Slashdot Mirror


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.

177 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. Because you know they're going to get slashdotted by plover · · Score: 5, Informative

    Army researchers eye nanomachine-based 'smart' paints for combat vehicles

    by John Keller

    PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. -- U.S. Army experts are trying to embed microscopic electromechanical machines in paint that could detect and heal cracks and corrosion in the bodies of combat vehicles, as well as give vehicles the chameleon-like quality of rapidly altering camouflage to blend in with changing operating environments.

    Officials of the Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command's Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (TACOM-ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., are working with scientists at the New Jersey Institute of Technology in Newark, N.J., to develop nanotechnology-based "smart" coatings for Army vehicles and other materiel.

    Unlike today's paint coatings on battlefield vehicles, Army experts seek to develop paints with the ability to self-correct because of changing circumstances and tell the user of potential anomalies such as corrosion or adhesion problems.

    Today's conventional paints are labor intensive to apply, and potentially hazardous to the people working with them, Army officials say. In addition, most of these coatings need to be touched-up by hand, which can hide damage to the metal or other substrate material.

    As a result, Army leaders estimate the total cost for U.S. Department of Defense corrosion-related problems at $10 billion per year -- $2 billion of which is related to painting and paint-scraping operations.

    To rectify these problems experts from Picatinny and the New Jersey Institute of Technology plan to develop a prototype paint with nanomachine powders consisting of tiny machines that act as gears, motors, and electronic switches at the atomic level.

    These "smart" paints should be able to alert maintenance technicians of potential problems with the coating, in addition to modifying their physical characteristics on command.

    These future "smart" coatings will involve far more, however, than simply brushing on paint from a can, points out Joe Agento, program integration manager at the TACOM-ARDEC Industrial Ecology Center at Picatinny Arsenal.

    "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.

    "We're trying to prototype a coating to replace the primers and top coats we use today, and develop a one-system coating that incorporates nanomachines within the coating itself," says Laura Battista, environmental engineer at the Industrial Ecology Center.

    "Now we are looking at the first stage -- a coating with nanomachines," Battista says. "We want to determine what the nanomachines are that we need; we still have to determine what that nanomachine would be -- switches, motors, or gears -- to allow the coating to change on command."

    Vehicle operators might quickly change the camouflage paint scheme on vehicles with "smart" coatings with an electrical impulse, Battista explains. "What we hope this coating can do is amazing. We're also looking at making it seem invisible."

    Researchers will begin by determining what the properties of a "smart" coating would be. Later, researchers would develop a prototype, before applying the coating to a tank or other Army vehicle, Battista says.

    A prototype "smart" coating may be developed as early as 2005, she says. "Once you already have the properties of the coating, such as the camouflage properties, we hope that changing the camouflage is as simple as changing pixels in the coating; it shouldn't be that difficult," she says.

    Assuming that researchers receive the necessary funding, Battista speculates that "smart" coatings might be deployed with active combat forces sometime between 2005 and 2009.
    Military & Aerospace Electronics October, 2002
    Author(s) : John Keller

    --
    John
  2. uses by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd be more interested in the medical uses ... fix cracks and clogs in the ole arteries, etc.

    1. Re:uses by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 4, Funny

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

    2. Re:uses by GreyPoopon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      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.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

  3. cool beans by p_rotator · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm waiting for nanotech tattoo ink. Illustrated Man, here we come.

    1. Re:cool beans by dubiousmike · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am actually waiting for the radar sucking paint they use on stealth bombers for my car.

      No more speeding tickets for me!!

    2. Re:cool beans by karnal · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'd actually bet money that most people probably wouldn't buy this kind of car.

      Why?

      Well, I'm definitely not speaking from experience, but wouldn't radar-sucking paint have a somewhat non-shiny appearance? I know with an 8 year old car, the paint is starting to show signs of age, and newer cars all look shinier. Somewhat better.

      But I'll keep mine, and maybe suck up some radar along the way.

      --
      Karnal
    3. Re:cool beans by dubiousmike · · Score: 2

      I will make sure to drive behind you (or in the fron or side - whatever keeps me "under the radar".

      Is that your website? Or are you just a fan?

    4. Re:cool beans by s.fontinalis · · Score: 3, Informative

      You don't really need the Stealth's paint to make a stealth car. Car & Driver magazine found out several years ago that a Black Car, with no trim & pop up headlamps is practically invisible to radar. (Sorry no link - it's an early 90's issue, and therefore preweb)

    5. Re: cool beans by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Funny


      > actually, it's a combo of the paint, the material that the painted object is made out of and the angle of the object to the radar source that make it stealthy. Now a jammer, THERE's the ticket buster....

      Just mount a coffee can on your fender, pack it full of shredded aluminum foil and gunpowder, wire your radar detector to set it off, and you can slip through the speed trap in a cloud of chaff.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    6. Re:cool beans by tshak · · Score: 2

      The US uses Laser extensively too. AFAIK the problem with Laser is that the officer can only use it while stationary, whereas radar can be used while they are driving.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    7. Re:cool beans by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      I am actually waiting for the radar sucking paint they use on stealth bombers for my car.

      The angle also plays a big part. You need a car with angles that point either up or down. Pardon my Ascii art, but the body would perhaps look something like this:

      <=o==o==>

      60's Corvette?

      The windows would also have to be fairly steeply slopped. I think that front and back windows are sufficiently sloped for road-level radar guns on most cars.

      I bet Saddam Hussein wants one of these.

    8. Re: cool beans by shogun · · Score: 2

      >Just mount a coffee can on your fender, pack it full of shredded aluminum foil and gunpowder, wire your radar detector to set it off, and you can slip through the speed trap in a cloud of chaff.

      I think you might be sues then by the British Air Force for breach of patent/copyright, sound a little similiar to Operation Window.

      yeah i know its the same as contemporary chaff, but I had to find the first instance. ;)

    9. Re:cool beans by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 2, Informative

      Negative.

      Black cars with no trim and a low profile are practically invisible to LIDAR not radar.

      Has something to do with finding a decent reflective surface to bounce the beam off of.

      (Another reason the Ohio Highway Gestapo mandates the use of front plates)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
    10. Re:cool beans by jelle · · Score: 2

      Oh man, combine that with animations and it becomes scary.

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  4. Need to read slower... by Anonymous+Cowtard · · Score: 4, Funny
    I thought it said "Nanotech Pants For Military"

    Needless to say, I was rather befuddled on the benefits of really small pants to the Army.

    1. Re:Need to read slower... by bricriu · · Score: 3, Funny

      I read the exact same thing. I, however, thought nanotech pants would be normal-sized, but endowed with several standard sci-fi add-ons... enhanced speed, adaptive camoflage, and, most importantly, "evacuation reclamation" for material replentishment. I mean, who wouldn't want to be able to piss bullets for real?

      --

      AHHHHHHH! I'm burning with goodness again!
      - Reakk, Sluggy Freelance

    2. Re:Need to read slower... by red_dragon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Whoa. Interesting. Just think of the advertisements for consumer products based on this:

      Dockers Nanotech Pants: Because Women Want More From You

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
    3. Re:Need to read slower... by ptomblin · · Score: 5, Funny

      '"Digital Pants" or "Smarty Pants" are an important part of our future strategy.'

      Now I'll sit back and wait for somebody to spot the reference and correct any errors I made.

      --
      The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
    4. Re:Need to read slower... by EverDense · · Score: 2, Funny

      Piss razor blades perhaps?
      Oh no, that would be the navy after a stop-over in Thailand.

      --
      http://jesus.everdense.com/
    5. Re:Need to read slower... by msheppard · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't be using the words "Nano" and "Pants" in the same sentance in front of any of the Army guys I know.

      M@
      (4... 3... 2... 1... Submit!)

      --
      Krispy Cream is people
    6. Re:Need to read slower... by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Funny

      how about shit a brick?

      :)

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    7. Re:Need to read slower... by mblase · · Score: 2


      I read that too. I, also, would like pants that can change color with the press of an electronic switch, or that can repair small cracks or rips automatically. Being able to change length from a one-inch break to cargo shorts to, well, nothin' would just be a bonus.

    8. Re:Need to read slower... by Glytch · · Score: 2

      Got the reference (I LOVE YOU, TDTIAB!). Close enough, though some overly-pedantic twit will no doubt post the exact transcript later. :)

    9. Re:Need to read slower... by mumkin · · Score: 2

      I thought it said "Nanotech Pants For Military"

      So did I, but I assumed that it was a follow-up to this article from Jan '01 about nano-pants. What's become of those fabled fibers?

    10. Re:Need to read slower... by Snafoo · · Score: 2

      In other words, a modern version of....
      Techno-Trousers!

      --
      - undoware.ca
  5. NOO!!! Nano paint by luckybob83 · · Score: 2, Funny

    That just adds more headaches for me and the other mechanics in the Army

    --
    If there is nothing left worth living, what are you willing to die for?
  6. Magic structure-fixing paint? by MattCohn.com · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Magic structure-fixing paint? by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    2. Re:Magic structure-fixing paint? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I seem to remember a white paint from a few years back that was being tested on Airliners.

      Apparently, if struck by hard objects the paint "BLED". That is, the white paint turned blue under stress.

      Tiny little blue dots on an airplane might just indicate that it had run into your average airborne items such as hailstones or birds, but larger blue splotches would be a visual clue that there was an impact to the plane that might warrent some attention.

      I never heard if this paint went into full-time service or not, but this was many years ago that I heard about it.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  7. Invisibility cloak by djkitsch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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?

    --
    sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
    1. Re:Invisibility cloak by michaeli · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Invisibility cloak? Using nanotech paints, I think this is much further from reality than the article suggests.

      The idea, I assume, of "invisibility" would br to paint an object (in this case a tank or a private's helmet - "Aieeee!!! These guys have no heads! Attack of the zombies, run for your lives!!!") the same colour and pattern as the background, thus making it indistinguishible from those objects behind it (similar concept to those noise-cancelling headphones)

      The fundamental problem with this is, what perspective do you assume the object is being viewed from? There will be a different background for every different position from which you view the object. You could assume the viewer was a certain distance from the object, making the number of discernable perspectives fewer in number (not even taking into consideration multiple heights at which a viewer could be), but then you still have to conquer the idea of projecting a few (ten, hundred) thousand colours of light from each point on the object (and in many different directions).

      I believe it was misleading to state a practical possibility of attaining invisibility with nanotech paint. It sounds very exciting in terms of applying a general camoflage or solid-colour paint (wouldn't mind some for my car - Cops: "crrrrck... um, yeah, we have a black 2002 Volkswagon golf speeding West on the 401... car 41, do you copy? crrrck..." Me: "hmmm, black? I think not. Yellow seems good right about now."

      --


      "this is a really good piece of cantoloupe."
  8. "What we hope this coating can do is amazing." by ThrasherTT · · Score: 2, Funny

    What I hope the Playstation 3 can do is amazing. However, that means exactly jack shit in terms of reality. I really wish we could get news of some real advancements, rather than PR announcements of new research projects.

    --

    All Your Memory Are Belong To Java
  9. Sounds great by Quasar1999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:Sounds great by Moridineas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Sounds great by Tenebrious1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      but in a few years, it'll trickle into the main stream...

      In a few years? I bet we see spammers selling nanotech paint within a few weeks!

      --
      -- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
    3. Re:Sounds great by tswinzig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.)

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    4. Re:Sounds great by elmegil · · Score: 2
      Cuz right now planned obsolesence is what keeps them in the black...

      I hardly see that. I have an 8 year old Saturn that shows very few signs of slowing down as long as I keep up the maintenance on it. What seems to keep the car companies in the black from my perspective is people who can't stand to have anything that's out of date (gotta have the latest & greatest), or who think that 0% interest is reason enough to go in debt even though your car has another 5-10 years in it.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    5. Re:Sounds great by PsychoKiller · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

      Nope. Car manufacturers are in the business of selling parts. Give away the razor, sell the blades.

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

    6. Re:Sounds great by RustyTaco · · Score: 5, Informative

      I work for a small research company that does a lot of stuff for the DoD.(Ok, I work when I'm not trolling slashdot, really.) Every so often, it varies by the branch, they throw out a big list(think 3" book) technologies they want. It's very public . I assure you very little, if anything from those solicitations works. Most of the work we do is evaluating if some methods of attacking a problem are even remotely plasable. Once some small fry like us proves it do-able, and reasonable then they'll usually throw it to one of the "Big Boys", Raytheon etc, to turn into something they can directly use.

      Bottom line, the miliary wants lots of things, most of them would make a Sci-Fi author giggle.

      - RustyTaco

    7. Re:Sounds great by tswinzig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    8. Re:Sounds great by Planesdragon · · Score: 2

      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...

      Huh?

      There is no "planned obsolesence" in the automotive industry. There's simply real economic choices, and maintenance fees.

      Every vehicle I've seen owned by a private citizen could be serviced by said private citizen for quite some time to come. Heck, only my parents (computer geeks both) have cars that aren't older than 1998--five year old models.

      Oh, and you can get cars with "monthy service fees" right now; get a leased car with a maintenance agreement.

    9. Re:Sounds great by karnal · · Score: 2

      Actually, when I look at the cost of replacing parts on any car, it's obvious one of two things is happening:

      1. The car manufacturer sure is selling these at a loss, and making one heck of a killing on the parts (your view).

      2. The car manufacturer is making hand over fist money on the car, and the parts are horrendously marked up.

      I tend to sway a little towards #1, because even with aftermarket parts, it still costs a buttload of money (yes, a buttload of money) to "buy" all of the parts required to put a car together (not to mention the labor). However, I also tend to think parts are marked up a bit; partially because GM can't seem to keep similar parts on more than 1 car in each lineup (sorry, my own rant there....)

      --
      Karnal
    10. Re:Sounds great by Moridineas · · Score: 2

      One car that lasted quite well was a Saab. There was a ford explorer that I *think* was just about 6.5 years old when I kinda got in a wreck..oops. I couldn't tell you offhand the mileage, but I know the saab was put through a lot. It did require some work to keep it up (the turbo died at one point) but it's still being driven and is an '86 i think.

    11. Re:Sounds great by ShooterNeo · · Score: 2

      Actually, "grey goo" per say is pretty much impossible, due to thermodynamics (heat engines at the molecular level are very inefficient, and it takes a LOT of energy to melt rock or steel)

    12. Re:Sounds great by PsychoKiller · · Score: 2

      partially because GM can't seem to keep similar parts on more than 1 car in each lineup (sorry, my own rant there....)

      Are you serious? GM is notorious for using parts across many products. The small block chevy has been used from 55 up to today (yes there have been slight changes). Injectors are the same for pretty much every port fuel injected application, throttle bodies, transmissions, rear ends etc. My 82-92 Firebird uses the same rear shocks as a 59-63 Vette as an example.

      You just need to know where to look. www.diy-efi.org is a good place to start.

    13. Re:Sounds great by G-funk · · Score: 2

      Nope. Car manufacturers are in the business of selling parts. Give away the razor, sell the blades.

      Wow, either american cars are really crap, or you're an idiot. This isn't an XBOX people. Yes, most car companies sell one or two models as a loss leader, but not to make money on parts!!! The reason they do it is because if you buy a cheapo toyota when you're young, you're more likely to buy a decent toyota when you're older.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    14. Re: Sounds great by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2


      > 2. The car manufacturer is making hand over fist money on the car, and the parts are horrendously marked up.

      Mostly 2. That's also the economic motive behind car theft. There's a huge countereconomy for laundering the parts of stolen cars and feeding them back into parts stores.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    15. Re:Sounds great by csnydermvpsoft · · Score: 2

      Nope. Car manufacturers are in the business of selling parts. Give away the razor, sell the blades.

      Actually, most car manufacturers make money from the more popular vehicles that they are able to sell at high prices - recently, SUV's; also fairly recently, minivans. The cheaper cars are mostly there just to promote brand loyalty.

    16. Re:Sounds great by ShooterNeo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The whole problem with envisioning self replicating nanotech engines is that most people don't realize this self replication would only occur in carefully controlled conditions. That is, conditions not found on earth or anywhere else in the solar system. The goo would only be able to reproduce in special vats where enough energy and the right materials is available, as well as cooling systems to get rid of all the waste heat from thousands of nanotech engines. OTHERWISE, these devices would already exist (actually, they do. Its called the cell, and its a near optimal result for the given conditions. That's why the fear of some magical "grey goo" going wild and eating up everything is unfounded, because that would imply creating a life form far superior to current life and out-competing it)

      As for destroying tanks, a far more deadly weapon would be small autonomous robots that swarm in by the hundreds...about the size of a baseball or so. They would be equipped with shaped charges.

    17. Re:Sounds great by karnal · · Score: 2

      Those "slight changes" are kind of my point though...

      Realistically, though, I was basing my opinion on the fact that I can take a power steering pump from my '79 cougar and put it in my roomate's '94 mustang...

      Now that's part re-use.. :)

      Thanks for the link, however. I do my own work on my 3 vehicles; new info is always welcome.

      --
      Karnal
    18. Re:Sounds great by ProfessorPuke · · Score: 2
      The fear isn't unfounded- as far as we know, our grandchildren could wipe themselves out in a Grey Goo scenario (either uncontrolled nanotech, or just rampant genetically engineered organisms).


      Just because a superefficient self-replicating device doesn't already exist, doesn't mean it never will exist. There's the concept of irreducible complexity, which you most often hear of when "creation scientists" try to prove that "macro"-evolution is completely impossible.


      Of course, they're wrong in claiming that current lifeforms couldn't have evolved, but we can't be sure that we'll never invent a useful cellular structures which is irreducibly complex: not useful enough in intermediate form to allow an organism to develope them gradually, but so powerful that it allows the creature to dominate its environment.
      Or worse, eliminate the environment (something Darwinian organisms will never do)


      Here's a simplified example of how a single evil geneticist could wipe out humanity with 2040s technology:

      Existing disease organisms (including viruses) have evolved a tradeoff between their lethality and contagiousness. Nonlethal ones like "common cold" (and its million variants) are very contagious. Instantly fatal things like anthrax fungi don't spread very fast. Slow killers like HIV are in the middle. No disease could evolve to be both highly deadly and highly contagious, because it would immiedately consume its initial host population.

      But, an artificially created virus would be free of the Darwinian pressures that stops a completely kamikaze organism from evolving. A labratory-bred infection could spread by casual contact and barely impair the host at all, but have a hardwired timer so that after exactly 200 days it pours out botulism toxin and drops the victim instantly. The entire planet could be infected before the first symptoms are shown.


      That possibilities isn't as extreme as some Sci-Fi postulates, but they're all things to fear in the next century.

    19. Re:Sounds great by ShooterNeo · · Score: 2

      Good points. Nature can't find the VERY BEST solution to a problem, at least not very quickly. BUT, I'm saying that for very small and somewhat simple organisms that reproduce, the cell found in biology is probably near the optimal result. Dexel suggests that tinier machines can work, but I think that thermal limits will prevent precision machinery at that level. Certainly biology doesn't work that way, it instead relies on thermal chaos for many organisms to work. Plus, I don't see why fears of grey goo mean much because by the time its possible to design an intricate molecular machine of this complexity designing a simple "kill molecule" that gums it up and stops it will be much easier. HOWEVER, I do agree that in the NEAR future, NOT 2040 (like TODAY) a killer virus could be created. Inserting genes into viruses has already successfully been proven : if the evil person added say the mutated genes that cause cancer to a known contagious virus you would have a death weapon. Essentially, the victim might not even get sick from the virus but would have hundreds or thousands of his cells become cancerous (with a form of cancer chosen that has no known drugs that are effective against it). Hundreds of tumors would break out and irrevocably kill the person. While such a virus probably would have weaknesses and countermeasures, the parts of the world without the technology to counter them would die off horribly.

  10. My brother is working on a similar project by PhysicsScholar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He is on the executive board of this project at Rice University over in the United States.

    They're working on similar studies and experiments, and have been doing so since the late 1990s. From what I hear, it's going quite well and the funding is just extraordinary these days now that Republicans are in control of U.S. government policies these days.

    --

    Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S., Canada, B3H 3J5
  11. electroic signture. by tcd004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:electroic signture. by KnightStalker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, I'm envisioning some enemy discovering the signal used to tell the paint to change color, then broadcasting a signal to turn all the US tanks hot pink.

      (I mean, it's not like they're going to have frequency-hopping strong crypto in the nano-paint. Right? :-)

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    2. Re:electroic signture. by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      You are making a presumption that our enemy will be technologically sophisticated. If you look at the last few wars we fought we have fought against people with no technology whatsoever. Iraq (desert storm, the 10 years of continual bombing since then and the upcoming war again), afghanistan, serbia, haiti, panama, palestine (through our proxy in Israel) etc. As a general rule we don't "pick on somebody our own size" and instead go after people who can't put up much of a fight.

      When we fight those people we tend to attack at night because they don't even have night vision glasses and we fight from 10,000 feet for the first few months because they don't have anti aircraft weapons to hit us with. We jam their radars and bomb their airports, we also bomb electricy and water supplies so that they are completely defenseless by the time we hit the ground with our people.

      The idea that some poor shmuck in some far off desert is going to have sophisticated nanotech detecting device is a stretch don't you think.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    3. Re:electroic signture. by lommer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:electroic signture. by unicron · · Score: 2

      Yeah, that idea is basically the thought process behind "Predator" style camoflauge. A great idea, but I think the processing power required would be unbelievable. Laying down on the desert floor is one thing, but imagine the same guy sprinting down a supermarket isle and the suit trying to keep up with the thousands of colors and shapes flying at it..some SERIOUS processing power would be needed to handle that kind of rapid changing.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    5. Re:electroic signture. by tcd004 · · Score: 2

      I think your point is well taken, but if you applied the same assumptions to the nuclear arms race, you'd be quite suprised that the poor schmucks in North Korea, Pakistan, and maybe Bolivia posess nuclear weapons.

      Assuming your enemy will always be weaker than you, is a terrible weakness.

      tcd004

    6. Re:electroic signture. by egomaniac · · Score: 3, Informative

      Laying down on the desert floor is one thing, but imagine the same guy sprinting down a supermarket isle and the suit trying to keep up with the thousands of colors and shapes flying at it..some SERIOUS processing power would be needed to handle that kind of rapid changing.

      How is that even the tiniest bit different than what a video camera hooked up to a TV does?

      It captures an image and reproduces it elsewhere in real-time. That certainly doesn't require massive processing power, and the resolution of this device doesn't even need to be as high as a video camera, since all you're trying to do is blend in. Camouflage works perfectly well for blending in, and it's hardly a high-resolution duplicate of the surroundings.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    7. Re:electroic signture. by shogun · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I'm envisioning some enemy discovering the signal used to tell the paint to change color, then broadcasting a signal to turn all the US tanks hot pink.

      They're not that colour already?

    8. Re:electroic signture. by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      Personally I think nuklear weapons are overrated. Make a list of all countries which have used nuclear weapons in war and it contains only one name "United States of America". Make a list of countries which have threatened nuclear war another country and it will only contain one name "United States of Amrica".

      The only country which will ever use nuclear weapons is the US. All other countries are trying to get them to fend off an attack from us.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    9. Re:electroic signture. by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      Make a list of countries which have threatened nuclear war another country and it will only contain one name "United States of Amrica".

      Not quite true, look at India and Pakistan, both have whom have recently detonated nuclear devices just to prove to the other that they could. It's also arguable that Israel's nukes have been a sufficient deterrent to numerically-superior and chemically-armed Arab states.

      The only country which will ever use nuclear weapons is the US. All other countries are trying to get them to fend off an attack from us.

      I've mentioned India and Pakistan, but the danger we face is not from a nuclear-armed country but from a nuclear-armed non-country, like a terrorist network for example. After the breakup of the Soviet Empire, it's not even necessary to have the technological infrastructure to manufacture your own weapons these days.

    10. Re:electroic signture. by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      "Not quite true, look at India and Pakistan, both have whom have recently detonated nuclear devices just to prove to the other that they could. It's also arguable that Israel's nukes have been a sufficient deterrent to numerically-superior and chemically-armed Arab states. "

      None of this contradicts what I have said. Neither India nor Pakistan have ever used nukes nor have ever explicitly threatened to use nukes while the US has done both. We bombed Japan (twice) with nukes and have explicitly threatened Iraq.

      As for Israel it's not nukes that are deterring it's the military might of the US. Attacking Israel means the US will bomb your ass. Although I for one don't see exactly what possible benefit we get from shielding israel from it's enemies the fact remains that israel is the tail that wags the american dog.

      "I've mentioned India and Pakistan, but the danger we face is not from a nuclear-armed country but from a nuclear-armed non-country, like a terrorist network for example. After the breakup of the Soviet Empire, it's not even necessary to have the technological infrastructure to manufacture your own weapons these days."

      There is no need for nuclear weapons when chemical and biological weapons are so much easier to use, make, carry, and deploy. I'll give you an example.

      Two terrorists could drive from the canadian border to mexico via the west. Along the way they could inject several hundred cows with mad cow disease and or hoof and mouth disease. After getting to mexico (and flying off to whereever) they announce what they have done. VOILA!. The economy of the west collapses, thousands of ranchers are out of work and they are angry at the US govt, the liberals, the environmentalists, the UN and wht have you (they were angry at them anyway so it's not much of a leap). They join militias and the entire western US goes into a chaos.

      A couple of bottles of a vaccine and they can deliver a devestating blow the US.

      Also remember nukes work best when dropped from a plane. Ideally they should be exploded in the air.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  12. War applications by alim · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now I can run red-lights! And you'll never see me!!! Muahahaa!

    1. Re:War applications by mmol_6453 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah...but being invisible doesn't protect you from physical collisions.

      Besides...I don't think they'll be able to change color that quickly, at least, not for a long time. (Though, looking at the acceleration of things, "long" might only mean ten to twenty years.)

      --
      What's this Submit thingy do?
  13. Nanotech pants? by Plutor · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why the army would want microscopic pants is beyond me..

  14. Apply with fiberoptics by vnsnes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Mix this in with fiberoptics or cameras, and you can have your the paint display what is on the opposite side of the vehicle. You will effectively see through the vehicle.

    1. Re:Apply with fiberoptics by kippy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

  15. Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by cybermace5 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's the dream of every geek and habitual speeder out there: car paint jobs that change at the tap of a button.

    If the paint is active as well, I'd like to see how well it does combating rust 24/7.

    Imagine...driving along and you decide you want a red car...or maybe a black car...or how about zebra stripes.

    Or maybe a lot of huge rust spots, for when you're asking for money ;-)

    --
    ...
    1. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by mustangdavis · · Score: 5, Funny

      Better yet, hook up the body of your car to your stereo's EQ!! Hopefully the paint can react to different electric charges that your EQ can send through it. This way, not only do you save money by not having to purchase a really cool looking LED EQ, but now even deaf people know when you're thumping down the street!

