Nanotech Paints For Military

pmacwill wrote to us with a recent article on Pennet in regards to the U.S. military's proposed use of nanotech paints. Actually, it goes beyond proposal -- and beyond paint, as it would allow vehicles to change camo patterns very easily, and would also repair micro-cracks and fractures without the need for service.

Comments

Magic structure-fixing paint?

[MattCohn.com]

would also repair micro-cracks and fractures without the need for service

...? Does this sound... not right? I meen, yes, cosmeticly it would be repaired. But it would create structual week points. This could be a big danger to those inside under millitary conditions.

Re:Magic structure-fixing paint?

[PainKilleR-CE]

Does this sound... not right? I meen, yes, cosmeticly it would be repaired. But it would create structual week points. This could be a big danger to those inside under millitary conditions.

In the article it sounds more like they want the 'paint' to alert the occupants and/or mechanics/technicians to structural problems rather than for it to make the repairs itself.

Invisibility cloak

[djkitsch]

And that's half way along the path to nano-coatings which blend in with the scenery behind you...

"Is that you or is it just a blurry lamppost?" ...or is is a cloaked Klingon Warbird?

Sounds great

[Quasar1999]

But what about the automotive industry? Where planned obsolesence will no longer work if this technology is introduced? Sure it's military technology now, but in a few years, it'll trickle into the main stream... and then what? Are the cars of the future going to come with a monthly service fee? Cuz right now planned obsolesence is what keeps them in the black... If I could buy a car that would fix itself for years to come, I would. Why buy a new one every 3-5 years as we're required to now since all the damn parts break...

Re:Sounds great

[Moridineas]

Planned obsolescence bah. Changing styles and added features in cars do plenty to drive the industry currently. And besides which, do you really think if not for the greedy manufacturers today we'd all be driving mint condition 30 year old cars now? pssssh.

and also what cars are you driving that break down enough to warrant a new car every 3-5 years? I'm driving one of my families cars now, and the shortest we've had any car in my lifetime has been about 8 years--and most longer.

Re:Sounds great

[tswinzig]

But what about the automotive industry? Where planned obsolesence will no longer work if this technology is introduced?

Calm down, man, we're talking about paint that MIGHT be able to make repair cracks in the paint job. This is not going to keep your car working.

Sure it's military technology now, but in a few years, it'll trickle into the main stream... and then what?

No, it's not even military technology now... they are in the EARLY EARLY EARLY planning stages. You're looking at many years from now before this technology is available.

Cuz right now planned obsolesence is what keeps them in the black...

Strange, I thought selling cars for more than it cost to make them is what kept them in the black.

If I could buy a car that would fix itself for years to come, I would.

But you can't, so you won't.

Why buy a new one every 3-5 years as we're required to now since all the damn parts break...

fixing paint cracks != fixing cars

YIKES!

(I bet you don't even change your oil and oil filter every 3000 miles, do you? Then you wonder why your engine breaks down.)

Re:Sounds great

[tswinzig]

Nope. Car manufacturers are in the business of selling parts.

I know they are in the business of selling parts. They are also in the business of selling cars. They are also in the business of supplying car loans (most of the OEM's anyway).

Yet they stay in the black because they sell the cars for more than it costs to make them.

Many cars sell for less than what it costs to make them, Cavalier and Sunfire from the GM product line come to mind.

I don't doubt that some cars cost more than what they are sold for. My dad's got a Prius, which they are losing money on in the short term. But I seriously doubt "many" cars sell for less than what it costs to make them.

electroic signture.

[tcd004]

Ok, pure speculation here. Wouldn't a military vehicle buzzing with nanomachines likely give off some sort of electroic signature that would be easy to detect? Just a question. I'm sure there are ways around it.

tcd004
What would you do with your own Oil company?

Re:electroic signture.

[lommer]

I can't imagine that they would be stupid enough to make all of the coatings controllable by radio RC. Rather, they would make the paint controlled by hard-wired circuitry in the tank. Granted, it would be nice for HQ to be able to issue one command as a convoy moved from grass to sand (or a similar situation) but the potential for disaster would be unbelievable. A simple human control selected by the driver should be far more effective.

What I'd be looking forward to is when they mount cameras on the bottom of the tank, then switch the nano paint on the roof to match. Voila! your vehical just became completely invisible from the air.

What a ridiculous application

[happyhippy]

Nanotech is first going to be used as a weapon, not as an alternative to rust proofing.

We will be more interested on how clouds of nanomites can liquify a human in seconds than a hairline crack repairing coat of paint.

Re:What a ridiculous application

[Captain Nitpick]

We will be more interested on how clouds of nanomites can liquify a human in seconds than a hairline crack repairing coat of paint.

Do you have any idea of the power requirements to liquify a human in seconds? Where exactly are these machines going to get that much energy in that amount of time?

Re:What a ridiculous application

[jw32767]

Why would you want to liquify them? The US military uses rounds that are designed more to wound than to kill. If you kill someone, you cost them one solider, if you wound someone, you cost them soldiers to carry them off the field, soldiers at the aid station to treat them, hospital staff, etc.

I would think they'd much rather injure people in a way that would require a lot of care, but have a low chance of killing them.

Re:What a ridiculous application

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a nitpicker aren't you. Well, let me rephrase it: look at thermite, it'll go through an engine block with only a teaspoon. Thermite is only an example of chemical energy... Same with nuclear. The amounts of energy that nuclear reactions produce are insane. Now your argument that 20 thousand atoms of uranium won't do squat are right. But a single mol of them might. (go look up how many that actually corresponds to). Just keep in mind that the nanodevices don't need to be their own source of energy: a plane doesn't fly by burning up it's own fuselage... it carries something called 'fuel'.

