Unidentified Objects/Balloons Intercepted by US aircraft

There was no "stonewalling" of Greenewald's FOIA request, as you should have read in the BV blog post you referenced. The USAF response, as shown in that blog post, denied the request under Exemption 1 of FOIA. Their response letter is shown and explains the particulars of the exemption. The letter also provided a PoC, FOIA case number, and instructions for filing an appeal.

USAF's response didn't stonewall Greenewald, just the opposite as they provided a timely reply with the information he would need to contact those responsible for the ruling and how to seek redress under the law. Hard to accuse anyone who is providing information meant to keep lines of communication open between the two parties of stonewalling.
I'm reading the USAF response between the lines as "anything we retained at this point is classified, and we can't give you any of it. But we passed a lot of it on to AARO, and maybe they can get some of it declassified for you, or they might have unclassified info of their own." They didn't have to do that.

The timeliness of the reply and the instructions for the appeal seem to be a legal requirement, so I wouldn't see that as particularly stonewalling or not, it's just CYA.
 
But Occam's razor suggests that the big balloon being detected late by NORAD (or whatever they're called) led directly to more attention to balloons which led to the smaller balloons being detected. The existing radar hardware is perfectly capable of detecting these, it requires an update/adjustment to the software that processes the raw data to weed out "uninteresting" stuff like flocks of birds or celestial objects.

As confirmed by Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs Melissa Dalton in an online presser of sorts referenced by @Arthur 33 in post #115 (bold by me):

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...of-defense-for-homeland-defense-and-hemisphe/

In light of the People's Republic of China balloon that we took down last Saturday, we have been more closely scrutinizing our air space at these altitudes, including enhancing our radar, which may at least partly explain the increase in objects that we've detected over the past week. We also know that a range of entities, including countries, companies, research organizations operate objects at these altitudes for purposes that are not nefarious, including legitimate research.
Content from External Source
And reiterated by General Glen VanHerck, Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command.

So as Assistant Secretary Dalton talked about, radars essentially filter out information based on speed. So you can set various gates. We call them velocity gates that allow us to filter out low-speed clutter. So if you have radars on all the time that we're looking at anything from zero speed up to, say, 100, you would see a lot more information.

We have adjusted some of those gates to give us better fidelity on seeing smaller objects. You can also filter out by altitude. And so, with some adjustments, we've been able to get a better a categorization of radar tracks now. I hope that adds additional clarification.
Content from External Source
After the PRC balloon they started looking harder and found more. And that it had probably happened in the past, but no one was looking for them. They were able to look back and reconstruct previous "objects" it sounds like:

We do know after the fact that there was high-altitude balloons because we went back and we were able to reconstruct them. As far as these specific objects at this time, I'm unaware to say it's certainly possible, but I — I don't have the fidelity to give you the answer. We will go look at the data to see if we can figure anything out about the potential, of course, not seeing these previously.
Content from External Source
Can anybody please show me a "Octagon" shaped balloon? Or a "silver cylinder" balloon. With a rigid exterior.

General Vanherck makes no mention that I can see of the shape in the full quote you used part of:

GEN. VANHERCK: Yeah. So I'm not going to categorize these balloons. We call them objects for a reason. Certainly, the event of South Carolina coast for the Chinese spy balloon, that was clearly a balloon.

These are objects. I am not able to categorize how they stay aloft. It could be a gaseous type of balloon inside a structure or it could be some type of a propulsion system. But clearly, they're — they're able to stay aloft.

I would be hesitant to — and urge you not to attribute into any specific country. We don't know. That's why it's so critical to get our hands on these so that we can further assess and analyze what they are.
Content from External Source
He repeatedly describes them as "small" and "moving with the wind", but he doesn't want to call them "balloons" just yet:

GEN. VANHERCK:..... What I would tell you is what we're seeing is very, very small objects that produce a very, very low radar cross-section. I'm not going to go into detail about shapes or anything like that really because it's really, really difficult for pilots at the altitudes we're operating. These are very, very slow object in the space, if you will, going at the speed of the wind essentially. And our pilots are (inaudible) 100 miles per hour to give us what I would consider a factual scientific-based description of what we see. Therefore, I — I'm hesitant to tell you that.
Content from External Source
GEN. VANHERCK: Yeah, let me talk about the — the — so the — the way I would characterize similar, they're similar in size, similar in speeds that go with the wind on these objects that we've seen. As far as specific shapes, we've got to get our hands on those to see fidelity of the detail of shape, how they get airborne, do they have propulsion. All of those things are still to be determined.
Content from External Source
 
I should rephrase. Can anybody show me a octagon shaped balloon that is the size of a 4-wheeler. The idea that the Airforce launched 2 sidewinder missiles at a 11 inch mylar party balloon is on its face ridiculous.

Also those cheap mylar balloons go up and pop (unless specifically underfilled). This object was detected in Montana and shot down over Lake Huron. No party balloon does that.

Audio of Lake Huron intercept.
Source: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-intercept-the-octagon-object-over-lake-huron

Also a side question on this audio recording. I thought all military comms like this would be encrypted? Any HAMM radio operators out there know how this recording was collected? Was it a leak?
 
Last edited:
Can anybody show me a octagon shaped balloon that is the size of a 4-wheeler.
OK.
octagonal baloon festival de los globos solares.jpg
Not sure where this gets us, though. There is absolutely no reason why there can't be a balloon of any 3-d shape imaginable:
globos balloon.jpg

Octagons are not a problem. Have you got any particular evidence that what was shot down were NOT balloons? Not being "gotcha-y," if you've got it, I'm interested.

Edited because I thought, on reflection, that a phrase sounded snarky...
 
Last edited:
Well it was clearly a denial.
The request was processed per FOIA and the information legally withheld per Exemption 1 as explained in the response sent to Greenewald. He was provided with all the information necessary to file an appeal under the law if he felt the response was not properly adjudicated. Those are the facts, pretty straightforward.
Also Greenwald was not the only person to do a FOIA on this stuff. I find this FOIA intresting because the Air Force basically told the guy to pound dirt and contact AARO if he wanted any records. This is useful because it at least shows that AARO has a case file for the Alaska shootdown. Or am I reading too much into this denial? FOIA deny 3333.jpeg
No documentation with this letter, so no way of knowing if such a request was made to JB Elmendorf and/or this is a legitimate response. Assuming it's all legit, then yes, you are reading too much into the response. If DIA is the cognizant agency for the requested information, why would you expect JBE to provide that information? The military is highly structured with defined "lanes" of authority/responsibility. JBE provided the information necessary to allow the request to be sent to the appropriate agency. If the information is releasable, DIA will release it. If it is not releasable, information will provided to allow for an appeal.

I've been the functional (engineering) lead on responses to FOIA requests, they are not answered in a vacuum. Responses are crafted by a team that includes the FOIA office, base legal, functional lead(s), security, public affairs, and often a commander's action officer. Things can get contentious. The response is issued by the FOIA Office, but only after the response has been reviewed and coordinated on by all concerned, and been briefed to and approved by the commander of the cognizant agency.
 
I have read this entire thread top to bottom. You are showing a picture of a octagon tent. Last I heard tents don't fly. Unless you are claiming a strong wind picked this up and flew it hundreds of miles from Montana to Lake Huron.
 
Also those cheap mylar balloons go up and pop (unless specifically underfilled). This object was detected in Montana and shot down over Lake Huron. No party balloon does that.

A cheap mylar balloon need only have a small puncture to relieve the pressure for it to be able to rise to jet aircraft altitudes. See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/balloon-like-ufo-photo-from-the-debrief.11481/post-243014 for a Batman party balloon sighted from a fighter jet.

There are also clues upthread that one of the objects was an amateur radio pico balloon, which often is an underfilled mylar party balloon with a very lightweight payload.

Incredulity should be the first step towards truth, not the last.
 
And reiterated by General Glen VanHerck, Commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command.

Yes the radar appears to not have been calibrated to identify balloons. I find this crazy as balloons have been used as weapons going back to WW1 at least. This appears to be confirmed by Kirkpatrick in his latest interview. He says he has been working to calibrate the radars to be able to identify balloons, which would have been very useful in these shootdown episodes. If we had a pre-existing signature of what a balloon looks like on radar you could immediately identify these objects as balloons (if that is what they were).

I guess this is progress? No more excuse anymore for a unidentified track to "maybe be a balloon" when we know exactually what a balloon looks like on radar and have a signature to compare.

DR. KIRKPATRICK: Sure. So, there's a lot packed in there, so let me try to undo that. First, we have a lot of our reporting comes from military sensor platforms, F-35s, F-22s, Aegis radars, whatnot. All of those sensors have to be calibrated against known objects, right. So, we're running a campaign and have been for the last year or so on here's what a weather balloon looks like in an F-35 when you fly it at Mach 1 in all of the sensors. Here's what it looks like on from Aegis, and then take all that data and turn it into models that we can then put back into the trainers so that the operators can understand what they're looking at. That's part one.
External Source:

Source: https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...patrick-holds-an-off-camera-media-roundtable/
 
Have you got any particular evidence that what was shot down were NOT balloons?

Some pilots said the object “interfered with their sensors”
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/11/politics/unidentified-object-alaska-military-latest/index.html

Some pilots also claimed to have seen no identifiable propulsion on the object, and could not explain how it was staying in the air, despite the object cruising at an altitude of 40,000 feet.
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/11/politics/unidentified-object-alaska-military-latest/index.html

GEN. VANHERCK: Yeah. So I'm not going to categorize these balloons. We call them objects for a reason. Certainly, the event of South Carolina coast for the Chinese spy balloon, that was clearly a balloon.

These are objects. I am not able to categorize how they stay aloft.
Source: https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...of-defense-for-homeland-defense-and-hemisphe/

Another official from the Department of Defense told the New York Times that the object broke into pieces when it hit the frozen sea.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/feb/11/alaska-mystery-flying-object-us-chinese-balloon
 
Since I quoted from Project Loon documentation in the proper thread, I can appreciate that these balloons could basically loiter by choosing suitable altitudes. However, the Chinese spy balloon was considerably heavier and would not have had the same kind of vertical mobility as a Project Loon balloon, which means its manouvering capabilities would not be expected to match those of Project Loon.
Why do you think this? Do you think that the China Spy Balloon had some sort of prop and rudder like the NSC Spokesman said? Seems far more likely that the maneuverability described was using the same tech as the Loom balloons.

NSC Spokesman John Kirby said the Chinese airship had a propeller and could maneuver in flight. This fits the FAA definition of an "airship"

Source:https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/montana-china-spy-balloon
 
A small propeller (or preferably two) could conceivably be used to orient the solar panels towards the sun, allowing the balloon to maximise the power collection while aloft. But for efficient active steering of a dirigible, you'd need a rudder or tailfin.
 
I am not sure I see evidence that they were NOT balloons there.

Interfering with sensors (countermeasures) does not seem to be something that a balloon payload absolutely could not do.
Not seeing signs of propulsion actually seems a GOOD match for a balloon.
The estimable General not being able to characterize them as balloons seems to me to mean "I can't prove they were balloons," basically. Which leaves open the possibility that they were balloons.
Breaking up on hitting the ice after falling from a great height seems very consistent with a balloon payload.

I'd agree that your sources as paraphrased are not strong evidence for them being balloons, but I don't see them contradicting the hypothesis, either. And we KNOW balloons exist, and that there was heightened interest in detecting/tracking/neutralizing balloons that might be "Chinese Spy Balloon 2, Helium Boogaloo."
 
I am a full on believer. But even I don't pretend to understand what is going on here. Makes no sense.

If it were all balloons why not just come out and say that? Why the non stop UFO talk, and media circus?

If it were ET or advanced secret government anti-gravity craft why would you announce it to the public? Seems keeping all these incidents secret would be the correct move.

Also why did the UFO community mostly ignore this case even though the MSM was blasting the term UFO all day and night for like a week? Most people just accepted what Lue Elizondo and George Knapp said when they told them their insider sources were saying these were all prosaic.

Maybe it was all just Balloons and the UFO talk is some psi-op to cover for the reality of more incursions by China?

I don't know, but I am pissed off we don't have clear answers to this. I want some FOIA responses, I want the FBI report on the wreckage, I want the FLIR video. Just give me the truth whatever it is.
 
I want some FOIA responses, I want the FBI report on the wreckage, I want the FLIR video.
I feel you... sadly, when it comes to questions of national defense, it MAY be the case that there are reasons that it will all be classified, and you'll (we'll, I'd like to see it too) never see any of that.
 
I am a patriot too, and I know some things need to be kept secret for national security. But not to this level. I would be happy if at least some members of congress (gang of 8) was briefed in full on these incidents. At some point the secrecy itself becomes the national security threat.

"We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

-Dwight D. Eisenhower
 
Just give me the truth whatever it is.
When it comes down to an object in the Low Information Zone, the truth is likely to be "We don't know what it is". A verbal description or a couple of frames of a single-pixel sighting simply do not give even an expert enough material for him to definitively state what it is. But you don't sound as if you'd be willing to accept that, no matter how true it is. It may be an unsatisfactory response, but it can still be a perfectly truthful one, and sometimes it's the best one you're ever likely to get.
 
At some point the secrecy itself becomes the national security threat.
not in evidence

gang of 8 was briefed on the salient points, see above
this "full report" claim doesn't mean the main intelligence was withheld

I can see how it's important for US counterintelligence to keep China in the dark which capabilities of the balloon have been discovered, and which parts of the debris got lost or couldn't be understood. The full report would reveal that, and thus it's highly classified and must not leak.

There is no "threat to national security" that results from that report not being available to Congress. Unless you assume the Biden adminstration is lying to Congress?
 
I can see how it's important for US counterintelligence to keep China in the dark which capabilities of the balloon have been discovered, and which parts of the debris got lost or couldn't be understood. The full report would reveal that, and thus it's highly classified and must not leak.

There is no "threat to national security" that results from that report not being available to Congress. Unless you assume the Biden adminstration is lying to Congress?

You have a lot more faith in our government than I do. I assume they are screwing us over/lying until proven otherwise. That is why we have checks and balances in our system of governance, and why we have things like FOIA. Unchecked power leads to corruption and crime.

I for one am not satisfied with the line "it is all for national security", and you don't need to know. FINE, than tell my elected reps. Until I see that that has happened I am calling shenanigans.

And as I posted above Marco Rubio said point blank that he has not been briefed on the China Spy Balloon wreckage and he is a member of the gang of 8.
 
I assume they are screwing us over/lying until proven otherwise.
not in evidence (excepting the Pres who's been convicted of fraud)

And as I posted above Marco Rubio said point blank that he has not been briefed on the China Spy Balloon wreckage and he is a member of the gang of 8.
Your source work needs to become better.

Your source:
Article:
As you’ll hear in the first portion, we started the initial; interview asking whether Rubio’s gotten satisfactory responses to his questions on the Chinese spy balloon incident from the beginning of the year (a simple question we’re circling back to many senators with, because most seem to have completely moved on from the subject that consumed Washington in February).

“No,” Rubio tells us.

“What’s the holdup?”

“A million things have happened since then, so people move on…” Rubio says.

So what exactly were Rubio's questions?
Article:
Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Roger Wicker (R-MS) claimed in a letter Wednesday that the Pentagon has not satisfactorily answered their questions about the Chinese spy balloon that was discovered in United States airspace in January.

The letter, addressed to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, claimed that the Pentagon was not clear on the sequence of events when it comes to the spy balloon. The senators had sent a letter to Austin last month that sought clarification on the timing of when U.S. intelligence discovered the balloon and when President Joe Biden was notified.

“In particular, we await documentation demonstrating when senior officials learned of the balloon and at what point you, and the President, were provided response options," the senators wrote. "The simple point of the letter was to establish baseline facts to inform all members of Congress."

I fail to see what the FBI report on the wreckage would contribute to answering Rubio's timing concerns.

Rubio was briefed on the wreckage:
 
There is not a transcript of the recording sadly. I will do my best though.

Ask a Pol: Have you gotten any answers on the China Spy Balloon?

Rubio: No

Ask a Pol: No? What is the hold up there?

Rubio: The hold up? um. A million of things have happened since than. People move on (unintelligible) There is a lot of technical exploitation. (Unintelligible) Our interest at this point are two fold. First what was on the platform, why was it useful? And the other is our ability to track and identify ahead of time. I think on the second one I have a better idea, we have a pretty good sense when we knew about it. What was done and not done about it. I think on the technical exploitation front that's an ongoing effort that you get bits and pieces on.
Sen. Marco Rubio (10-24-2023)
Source audio 0:07-0:59

Source: https://www.askapol.com/p/exclusive...=3f4aa44c-9104-41ae-ae18-7a4cfa42a12e#details
 
There is not a transcript of the recording sadly. I will do my best though.


Sen. Marco Rubio (10-24-2023)
Source audio 0:07-0:59

Source: https://www.askapol.com/p/exclusive...=3f4aa44c-9104-41ae-ae18-7a4cfa42a12e#details
"that's an ongoing effort that you get bits and pieces on." contradicts your claim,
And as I posted above Marco Rubio said point blank that he has not been briefed on the China Spy Balloon wreckage and he is a member of the gang of 8.
 
