not seeing anywhere that says it was a balloon unless I’m missing something. So, maybe a Predator or Reaper equivalent? Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Piperonca said:
About today’s shoot down, I’m not seeing anywhere that says it was a balloon unless I’m missing something. So, maybe a Predator or Reaper equivalent? Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...

I read it was the size of a small car. Flying VW?

 
Piperonca said:
About today’s shoot down, I’m not seeing anywhere that says it was a balloon unless I’m missing something. So, maybe a Predator or Reaper equivalent? Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...

Reaper? Lol, no. It was a Raptor in the 40s, they sit alert up there, and no that's not State secret. Details are not forthcoming about the object, but I mean if we're just BSing in NIPR land, my guess is another #baroon. :D Those DCA bois are hot this month, they're gonna run out of canopy rail real estate with those stencils.
upload_2023-2-10_20-52-2.png
Insta is en fuego tonite.
 
MBDiagMan said:
So….., you are truly unable to see that implying that believing there was surveillance equipment equates to tin hat conspiracy theory is not the same as not believing that it’s true? Come on, a retired US Air Force Officer can SURELY figure that out.
Click to expand...
First, where was - or is - the proof this was Chinese MILITARY? Why not their NSA equivalent? Why not even a government-sponsored commercial surveillance system - or even a private company?

Second, where’s the proof they were surveilling military, especially nuclear assets, which everyone assumed? I can assure you, those are very well secured - plus what’s the benefit in surveilling nuclear sites when they’re not on heightened alert and in the context of satellite surveillance by them, the Russians, the Israelis, the French, the Brits, and whoever else?

Why did people go down the “surveilling our nuclear assets” rabbit hole without wondering if they were surveilling CORPORATE targets, which are much softer and more in line with Chinese practices, such as stealing/copying our technologies? Or maybe our power grid management?

I’m not saying they did this or anything else. I’m saying it was a no-brainer to speculate it was surveillance equipment - but not at all clear who exactly was doing it and for what purpose. And I’d also say not shooting it down early-on allowed for the possibility of learning what was being gathered and transmitted, to better protect “our” assets - military and civilian.

One thing’s for sure: thank goodness our national defense is ultimately based on reason and not emotion.
 
Is anyone else kind of concerned they just shot down something they hadn’t identified? That just seems… unwise.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
First, where was - or is - the proof this was Chinese MILITARY? Why not their NSA equivalent? Why not even a government-sponsored commercial surveillance system - or even a private company?

Second, where’s the proof they were surveilling military, especially nuclear assets, which everyone assumed? I can assure you, those are very well secured - plus what’s the benefit in surveilling nuclear sites when they’re not on heightened alert and in the context of satellite surveillance by them, the Russians, the Israelis, the French, the Brits, and whoever else?

Why did people go down the “surveilling our nuclear assets” rabbit hole without wondering if they were surveilling CORPORATE targets, which are much softer and more in line with Chinese practices, such as stealing/copying our technologies? Or maybe our power grid management?

I’m not saying they did this or anything else. I’m saying it was a no-brainer to speculate it was surveillance equipment - but not at all clear who exactly was doing it and for what purpose. And I’d also say not shooting it down early-on allowed for the possibility of learning what was being gathered and transmitted, to better protect “our” assets - military and civilian.

One thing’s for sure: thank goodness our national defense is ultimately based on reason and not emotion.
Click to expand...
If one was a bit prejudiced, one might come to the conclusion that you you think that half of the US is a bigger potential enemy than the Chinese are.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
First, where was - or is - the proof this was Chinese MILITARY? Why not their NSA equivalent? Why not even a government-sponsored commercial surveillance system - or even a private company?

Second, where’s the proof they were surveilling military, especially nuclear assets, which everyone assumed? I can assure you, those are very well secured - plus what’s the benefit in surveilling nuclear sites when they’re not on heightened alert and in the context of satellite surveillance by them, the Russians, the Israelis, the French, the Brits, and whoever else?

Why did people go down the “surveilling our nuclear assets” rabbit hole without wondering if they were surveilling CORPORATE targets, which are much softer and more in line with Chinese practices, such as stealing/copying our technologies? Or maybe our power grid management?

I’m not saying they did this or anything else. I’m saying it was a no-brainer to speculate it was surveillance equipment - but not at all clear who exactly was doing it and for what purpose. And I’d also say not shooting it down early-on allowed for the possibility of learning what was being gathered and transmitted, to better protect “our” assets - military and civilian.

One thing’s for sure: thank goodness our national defense is ultimately based on reason and not emotion.
Click to expand...
Some very good points in there, little I can disagree with.

The first news reports put in in Montana "above the missile fields" and a whole lot of people went haring off assuming the missiles and bases were the targets. Yet these assets are the best-protected ones we have; they're designed to keep their secrets from foreign intelligence satellites far more capable of what the Chinese could put on balloons. And the specific locations of the missile sites are easily found online.

But then why do SIGINT/COMINT on the cheap, using a balloon instead of a satellite or ground assets? The only real answer is that you're going for soft targets... ones which don't normally consider electronic intelligence a threat, that you can record/geolocate etc. without major effort. The Chinese don't differentiate between spying for military and economic purposes. They may well have been going for corporate data, or to get information on infrastructure that might allow them to disrupt it upon need.

And I've seen reports claiming Premiere Xi wasn't aware this was happening; that he hadn't specifically ordered this kind of intelligence collection. However, Xi may just as well have a sign on his desk saying "The Yuan stops here." He was responsible, especially in a very tightly controlled country like China. Otherwise, it sounds like an effort to save face. Personally, I don't believe this happened without his knowledge.

The major reason given for delaying shooting it down was to minimize the potential for collateral damage. But the point about delaying the shoot-down to gather intelligence on the intelligence-gatherer is a valid one. We probably now know what process they used for transmitting the data back to China (I doubt they recorded it onboard), we have a feel for the actual degree of control they had (i.e., were they able to stay stationary in 30 knot winds?), we maybe even produced some test signals to see how it reacted.

One of the key points here is that the use of balloons as intelligence collectors is *blown*. We know they're doing it, we know how to find the balloons, and we know how to shoot them down. The whole mission is pretty much trashed.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top