James53
Well-Known Member
Just for hypothetical future reference, how big a balloon is needed to carry a nuclear bomb?
That depends on the weight of the bomb plus the controls and propulsion.Just for hypothetical future reference, how big a balloon is needed to carry a nuclear bomb?
This is key to why our current decision makers at the top neglected to take aggressive action. Never mind the analogy about possibilities of taking out civilians in Montana/Dakotas with pieces of hardware blown up by missles, which I suppose the Chinese will take heart if they misplace a few errant bombers, it was all about the kids. What about the children in those school buses?Apparently the "school bus" is a new systeme internationale unit of length, equivalent to 90 feet. Just as the "Katie Couric" is about 2.5 pounds. ;-)
Anyway, I feel very confident that the splashdown area was extensively monitored during splashdown.
Can't you guys just use metric instead of random lengths, like "school bus"?Apparently the "school bus" is a new systeme internationale unit of length, equivalent to 90 feet. Just as the "Katie Couric" is about 2.5 pounds. ;-)
I wished I could help you out on the length problem, but I’m not real savvy on metric here on my ranch in Texas. Purty good at weights tho.Can't you guys just use metric instead of random lengths, like "school bus"?
Tongue in cheek.
All kinda mute now, the payload has been blown to bits.
Convenient..
Pat G
Woops. Sorry. The Censor seems to have a problem with Texas units of measure.I wished I could help you out on the length problem, but I’m not real savvy on metric here on my ranch in Texas. Purty good at weights tho.
For instance, “that thar bull weighs a **** load”.
As in, a whole bunch.
Hope that helps..
Pat G
Can't you guys just use metric instead of random lengths, like "school bus"?
Typo. I actually have an engineering and accountant degree.Honestly not trying to be a pedantic a-hole. The word that makes sense there is "moot."
Americans use the metric system. I've often heard the phrase, "...a metric 'ship'-ton..."
Actually the missle was better than guns if you read the earlier story about a similar intercept, the continuos rod warhead in the missle would take big slashes out of the ballon, not poke little bitty holes in it that would take forever to deflate. Am I somewhat correct @Bravo52 ?The F22 can hover and fly very slow. Seen it with my own eyes at the EAA AirVenture. They did a fly-by at 35 mph about 100 ft. off the ground. The balloon was evidently above the F22's operating range and had to shoot up at it. They probably could have used the 20mm gun if they had a straight on shot at it.
RQ-4 Global Hawk can do that easily. Only problem it's unarmed.Only problem - you’d need a drone that could do 60-65,000 feet.
The F22 ceiling published ceiling is 65,000 feet. You can bet the actual ceiling is more than that. Several retired Air Force officers on Fox News said it would likely be shot down with canon fire before it was shot down. I am sure there is a reason that they used a Sidewinder, but is wasn't because the F22 couldn't get to 58,000 feet.That makes sense. I saw another source that the F-22’s ceiling was 65K feet. I should have looked deeper. The USAF only lists “above 50K”. Assuming they aren’t holding back 15K of ceiling, then it’s clear the the gun isn’t an option. Thanks for fact-checking me.
great shot. Clearly the payload wasn't blown to bits as some would suggest. Looks like they very effectively popped the balloon with minimum collateral damage to the payload.
I suspect he just doesn’t know who you are, Pat. Good job responding patiently.Typo. I actually have an engineering and accountant degree.
Thanks for catching that, my bad.
Just enjoying rocket friends and banter. I’ll strive to do better.
From what I've been hearing, the shot was an AIM-9X and that uses a "blast frag" type warhead. The frag would be much better for ensuring the balloon was hit since it has a much greater frag radius than a typical 20MM round the F-22 carries. Apparently the two ship that killed the balloon was "Frank 01" and "Frank 02" from Langley AFB in VA. The "Frank" call sign was in honor of Frank Luke, WWI ace known as the "Arizona Balloon Buster".Actually the missle was better than guns if you read the earlier story about a similar intercept, the continuos rod warhead in the missle would take big slashes out of the ballon, not poke little bitty holes in it that would take forever to deflate. Am I somewhat correct @Bravo52 ?
Thank you, a blast frag warhead would definitely rip lots of holes in the ballon.From what I've been hearing, the shot was an AIM-9X and that uses a "blast frag" type warhead. The frag would be much better for ensuring the balloon was hit since it has a much greater frag radius than a typical 20MM round the F-22 carries. Apparently the two ship that killed the balloon was "Frank 01" and "Frank 02" from Langley AFB in VA. The "Frank" call sign was in honor of Frank Luke, WWI ace known as the "Arizona Balloon Buster".
Enter your email address to join: