Because "Atlantikwall" doesn't sound that great

It is perfectly possible (and imho the most likely) that we have a small fraction real hostile drones and a large fraction resulting drone hysteria.

We will not prove or disprove that with these fourth-hand imprecise descriptions of observations matched to flight tracks.

Reminds me of the "Chinese balloon" scare of a few years ago. When the US Air Force was shooting amateur radiosonde balloons.

I hear you. Once during archeological fieldwork, while jumping a small ditch, inadvertently jumped right into a clump of giant Hogwood I somehow missed, luckily for me while in coverall and with workgloves on so it did not turn out dramatic....

Reminds me of an archaeological dig I was participating in, 30 yrs ago, camping in the field. Walked past the latrines one evening (trenches with planks over them), and heard a voice from the latrines exclaim in despair: "Oh damned, I dropped my torch in the shit!"

*below 150 km, not 1540 km

2/x
Location at time of observation.
This was a difficult object to model in our reentry model: very eccentric orbit (brief dips below 1540 km), and indications of changing attitude =- changing drag area

You would expect that from a Miss Norway rather than a Miss Chile

CSpoC has issued a TIP for the #UNHA3 RB #reentry of 18:14 +- 1m UTC (5 Nov), half an hour earlier than our forecast (but well within error margin of the latter) over the southern Atlantic. This is presumably based on a space-based observation of the reentry fireball.

New update from our Tudat #reentry model for the #UNHA3 RB:
18:47 +- 70 min UTC

Update from our Tudat #reentry model for the #UNHA3 RB:
19:08 +- 1.6 h UTC.

You are wrong in that... ;-)

5/x
The #Minuteman-III unarmed #ICBM test launch (see tweet 1/x) from Vandenberg has happened today:
www.vandenberg.spaceforce.mil/News/Article...

Range can be changed by launching more lofted (higher apogee) or less lofted