Comments
Jan_Pawel2 t1_j9g9qlj wrote
Bono?
K9YO-15 t1_j9gemc1 wrote
It was the only plane that can fly high enough.
Phyr8642 t1_j9gfv5q wrote
No shit. We still fly those?
BrightlySandy t1_j9go84n wrote
the main thing is to make sense to shoot down. China makes balloons like hot cakes
MrEloi t1_j9gotam wrote
I thought that the F-22 got up to 50,000 feet and the missile climbed the remaining 10,000 feet?
This photo show the plane at 60,000 ft or more ....
The shadow cast onto the balloon is all a bit too perfect.
Note: technically, the F-22 can reach 60,000+ ft in some circumstances
Mival93 OP t1_j9gp7p7 wrote
This photo is from a U2 spy plane that observed the balloon, as noted in the title. Not an F22. The U2 can reach above 70,000 feet.
Coke_Addict26 t1_j9gpkqp wrote
It's a U2 reconnaissance plane, not an F22. This looks like it's from when the balloon was still over land and it's there to take pictures not shoot it down.
MIAMarc t1_j9gtixt wrote
Yes. We keep a few on hand for atmospheric research and also situation like what happened.
MrEloi t1_j9guynf wrote
>as noted in the title.
Doh!
Mival93 OP t1_j9gvey2 wrote
Haha it happens!
Phyr8642 t1_j9gyt70 wrote
Huh, cool, today I learned.
rsta223 t1_j9h1x24 wrote
The F-22 officially has a ceiling of 60k, and was apparently at 58k when it shot the balloon (which was at 63k, with the missile covering the 5kft difference).
(As stated by others, this is a U-2, but the 22 could actually get pretty close, and based on the flight envelope diagrams I've seen, even 60k is pretty conservative for the 22, and probably an artificial limit for pilot oxygen/pressurization reasons or something)
[deleted] t1_j9hc9bg wrote
[removed]
DemonAzrakel t1_j9hhtc6 wrote
I figure the published number would be intentionally conservative, not giving the precise limitations out to the public.
complete_hick t1_j9ho47k wrote
SR-71s flew at 80k feet
Dr_StrangeloveGA t1_j9hti5k wrote
Quite a bit, actually. Real time intelligence that satellites can't provide, relatively inexpensive to operate compared the SR-71.
lirva1 t1_j9i0mfu wrote
...and don't forget, use those $400k rockets to knock em down. Fuck that pansy 30 mm canon shit. Bullets....hooeey.
Latvian_Pete t1_j9i2euz wrote
And a TIE fighter just out of frame on the left
spekt50 t1_j9i30z8 wrote
And doesn't leak all its fuel on the tarmac to boot.
Dr_StrangeloveGA t1_j9ihwgj wrote
Well yes. And doesn't require a space shuttle type of support. U2 doesn't require the air and ground resources of the SR-71.
The difference between a U2 and and SR-71 is like Nascar vs F1. Very different flight charistics and missions.
Gregory_malenkov t1_j9ix5k7 wrote
NASA has a few that they operate for this purpose. The USAF still operates a fleet of around 30 U2s, for real-time intelligence gathering that’s just not really possible for satellites.
ixfd64 t1_j9lraje wrote
It's legitimate. Here's the original: https://dvidshub.net/image/7644960/u-2-pilot-over-central-continental-united-states
Mival93 OP t1_j9g8vf4 wrote
Can’t verify if this is legit or not. Source is here https://twitter.com/space_osint/status/1628096104175632388?s=46&t=ZRUYgCy01Xh-txkgjjxoZQ