Unknown "Blob" over DC today. Hmmm

a reply to: Zaphod58

I mean no disrespect I just don't believe that. We have missile systems locked and loaded with tracking radar I find it doubtful we don't have advanced radar systems protecting the most important place in the country. I have a Nikon lens that can take pics of the moon for God sakes. I may not be military by know optics and we have a lot more than oldschool night vision glasses available.


It's not the private airfield in Dayton we are talking about.

a reply to: Zaphod58

a reply to: luthier

We don't have "missiles systems locked and loaded with tracking radar" though. Until 9/11 we didn't even have anti-aircraft systems in place anymore. We relied solely on airborne interceptors from the early 1970s on. Even today our anti-aircraft systems in place aren't as good as they could be, and are more or less short range defense systems. Even in DC. We don't have patriot missile batteries ready to fire, we have humvees with box launchers, and AMRAAM missiles converted for ground launch as our primary systems for air defense, after airborne interceptors. And neither of those are locked and loaded, and ready to fire at a moments notice.

There are optical systems that are better than your lens that can shoot the moon, that doesn't mean that they're cheap, or that they are in use every day, even in DC. Sorry, but in the grand scheme of things DC is an office. If there was a real threat the President would be airborne within 20 minutes, at the most, and either flown to an out of state bunker, or to Andrews where he'd be up in one of the VC-25s. And there are already systems in place that are going to show a real threat coming in, that don't require the level of sophistication that you think needs to be there.

a reply to: aapeltzz

I have seen Ladybugs do that.
Of all the strange things.

S&F

a reply to: Zaphod58

Again i find this false.

We have NASAAM, and AIM 120's, on top of the humvee stingers and CLAWS with the sentinel radar systems. The city is covered.

a reply to: Wildmanimal


That is true.

a reply to: luthier

I didn't say that it wasn't. In fact if you read my earlier post, I specifically mentioned those systems. But they aren't locked and loaded and ready to fire on a moments notice. The more time they're active, and ready to fire, the more time they're going to have to spend in maintenance later, because components wear out as they're in use. They're brought up as needed, when threats are identified by other systems. That minimizes the usage on their systems.

The AIM-120s are NASAM btw.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Hmm I thought the 120's are used in planes as well.

Anyhow that makes almost no sense. It's like having a home defense gun in a safe taken apart.

I have doubts this is the case. Sorry again no offense. I know you know aircraft. I just don't buy it. We have had Russian craft flyover DC. I doubt we are not ready if we see missiles and would need to be loading tubes up waiting for computers to boot.

a reply to: luthier

They are. NASAM modified them for ground launch.

They're not unloaded, they're just not transmitting their radar, and don't have their fire control systems active. It doesn't take long at all to start them up. They aren't like a PC at home. They're kept in warm shutdown, meaning they can be active within a couple minutes. If they were transmitting and fully active 24/7 they'd have to replace them every few months for maintenance. By leaving them mostly shut down they can rotate them every few years instead. Or not even have to rotate them and do their maintenance in the field.

They also aren't going to be used against most missiles. They might be able to stop some subsonic cruise missiles, but if they are using supersonic missiles, or ICBMs they're next to useless. They're designed for use against aircraft, UAVs, and slower moving missiles.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Zaphod58


Anyhow that makes almost no sense. It's like having a home defense gun in a safe taken apart.

That is about what the laws here in California require. And you know where those came from...

I think he was pretty clear. Why leave them on all the time to wear out and have to be constantly be replaced? We need to watch our spending.... Don't we ?

a reply to: visitedbythem


Uh no. We save money in gold toilets, free everything, and political money laundering not national defense. Particularly the Pentagon etc..sure we have more important bases but not to the optics of the nation.

P s I am a libertarian. Not a leftist. I know trump supporters find it hard to believe anyone could critisize anything about it him. But those of us not brainwashed still hold everyone accountable.

a reply to: luthier

We don't have unlimited numbers of NASAM, or Avenger, or any other defensive system. So if we burn through them all running their systems 24/7/365, then eventually the maintenance is going to end up like it did with the carriers. We wound up with one carrier capable of deploying because all the others required maintenance and had been pushed to the point they had to go into dock because so many systems needed work. Running these systems all the time will eventually get them to the same place. It makes more sense to have them in standby when not needed, and not wear them out.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It really does not if you need a real defense. They probably rotate what is online and in standby. We are talking apples and zebras as well with maintenance of a carrier verse land based equiptment.