"that's an ongoing effort that you get bits and pieces on." contradicts your claim,
No that proves that Sen. Rubio has not been provided the full FBI report on what was on the balloon. If he had gotten the report he would know 100% what was on the balloon. Not "bits and pieces" of info on what was on it.
 
No that proves that Sen. Rubio has not been provided the full FBI report on what was on the balloon. If he had gotten the report he would know 100% what was on the balloon. Not "bits and pieces" of info on what was on it.
Yes, but your claim was that "he has not been briefed" on it at all.
As it is, he is getting briefed, and may actually know what the analysts have found out so far, and been briefed on those results as they came in ("ongoing effort", "bits and pieces").
 
I am 99.99% sure the government knows what they shot down. I don't buy for a second they "lost" the debris. I call BS. We are being lied to.
If something lands in water, it might never be found. If something is shot down over land (especially something from a very high altitude), it still might be extraordinarily hard to find. How many years did it take to find the money that "D.B. Cooper" took with him when he jumped out of a plane? How many people disappear in a year's time? How big an object can get hung up high in a Douglas fir, out of sight of both aerial surveillance and ground-based searchers? If something disintegrates on impact or with the passage of time, are the parts recognizable enough that a passing hiker might take an interest, or would he just frown that somebody littered the trail, and walk past?

I can't do anything about your incredulity. I can just offer some alternative reasons that something could disappear and not be found, or not reported to the public at large. Correction: not be found yet. It could still happen, so relax. As for stuff they already have, it may be legitimately secret, it may be something still being studied, it may be mundane. You'd need to explain just WHY you should be uniquely privileged to have that information. Your suggestion about giving the info to an "elected official" suggests that an official should be read into secret material just by virtue of being elected, when an election is more akin to a popularity contest, NOT a security review.
 
Last edited:
If something lands in water, it might never be found. If something is shot down over land (especially something from a very high altitude), it still might be extraordinarily hard to find. How many years did it take to find the money that "D.B. Cooper" took with him when he jumped out of a plane?
Losing something in Canada in the winter seems like a given when we sometimes can't find all of the Easter eggs we hid in the garden until we mow the lawn in spring.

More examples:

"Canadian explorers have found the wreck of one of two ships lost in the 1845 Franklin expedition to Canada’s Northwest Passage, solving an enduring historical mystery and bolstering Canada’s claim to the key Arctic trade route. " That was in 2014.

Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 2501 is a DC-4 lying at the bottom of Lake Michigan, lost to this day.

The hardware that dropped in the water off Alaska and into Lake Huron is good and gone, barring an unlikely coincidence. The hardware that dropped in the Canadian wilderness has a slightly better chance of being discovered, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
"Canadian explorers have found the wreck of one of two ships lost in the 1845 Franklin expedition to Canada’s Northwest Passage, solving an enduring historical mystery and bolstering Canada’s claim to the key Arctic trade route. " That way in 2014.

Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 2501 is a DC-4 lying at the bottom of Lake Michigan, lost to this day.​

I've heard (anecdotally) the statistic that there are more unexplained disappearances of planes and boats per square mile in Lake Erie than in the "Bermuda Triangle".
 
More examples:
Example from Canada, over land:
Article:
More than 71 years ago, on Jan. 26, 1950, U.S. Air Force Douglas C-54D Skymaster Serial 42-72469 went missing on a flight between Anchorage/Elmendorf, Alaska, and Great Falls, Mont. Two hours into the flight, while crossing the Yukon-British Columbia border, the last contact with the plane was in a radio position report received at 1:14 p.m. This report stated that the aircraft had passed over Snag, Yukon Territory, and five minutes later was expected to be over Aisihik.

Nothing more was heard from the military transport. The four-engine aircraft, carrying 41 military personnel and three civilians, including an expectant woman and her infant son, had simply disappeared without a trace.

Since the C-54, the military version of the Douglas DC-4, was still unreported after its fuel supply was exhausted, an extensive organized aerial search was instituted, combining the joint efforts of the United States and Royal Canadian air forces. The search, which encompassed approximately 871,000 square miles and proved fruitless, was suspended Feb. 20, 1950.

