Mea culpa…I totally misread and then derailed. Hopefully this isn’t in violation of the previous post.
Let’s get back to how stupid it is to shutdown an airport over a party balloon.
It is not stupid to shut down an airport because anti-drone lasers are being tested in the vicinity.
It is stupid to mistake a balloon for an enemy drone. There is no evidence for enemy drones in the US, the UK or in most of western Europe. At present, the vast majority of drone reports in these locations are caused by distant planes, with most or all of the rest caused by innocent amateur drones, balloons (as in this case) or misidentified celestial objects. Drones are the UFOS of the 2020s.
However I suspect that enemy drone incursions are likely to be a problem in the next few years or decades, as drone warfare replaces many manned weapons systems. I suspect that airport shutdowns and exclusion zones due to real or suspected drone incursions are likely to be increasingly problematic over time.
Yes, that’s stupid. But people make mistakes and software misidentifies things, and calling it stupid might be accurate but doesn’t help. Those mistakes will always happen.
The problem here wasn’t that a balloon was misidentified; it’s that the perceived problem was addressed with experimental technology and none of it was coordinated with other interested parties.
Maybe shooting down suspected drones with lasers is the right approach. But this approach needs to be taken in conjunction with plans for how to eliminate risk to air traffic in the area. None of that was done, and that’s what needs to be fixed.
Given this happened on the US/Mexico border, I think it should be “Noventa y Nueve Globos Rojos”.
Exactly. You should do your experiments outside of commercial airports, and you should coordinate military exercises with relevant local authorities.
There is apparently a real problem with smuggling drones in this area, so there is some excuse for the deployment anti-drone technology. But lasers and civilian aircraft do not mix well.
Before anti-drone lasers can be deployed safely in the vicinity of an airport or airline flightpath, there need to be foolproof safeguards against targeting civilian planes with these weapons; and I do not think that these safeguards exist yet.
The numerous misidentified ‘drones’ in the New Jersey flap prove that reliable drone detection and identification are not currently reliable, and would not be sufficient to protect civilian or friendly aircraft.
Seems to me if you can shoot down a drone, you can also track it. Blowing up contraband (evidence) is overkill and unnecessary.
Well, somewhat. Power loss and beam diffusion over distance are both issues. The Air Force Research Lab and Kirtland AFB had worked on the Airborne Laser platform for years with middling success and scrapped the program 15 years ago. So the actual effect will depend on a number of factors.
As happened in 1942 in the Battle of Los Angeles. But at least back then there was legitimate reason to panic at a presumed hostile intruder.
The stupid part is testing anti-drone lasers in the vicinity of an airport.
Kinda.
Yes, if it’s within the range and azimuth coverage of a particular shooter, that particular co-located tracker can also track it. Until it flies out of that tracker’s coverage area. Then it’s lost. Air defenses are like ground based fences. They successfully keep the bad guys on the other side of the fence. Until they climb over it, tunnel under it, or go around it, and the fence is now behind them. The fence does no good after that.
It’s also the case that even if you track it to touchdown, to do anything useful you’ve got to have men on the ground (or in helos) who can get to that location, wherever it is, fast enough to capture the goods and the people trying to retrieve them and put them in their truck for further transport to market. That takes a lot more expensive manpower and equipment than just a laser that drops the goods in a place the baddies will never find.
I’m not defending this whole stupid scenario of secret police weapons being deployed dangerously.
But I am suggesting the overall idea of destroying unmanned smuggling devices as the least expensive way of keeping contraband out isn’t nutty on its face.
What’s nutty of course is trying to stop the marketplace in the first place. How come Rs, and to a lesser extent Ds, revere the marketplace as an unstoppable force that ought not be regulated and certainly can’t be successfully suppressed. Unless it’s a marketplace for drugs or sex or …
yep, prob. no good in somewhat “dessert conditions” with lots of dust, etc…
but - hey - might be a fine weapon to take ice Greenland with its pristine air
“Sir! We tried using the High Power Laser over the Doughnuts, but the powdered sugar in the air is degrading the beam!”
mmmm…donut lasers!
going from a closed airport to “hitchhiker-esque weapon-limitations” in no less than 100 posts …
… that is pretty good for 2026 … not peak 2005-SDMB or so … but not too shabby, either …
I’m surprised no one’s mentioned a 1920s-style death ray.
Old fashioned. They were replaced by Jewish Space Lasers. Now we gotta see what the Obama aliens come up with.
Who do you think was responsible for those laser attacks that closed El Paso a couple weeks ago? The regime claims it was DHS. Of course they would. They can’t admit Obama’s pet ETs have been zapping folks.
And who says it was lasers as opposed to some other energy weapon far beyond Earth science & tech?
Not related to this thread at all. Just a completely unrelated fuck up.
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/27/texas-airspace-closed-drone-laser-pentagon-us-border-mexico
At least they actually got a drone and not just a party balloon.
When each organization prizes secrecy over coordination it’s gonna get stupid quickly and stay stupid forever.
Further, since these border terrorists and drug drones are figments of the Propaganda Ministry, anything anyone shoots down will actually be collateral damage.