Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Tonka

Military, Aviation, Spacecraft Technology that won't necessarily replace us

Recommended Posts

Read the "Science" page on the Hypermach site for all you need to know. They're talking about Mach 4 speeds via plasma this and that and maglev engines with no oil. Of course, on the "Get Involved" page, they're selling shares for £100 each...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The folks around Chicago are complaining about the noise due to the new runway configuration. I doubt those will make anyone happier with the noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://ahrlac.com/index.php/press-releases/96-revolutionaty-aircraft-showcasing-africa-s-advanced-aerospace-capability-takes-to-the-skies

Looks like a fun one to fly... might have a bit of forward wing sweep on it? Rudders just look a little small, but maybe they are far enough away from the CG. Read somewhere of a projected cost of about $10mil.

_MG_6035.jpg

ahrlac-15.jpg

ahrlac-3.jpg

ahrlac-0.jpg

From another article:

The Ahrlac can fly at a maximum cruise speed of 500km/h and remain airborne for up to 10 hours with a range of about 2000km.

The aircraft will primarily be used for surveillance, anti-poaching operations, counter-insurgency, armed maritime and border patrols and emergency supply missions.

The aircraft has 6 “hard points” designed for weapons to be rapidly “clipped” on and off, allowing it to carry light rocket pods, missiles, bombs and external fuel tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/navys-futuristic-laser-weapon-action/story?id=27507405

I've seen a lot of comments on lasers shooting down missiles, artillery projectiles, and uavs.....very little about manned aircraft from the surface.....what's concerning is the vulnerability of manned aircraft especially when our adversaries figure out (steal) the technology. The size of the power supply required for a given laser output seems to currently favor surface based systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/navys-futuristic-laser-weapon-action/story?id=27507405

I've seen a lot of comments on lasers shooting down missiles, artillery projectiles, and uavs.....very little about manned aircraft from the surface.....what's concerning is the vulnerability of manned aircraft especially when our adversaries figure out (steal) the technology. The size of the power supply required for a given laser output seems to currently favor surface based systems.

You should talk to the Laser expert over at MSIC. She paints a very grim picture at just how far the Chinese have progressed in directed energy. Shooting down like Star Wars, no nowhere close to that yet, but they are further along than we are to look at the number of systems and complexity they have spent money on. Essentially that and cyber/sat/GPS Attack are part of the big deny access plan to take away or at least severely effect our major advantages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a system can knock down something moving as fast as an artillery projectile (and multiple projectiles that are spinning at that) then it's not too big of a stretch to see targeting bigger and slower targets. Granted when they leave the tube they stay on a fairly predictable trajectory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boeing, then SpaceX will take astronauts to space in 2017... well let's at least hope "by the end of this decade." Granted this announcement was actually made awhile ago, the competition was challenged by Sierra Nevada but confirmed today.

Also, Boeing will send up one of their own test pilots, perhaps entering a new civilian astronaut corps... we can only hope.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/26/7916125/nasa-spacex-boeing-commercial-crew-program

53509703ad9f9074cbc14997f8e43490bb03bf1c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2014 at 2:45 AM, gearpig said:

That's it. I'm out. If the airlines and decreased flight time weren't enough, there's no way I'm launching if some dude can knock me out of the sky without knowing I'm targeted or potential counter-measures.

Unless we're the only ones with that technology, of course. Would certainly change missile defense procedures.

Bonzai all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chinese moon landing strategy:

How China's Planned Moon Landing Will Differ From America's Moon Landing

xa3qu9olgeiogbqdkp2q.jpg

Not planned till 2036 but this should kick us in the pants for the next big thing... which IMO should not be getting our asses to Mars but to Venus...

HAVOC is the better option than shooting for Mars right now, we probably could pull this off in 10 years or so with focus, a shit load of money and a functioning political system to keep the government working towards this...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want to explore a blazing hot shit hole in a blimp rather than go somewhere where you can actually walk around and maybe bring a rock or something home as a souvenir??

Sounds fun...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

So you want to explore a blazing hot shit hole in a blimp rather than go somewhere where you can actually walk around and maybe bring a rock or something home as a souvenir??

Sounds fun...

Because it is much easier to accomplish in the near term and success begets success.

About half the distance with a much more favorable intercept geometry, about 90% the same G, way less radiation from pseudo magnetic field, 4 times as much solar power available, etc...

Crawl, Walk, Run.

Crawl was the Moon

Walk could be Venus

Run is definitely Mars 

You could retrieve surface samples with an unmanned solution and retrieve from the HAVOC vehicle in atmosphere also, landing on any place Mars or the Moon adds so much cost, requirements and risk that it stifles just getting into deep space.  

First manned Mars missions, IMO, would be only Mars orbit and maybe Martian moon landings, like Apollo 8 (lunar only orbit) to keep practicing before we play.

Edited by Clark Griswold
last point added

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a fing car in space going to mars. two boosters have landed simultaneously.

Elon Musk is a very stable genius.

Edited by torqued
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm watching a live youtube feed of a mannequin in a space suit sitting in a convertible slowly rotating in space with the earth in the background.

interesting times indeed.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is “Don’t Panic” the canned message displayed in a Tesla in the event of a collision, or just what they chose to put on the screen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So is “Don’t Panic” the canned message displayed in a Tesla in the event of a collision, or just what they chose to put on the screen?

Read Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy...it will all become clear.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...