- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 36,627
- Reaction score
- 13,268
- Location
- Columbus, OH
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
What the NSC spokesperson said is they don’t know what it is, who owns it, or what’s it’s purpose is.It wasn't unidentified. It was identified by the pilots. They just haven't released this information to the public at this point.
No he didn't, but since you're arguing in bad faith that won't matter to you.What the NSC spokesperson said is they don’t know what it is, who owns it, or what’s it’s purpose is.
Stop lying.No he didn't, but since you're arguing in bad faith that won't matter to you.
That doesn't mean they don't know what it is. But again, since you're arguing in bad faith that won't matter to you. You just came to this thread to be argumentative, not because there's anything you believe in.Stop lying.
“We are calling this an “object” because that is the best description we have right now,” said Mr Kirby.
“We do not know who owns it, whether it is state-owned or corporate-owned or privately owned we just don’t know.
“We don’t understand the full purpose, we don’t have any information that would confirm a stated purpose for this object.”
Should of done this the first time. Dummy Biden wised up and made the military follow ordersFool me once……..
US shoots down ‘high-altitude object’ of ‘unknown origin’ over Alaska
The incident comes a week after a Chinese spy balloon was shot down over South Carolinawww.independent.co.uk
We have an epidemic……
Assumes facts not in evidence. The military doesn't broadcast everything it does, nor the reasons why.So now the military is shooting things out of the sky without knowing what they are. Nice.
Commercial flights are at around 36,000 feet, can go up to 42,000. Military is a bit higher.Firstly, an altitude of 40,000 is not normally an altitude where you'll find commercial flights. Or my memory isn't so great.
Not much. It probably just means they suspect it's another spy ballon, but could be a totally harmless weather balloon.Secondly, what the heck does that "reasonable threat" mean?
Because the media had a massive two week freak-out over the spy balloon. If they don't tell people and it gets spotted, we'll have yet more hysterics.For example, why the heck even tell the public at this early stage?
You retire from Pan-Am or TWA?Firstly, an altitude of 40,000 is not normally an altitude where you'll find commercial flights. Or my memory isn't so great. Been out of that business for a long time. In fact, didn't they state that balloon over CONUS was not a threat to commercial air travel because it was at about the same altitude? I think they need new writers at that organization.
Secondly, what the heck does that "reasonable threat" mean? A bloody threat is a threat, or so I thought. What's an 'unreasonable threat'?
And now they can collect the pieces much easier off the ice.
EDIT: But I see the thread I thought I would post in was dumped and we already had one and you folks are having questions anew. Some of you are correct that something is a tad odd here. For example, why the heck even tell the public at this early stage?
No, based on what the NSC spokesman said in the press briefing.Assumes facts not in evidence. The military doesn't broadcast everything it does, nor the reasons why.
If he revealed what the object was that would have absolutely no bearing on your position.No, based on what the NSC spokesman said in the press briefing.
Yep. My sons Delta flight this week was at 42kYou retire from Pan-Am or TWA?
Civilian air traffic uses altitudes from 33,000’ to 42,000’.
You have no principles. That’s why you’re in here supporting stupidity and defending shooting something without even knowing what it is.If he revealed what the object was that would have absolutely no bearing on your position.
If you knew what it was you would change your line of attack to something else.You have no principles. That’s why you’re in here supporting stupidity and defending shooting something without even knowing what it is.
"Find out?"I think this is a thread where we're going to find out that a bunch of old conservatives just have to be mad all the time.
Without going too far off-topic, my remembering is that most companies don't like to push an airframe up toward service ceilings because of maintenance cost increases when you do that. I seem to recall that 36,000 to about 39,000 was about right, depending on meteorological conditions. Other air traffic is also a determining factor, too. But 40,000 20 years ago just wasn't the normal cruising altitude that I remember.You retire from Pan-Am or TWA?
Civilian air traffic uses altitudes from 33,000’ to 42,000’.
That's right. It was a threat to air traffic.So now the military is shooting things out of the sky without knowing what they are. Nice.
Yes ... like I said. No matter what or who you want to believe, the military doesn't broadcast everything it does, nor the reasons why. Period.No, based on what the NSC spokesman said in the press briefing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?