5 ms·

This sort of calculations are slightly silly. F22s take off for training flights all the time, having one training flight switch to operational does not affect

This sort of calculations are slightly silly. F22s take off for training flights all the time, having one training flight switch to operational does not affect the cost. It’s similar for using missiles. The opportunity to shoot a real one at a real target is good training. Those things costs this money perhaps, but it’s not a useful way to think of it this way for such a case.

calderknight 4y ago
I think the implication is not that the cost in this specific case was very high. I think the point was that there is an assymetry in cost. So, if someone wanted to have balloons over the USA, it would be much cheaper for them to try than it would be for the USA to stop them. By the time someone starts sending 1000's of balloons, the costs to destroy them may add up.
- kodah 4y ago
  You could also just be trying to apply logic to someone with a low-cost, nonsensical argument. The irony being that it's the same sort of attack you're describing, but on your brain.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pixl97 4y ago
  'someone' I mean it would be pretty easy to figure out who it was, if at nation state level enact things like embargos against them which would cost them quite a bit more. If not at nation state level they'd likely be taken care of much more quietly.
  - calderknight 4y ago
    Agreed, but consider wartime.
- mlindner 4y ago
  Threats that are few in number and great in number are handled by different sorts of countermeasures. If China really did flood the west in balloons, then alternate measures would be used to handle it, perhaps measures that aren't public. High altitude balloons are very fragile (you need to wear gloves to avoid getting oils on them because those can dissolve the balloon material causing them to prematurely burst). I'm sure there's many counter measures that could be used if needed.
- aikinai 4y ago
  China already does something similar to Japan. They fly hundreds of flights a year around Japanese airspace, forcing Japan to constantly scramble jets just in case. This tires their pilots, puts wear on their planes, and costs a ton of money.

calderknight 4y ago

I think the implication is not that the cost in this specific case was very high. I think the point was that there is an assymetry in cost. So, if someone wanted to have balloons over the USA, it would be much cheaper for them to try than it would be for the USA to stop them. By the time someone starts sending 1000's of balloons, the costs to destroy them may add up.

kodah 4y ago
You could also just be trying to apply logic to someone with a low-cost, nonsensical argument. The irony being that it's the same sort of attack you're describing, but on your brain.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pixl97 4y ago
'someone' I mean it would be pretty easy to figure out who it was, if at nation state level enact things like embargos against them which would cost them quite a bit more. If not at nation state level they'd likely be taken care of much more quietly.
- calderknight 4y ago
  Agreed, but consider wartime.
mlindner 4y ago
Threats that are few in number and great in number are handled by different sorts of countermeasures. If China really did flood the west in balloons, then alternate measures would be used to handle it, perhaps measures that aren't public. High altitude balloons are very fragile (you need to wear gloves to avoid getting oils on them because those can dissolve the balloon material causing them to prematurely burst). I'm sure there's many counter measures that could be used if needed.
aikinai 4y ago
China already does something similar to Japan. They fly hundreds of flights a year around Japanese airspace, forcing Japan to constantly scramble jets just in case. This tires their pilots, puts wear on their planes, and costs a ton of money.