Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> An AIM-9X actually going off is substantially larger.

No; the resulting exploding plane full of fuel is.

The actual explosion from the missile is small; you can see it at 0:54 or so on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YMSfg26YSQ.

As with a fragmentation grenade, they're shrapnel generators. https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-trending/grenades-movi...




Yeah, there isn't any explosion even that large. Perhaps you are mistaking the cloud of vapor as the balloon pops?

Again, the goal was to preserve as much intact as possible, shrapnel production runs completely counter to that objective. I'm basing my comments off this source [0], which admittedly is just some guy on the internet, though I have not been able to find any source claiming the missile carried a munition, if you have one please share it.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2xz21HvLs8


> Perhaps you are mistaking the cloud of vapor as the balloon pops?

No. Two clouds are visible. One (white) clearly from the balloon envelope, and one (darker) clearly from the missile. https://imgur.com/a/y386kLU

It's also very clear from the video that they targeted/hit below the balloon's envelope.

> shrapnel production runs completely counter to that objective

So does missing it, and they're already dropping it from 65k feet. They'll be prepared to piece things together.

> I have not been able to find any source claiming the missile carried a munition...

This is a pretty silly inversion of burden of proof. Between "some guy on the internet said something no one else reputable is corroborating" and "the Pentagon typically doesn't use dummy rockets to shoot enemy aircraft down", I know which side I fall on.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: