In my opinion the balloon was tracking and scanning our radar detection systems, and find vulnerabilities in them; since the closer you get the best you can read the frequencies. Furthermore, there is no coincidence that in just few days after, we have to deal with other smaller balloons; I just hope that China did not created a vulnerability on those radar defense systems.
Why The PRC Balloon Was Not For Meteorology
The PRC government claimed that its balloon that traveled across the US was for meteorological research, however, IPVM analysis shows its characteristics fundamentally differ from meteorological balloons.
Since very few people have ever seen either a surveillance or meteorological balloon, it can be difficult to immediately recognize the significant differences between the two. In this report, IPVM explains the fundamental differences.
To learn more about how surveillance balloons work, see our tutorial - How Surveillance Balloons Work.
Can IPVM please stop turning this site into TMZ. There are some parallels to this industry within but this has to stop.
This is a well-researched post from someone who has a Masters's Degree in Physics from Yale.
If you do not like it, you can read one of the many other posts that IPVM has published this week.
I'd hope that anything posted here is well researched. I mentioned nothing about credentials or educational history of the article's author or data. Thanks though.
Geez, lighten up Francis. I found it very informative and suspect a vast majority of readers found it informative. If you don't like it, don't read it.
Feelin' pretty light, friend. I did read it. That's why I made my comment. No need to repeat what Johnny boy suggested.
Why don't you like this post and think its "TMZ"?
I have criticized IPVM on occasion for "TMZ behavior", but I don't think that applies with regards to this post.
The TMZ-like behavior is fluff relating to celebrity personalities. For example, articles that are basically Industry Executive Says Something Dumb, and then the executive replies that he didn't mean it that way, and then John says "well you should be more careful because you're an important industry executive", and then the executive says "no you need to stop misinterpreting things", and then John says "excuse me I quoted you exactly", and then the executive starts posting negative comments on Linked In and then John feels obligated to reply in full, and then it turns out that the executive is actually John's long-forgotten twin brother who left with the other parent in a divorce while they were both babies, and they become friends and decide to get their parents back together. See, that kind of stuff is just silly.
But in this case, Nikita - a highly educated physicist - is analyzing current events. (Seriously, how many media outlets even have a guy like Nikita on staff?) This does not have any impact on day-to-day installation of physical security systems, because most of us aren't selling balloons. Nevertheless, it is extremely different from celebrity personality fluff. Comparing it to TMZ's nonsense is very disrespectful to Nikita's work.
If anything, criticism should be that this is irrelevant to your business. As for my company, a lot of what IPVM is irrelevant to my business. We don't deal with security guards. We're not investors, so we don't really need market analysis. For day-to-day operations, I don't really need to know if some company we don't use has an outage or vulnerability (but it is helpful when looking for a new partner). There's stuff here that I don't need. It's okay to skip articles that aren't relevant to your business. The existence of this article does not hurt you.
I found this informative. It's not a review of a product that I would sell or compete against, but it's interesting and relevant to what's going on in the world. I think it's a bit much to call this TMZ reporting.
WSJ with a good history video on spy balloons:
For me, having some different information that is still in some way tangentially related to the surveillance industry is very intriguing, albeit not useful in my day to day job.
Any idea on what a balloon the size of the PRC one would begin to cost?
Pentagon released an image of the ballon a US pilot took:
That gives a better sense visually of how big it was.