Yeah, riiiiiiight...

[tomzyk]

"Rather than paints, we are talking about coatings, which could be electroplated, or put on with physical vapor deposition qualities. We are talking about more things than paints. They could be metallic or have other qualities," Agento says.

They even ADMIT that it'll STILL be vaporware in a few years! ;-)

Re:Apply with fiberoptics

[kippy]

This idea is brought up every time /. posts a story about adaptive paints. As has been pointed out before, the best we could hope for with this tech is to be able to adaptively change colors to blend in with the colors of your surroundings like a chameleon. If you're in a patch of grass, you'd turn green, in the desert tan...

You wouldn't get Predator-style invisibility because the uniform would have no way of knowing what the viewer's vantage point is. Thus, the suit can't just paint what's "behind" you because it doesn't know where "in front of" is.

Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott

[dave_mcmillen]

"What we hope this coating can do is amazing. We're also looking at making it seem invisible." . . . A prototype "smart" coating may be developed as early as 2005, she says.

I'm always unimpressed with this sort of "news". Of course what they hope it can do is amazing! And a lot of things "may" happen as early as 2005. But is there anything that indicates that they're making real progress? This is like a not-very-detailed grant proposal, in press release form.

To hear about cool things that one might do with nanotech, you're better off browsing the science fiction section of your local bookstore.

Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized.

[MisterFancypants]

Seems like the type of thing law enforcement agencies would be against. As soon as you put out an APB for a black 4 door sedan, poof its a green 4 door sedan.

Of course, you can't usually stop progress just to make someone's jobs easier, but I can imagine this will be a long time off for consumer use due to these and other debates, even if the technology is perfected soon. And even when/if it comes to pass, I'd imagine you'll have to compromise to legally use this system (by having a car that reports your GPS location on a lojack-like system, or such).

Re:As if the military wasn't ass kicking enough

[SuiteSisterMary]

See, therein lies the problem. The paradigm has changed, and the military needs to change with it.

Who cares if your chobham armour can shrug off 120 mm rounds, if the attack isn't coming from a T-80, but rather from a child who is willing to sacrifice their life to smuggle a small container of nerve gas into your bivouac?

Or, put another way, ask the Soviets how much help their tank armour was when they invaded Afghanistan.

Combine it with cameras, get a cloaking device.

[rebelcool]

Ever since reading about the print/paintability of OLED's and the like i've always wondered 'can you combine this with a camera and create a kind of cloaking device?'

Like have a rear facing camera which projects what it sees on the front end of the vehicle. It wouldn't be perfect, im sure there'd be quite a bit of distortion and the like, but surely better than just a mottled paint job.

Re:uses

[GreyPoopon]

the only problem is getting that paintbrush in those little hard to reach areas - like the heart.

Slightly off-topic, but you'd be amazed at the progress in catheterized procedures these days. Doctors can now completely repair a hole in the heart by just inserting a catheter up one of the veins in the leg -- no zipper scar, no rib spreaders. I'm sure they can apply similar techniques to an interior "paint job" for the body.

Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott

[plover]

As a matter of fact, they do.

Ever hear of DARPA? Ever use any of their inventions? (Hint: think Al Gore.)

Re:Can this really be true?

[Big_Breaker]

I believe it. American Airlines has a significant cost advantage in this area over other carriers because they don't paint the majority of the plane. Its lighter, less maintenance and easier to service.

With enough time I could pull together numebers but they are BIG. Paint is really toxic stuff and the military has to repaint for every region.

Invisibly repaired cracks

[kilonad]

If the nanotech that will be repairing the cracks is anything like the self-healing plastic, I really hope they find a way to make the repairing particles a different color, or maybe add some dye or something. If you've got a bunch of cracks in an area, and all the fixing particles are currently in use, you've got an area that can no longer fix itself. If the fixing particles are the same color as the stuff they're healing, you'd have no idea that it got damaged in the first place. You wouldn't want to go into battle with a tank that's unknowingly damaged.

Re:As if the military wasn't ass kicking enough

[duck_prime]

See, therein lies the problem. The paradigm has changed, and the military needs to change with it.

Who cares if your chobham armour can shrug off 120 mm rounds, if the attack isn't coming from a T-80, but rather from a child who is willing to sacrifice their life to smuggle a small container

There are a couple of things going on here...

1. The U.S. Army is so ferocious that cell-based terror attacks are the only way to fight America. The Army has obsoleted itself in a sense. A good sense, because nobody even bothers dreaming about invading New Jersey anymore.

2. Nationalism has made it impossible to occupy a hostile country. Sure you can smear their army, but a hostile, sullen populace will make the occupation cost more than whatever you gain from conquest. Only genocidal maniacs can benefit from territorial conquest anymore.

Indirect detection methods would still work

[EnlightenedDuck]

Quick puzzle - let's say this nano-machine laden paint is developed, is economical, and can change camaflouge automatically - or, even a step better, render the tank effectively invisible. Now let's say this tank is invading Iraq (or any other country) - don't you think it would kick up a fair amount of dust driving cross country? So we'd have these invisible tanks kicking up huge clouds of dust or plumes of mud or....don't think it would take a genius to figure out where the tank is, even if you can't see it:)