Skymaster-flying-3263151-scaled.jpg
 
I am 99.99% sure the government knows what they shot down. I don't buy for a second they "lost" the debris. I call BS. We are being lied to.
Stolen from @Fat Phil over on the Kirkpatrick thread:

Looks like a bit of a "can't prove a negative" fallacy, and in this particular story, it even comes with the additional conspiratorial twist:

A: We don't have X.
B: Show us!!!!
A: See, we don't have X.
B: That proves you've hidden it somewhere secret!!!!
Content from External Source
(Thanks, Phil!)

As I commented before, sometimes "We don't know" is the CORRECT answer, whether you like it or not. Please don't fall down the conspiracy rabbit hole whenever you don't get the answer you want.
 
Example from Canada, over land:
Custer fought the Indians in 1876. It took well over a century before the remains of horses and cavalrymen of his "Grey Horse Troop" of the 7th Cavalry were found in a ravine on the Little Bighorn battleground.
 
If it were all balloons why not just come out and say that?

US defense officials and the Biden administration have said the subsequent balloons appear to have nothing to do with China or any other nation but are instead harmless inflatable craft launched by private companies, recreationists or research institutions.
Content from External Source
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/feb/18/balloons-alaska-us-military-canada

“The intelligence community is considering as a leading explanation that these could just be balloons tied to some commercial or benign purpose,” said White House national security spokesman John Kirby.
Content from External Source
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...ants-sharper-rules-on-unknown-aerial-objects/

The United States believes the unidentified objects shot down by American fighter jets over Canada and Alaska were balloons, though smaller than the China balloon downed over the Atlantic Ocean last weekend, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday.
Content from External Source
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...cts-believed-to-be-balloons-sen-schumer-says/
 
The hardware that dropped in the water off Alaska
This is the shootdown that is most suspect IMHO. For starters it was shot down over frozen sea ice not open ocean. How hard is it to find something on a perfectly flat white surface?

This oil worker up in Deadhorse Alaska (Backcountry Alaska) was making daily videos showing the massive recovery operation. He was baffled that the media was reporting that they still had not recovered the debris as the conditions were perfect for a recovery operation. He also reported that after 2-3 days of high activity of military aircraft things basically went dead. This was during the same time that the WH was reporting that the search for the debris was still active. Basically catching the WH in a lie.

Source:

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14chdtw/deleted_video_from_youtuber_who_witnessed_the/
 
Your suggestion about giving the info to an "elected official" suggests that an official should be read into secret material just by virtue of being elected, when an election is more akin to a popularity contest, NOT a security review.
I see this constantly being repeated by TTSA UFO brain cultists and many skeptics too. There is this little thing called the US constitution that delegates the power of oversight to our legislative branch of government. Elected reps don't get "clearances" like normal government employees. They automatically gain ability to review classified material when they are elected by the people. It is called checks and balances. Yes there is some level of "need to know", are you on the intel committee etc. But these secrecy pimps need to do some basic civics research before that start talking about clearances for the legislative branch.
 
This is the shootdown that is most suspect IMHO. For starters it was shot down over frozen sea ice not open ocean. How hard is it to find something on a perfectly flat white surface?
Frozen sea ice is not a perfectly flat white surface.
Article:
Ice forms first as small crystals called frazil ice. These form at the surface and develop a layer that looks similar to an oil slick (Figure 21a). The crystals then coalesce to form small plates called pancake ice, which have rounded edges caused by constantly being bumped (Figure 21b). As more seawater freezes, the pancakes grow up to 3 m in diameter and eventually freeze together or are piled up on top of each other by storms to form larger ice floes. Water can freeze onto the bottom and snow falls on the surface, increasing their thickness to typically more than 2 m (Figure 21c).
s206_blk1_part5_f4_07.eps.jpg
Figure 21 Sea ice growing on the surface of the ocean. (a) The first stage of ice formation is frazil ice forming a 'slick' on the surface of the sea; (b) pancake ice which has developed from the frazil; (c) older pack ice with a covering of snow; (d) the dark region is thin ice which has grown in the gaps between the older, thicker pack ice.

Once it's snowed over, or rimed over in the fog, the debris is also white.
 
Frozen sea ice is not a perfectly flat white surface.
You are being deliberately obstinate IMHO. It was in the middle of winter. The sea ice was frozen solid and thick. The Oil Worker showed the conditions. Sunny and clear. Perfect conditions for recovery PERIOD. With all those resources in play they would have recovered every little bit of debris. Hell they would have recovered the little bits of metal from the sidewinder missile too IMHO.

Unless you are claiming the US military is the most incompetent organization in the history of mankind.
 
Back
Top