NORAD 'blimp' comes loose from tether

Ya look like it down now

Twitter

Just before it came down

Twitter

a reply to: Trillium

I'm assuming it is a helium filled blimp ! I live close enough to see them day and night............ not sure they are brought down each evening due to some kind of marker lights in roughly the same general location after dark. There was some pretty extreme gusts this morning as this weather front spun/turned the wind direction around. Wonder if that had something to do with it?

Reported it's cost is 200 million. Holy Crap. Makes the thought of PT Barnum come to mind.

Technically it's not a 'blimp', it's an 'aerostat'. 'Blimps' are aircraft and can be flown. These are unmanned. 'Stat' as in 'static' means it's moored in one place.
At least it's supposed to be.
dang, I wish the wind had been different. I would have loved to have seen it over my way.

Those of you who think these are wastes of $ are invited to suggest cheaper/better radar platforms. You know, to keep us safe from missiles and rogue aircraft and stuff like that there.

So norad decided to create gigantic helium filled tethered balloons, and cram them full of state of the art radar and surveillance systems worth $180 million?
But then, when they were debating whether or not to spend a little extra to make these blimps remote controllable in case of tether failure, they just went - "nahhhh she'll be right"?

Either that or the thought never occurred to them. I don't know which scenario is worse.

a reply to: symphonyofblase

They've been using Aerostat systems for years with few failures like this. They monitor the winds and lower them as necessary. They miss windshear and gust fronts sometimes.

originally posted by: symphonyofblase
So norad decided to create gigantic helium filled tethered balloons, and cram them full of state of the art radar and surveillance systems worth $180 million?
But then, when they were debating whether or not to spend a little extra to make these blimps remote controllable in case of tether failure, they just went - "nahhhh she'll be right"?

Either that or the thought never occurred to them. I don't know which scenario is worse.

adding a propulsion system would be hugely more expensive, and would degrade load-bearing capability. remote control would leave it vulnerable to hackers.
It got away this once and no one got hurt. Good luck finding foolproof technology in this world.

a reply to: works4dhs

Those of you who think these are wastes of $ are invited to suggest cheaper/better radar platforms. You know, to keep us safe from missiles and rogue aircraft and stuff like that there.

"Gee, if I kept my fingers out of your cookie jar things would be just fine between us?"
"That's an outright and discourteous lie"!!!

INCOMING-

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I find it hard to believe that the military could "lose" something like this. Give me a break. Who was in charge of that thing - the military equivalent of the Keystone Cops?

I believe there is more to this story but I could be wrong. I do NOT believe the gov't story about this.

a reply to: dianajune

You'd be surprised. They've had problems with Aerostat balloons in the past because of weather. Although they didn't really lose it, it just came off the mooring.

In 2011 they lost two in one day because of weather, not in DC though, as these were just put in place. One of the PGSS Aerostats ripped loose in strong winds over Afghanistan. It was shot down by an F-16.

archive.defensenews.com...

No batteries in the auto deflation system.

Each aerostat was equipped with an automatic deflation system to bring the giant floating sensor to the ground quickly in the event of a cable break. But the system's batteries had not been installed at the time of the accident, so the system failed to activate when main power was lost.

The report, a summary of which was obtained by the Los Angeles Times, found that "design, human, and procedural issues all contributed" to the aerostat breaking loose, disrupting air traffic and causing jets to be scrambled to track its progress. When it finally came down 160 miles north in Moreland Township, Pennsylvania, the Army had state police bring it down the rest of the way with approximately 100 shotgun blasts. At the time, authorities believed they had no other way under the circumstances to deflate it.

Gotta love the old fall back, blast it 100 times.

a reply to: roadgravel

The initial failure was one of the pitot tubes, which allowed it to turn sideways to the winds. The bigger failure was the lack of batteries.

a reply to: roadgravel
Yeah, the MSM Report can print a huge, sensational, headline: Cops Shoot Unarmed Aerostat Over 100 Times for NOT Complying With Their Orders



The thing weighed 10,000 lbs. Anybody know the outcome? Anybody fired, reprimanded, etc.?

Bet the "battery check" procedure will be updated at the very least.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Nope. They'll change their procedures, probably wait a few months and quietly shuffle someone off to a new Maintenance Officer position, and that'll be the end of it.