Again we had a Russian jet over DC. I assume we could have shot it down if it was carrying weapons? But what you are saying doesn't inspire confidence knowing it snuck in that close before detection.

a reply to: luthier

The Russian jet over DC was there with American personnel on board as part of the Open Skies treaty. They were based at a US base and were flying all over the country. You seem to be selectively reading what I'm saying. There are systems outside of DC that are designed to detect aircraft coming towards the US from outside. If that Russian aircraft had been an aircraft with weapons, flying an attack profile, it would have been detected and intercepted in the ADIZ before ever entering US airspace. It certainly wouldn't have gotten over DC with those weapons.

What DC doesn't have is an advanced radar system to protect the airspace over DC. It doesn't need one, because it relies on the outside systems looking out, and the ATC radar monitoring the airspace over DC. That radar detected what appeared to be an aircraft not talking to ATC, alerted the proper people, who then looked at the data and launched a Coast Guard helicopter to intercept it. If it had been a faster moving aircraft they would have launched F-16s out of Andrews, or F-15s out of Langley.

Just because you think they should have the most advanced, and expensive, system because it's DC, doesn't mean that they need it. They have short range systems that can be used to protect the airspace, as well as fighters that can be scrambled to intercept aircraft when needed. Other defenses and systems doesn't mean no defenses or systems.

As for the defense systems vs carriers, yes, they're not the same, but the principle is. You use any system long enough, and something will break. And it's not always as easy as plugging a replacement in. You can rotate a new system in, but eventually they'll break too, and if you aren't careful, you end up with none of them left while they're all being worked on.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So just to be clear your telling the whole NASAMS system is on standby until needed?

That they couldn't look at images after the event and see a large mass


There are no infrared systems or other optical that should have caught this.

And even though we know for sure crafts exists that the Nimitz and other since columbu saw are real we just hope they aren't hostile and don't harden up where we can?


Ps and what about the sentinel array is it off too?

Yikes

a reply to: luthier

Yes. As with all defensive systems. They're tied into other nets that give warnings, and they go active when needed. It doesn't matter if you're talking about Patriot, GBM, the S400, or whatever you care to name. They don't sit there going 24/7 no matter who they belong to.

Whether they're real or not, there are systems that are capable of tracking them, outside of DC. Unless they've suddenly shown an ability to teleport, so they can appear over DC, then those other systems you keep ignoring me talking about will see them coming. They'll see them in enough time to launch fighters from Andrews and have them in the air. Those systems monitor the entire ADIZ along the east coast, as well as ships off shore that are watching as they go in and out of port.

There are optical and IR systems that could have caught this, just not around the DC area. They rely on other means.

a reply to: Zaphod58


Right but the military does think crafts can teleport. And people are concerned about this as they were with the postman.

A mass of birds should have shown up unless low. In which case visible or heat signature is available from hunting binocular level tech. I mean this had to happen in less than 30 seconds to make any sense and the there are other issues.

Also post even they can get satelight imagery of many different kinds most likely.


Not impossible just saying it seems less probable than a mistake was made. There was glitch or the equiptment didnt work.

a reply to: luthier

A radar return was detected, and it wasn't talking to air traffic control. It wasn't fast, and it didn't teleport in. The controller alerted the NORAD liaison, exactly as he should have. NORAD looked at it, and immediately launched a CG helicopter to intercept it, identify it, and if necessary escort it out of the area. Everything happened exactly as it should have, and exactly as it was supposed to happen.

The weakest part of the system is always the operator. If it was a flock of birds, then this wouldn't be the first time an operator made that mistake. It certainly won't be the last time it happens.

So the military came out and said that think they can teleport? Or was it someone in the military or former military giving their opinion?

a reply to: Zaphod58


Just to be even more annoying than previously we have no idea what it was. Could have been a mothership for all we know they couldn't find it