    2. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by Mad+Bad+Rabbit · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Imagine...driving along and you decide you want a red car...or maybe a black car...or how about zebra stripes.

      Remember the 1970's custom van craze, with elaborate Frazetta-looking airbrush murals? Now imagine the same kitschy artwork, only animated. Are you having flashbacks? No, the Greatful Dead skeleton on that guy's van really is waving at you.

      Or instead of mere bumper stickers, SUVs could now sport political blogs that cover the entire side of the vehicle. Meme warfare on wheels!

      Another application: imagine you break the posted speed limit, and not only does your onboard compliance-monitor signal the highway patrol, but your vehicle starts flashing bright ugly blue to let everyone else know what you did...

      >;K

      --
      >;k
    3. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by Diamon · · Score: 2

      Or how about the Tach? "I clocked you going Red in a Blue zone."

    4. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by Diamon · · Score: 2

      To save everyone the trouble of correcting me, I of course meant speedometer. Odometer could be fun too. I've got to get a new car, mine just turned brown last week.

    5. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by MisterFancypants · · Score: 2, Insightful
      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).

    6. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by Schnapple · · Score: 2
      car paint jobs that change at the tap of a button
      Yeah but what will wind up happening is this - Microsoft will come out with it on one of their cars (c'mon, you know there will be MS-powered cars at some point) and then they'll get sued by auto body makers for putting them out of business by making their optional feature standard and unremovable.
    7. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by Asprin · · Score: 2


      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.

      Not an issue, my friend. Thanks to your car's escrow key and a couple of suitable laws, law enforcement can now change YOUR paint job to hot ink with lime green stripes and a giant helicopter-visible bulls-eye on the top labeled "ARREST ME! CASE #2991822"

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    8. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 2

      Fat chance, they won't even let you drive with neons turned on in most states.

    9. Re:Can't wait for this to be demilitarized. by girish · · Score: 2, Funny

      oh, jeez, we are gonna have those crazy people, like the people who use blink in html, paint their cars in this stuff and have it change colors randomly and go blinking down the highway... man, that would be a nightmare..

  16. A Slight Alteration. by Madsci · · Score: 2, Funny

    This article is 10 times more amusing if you replace "paints" with pants. Try it, you'll see. Nanotechnology pants for all! I am so drunk.

    --
    Your paranoia is about as subtle as the alien probe in your neck.
  17. How about using OLEDs? by friendofafriend · · Score: 2
    Instead of nano paints, why not use this just-around-the-corner technology...

    Roll up tank camo?

  18. Does this mean? by LordHunter317 · · Score: 2

    That if I steal a hummer from the Army and run-away changing the camo patterns, they won't be able to find me?

    I call that one over there!

  19. What a ridiculous application by happyhippy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    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.

    1. Re:What a ridiculous application by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 2, Insightful
      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?

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    2. Re:What a ridiculous application by passion · · Score: 2

      Why?

      In a civilized world, the only people who should be killed are those who have been tried and found guilty in a court of law - and even that question is a hot topic of political debate.

      If war didn't involve killing, but instead the rapid transfer of power (which is war's ultimate goal) through non-violent means, it would be far less traumatic to human lives, and the earth in general. Perhaps nanotech could operate like insecticide, and get on the enemies' clothes, and send signals when the soldier returns back to base. At that time, a larger cloud could be enabled that would paralyze the forces, and they could be held as POW until the conflict ended.

      --
      - passion
    3. Re:What a ridiculous application by jw32767 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      --

      Josh Winslow
    4. Re:What a ridiculous application by Overt+Coward · · Score: 2

      Not that I think the application likely, but they could feed on the energy of the "host" that they are destroying...

    5. Re:What a ridiculous application by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      Liquifying a human would be demoralizing to his fellows, but rendering a human's nervous system mostly useless for a year would be more effective. Their fellows then have to care for them.

      Just make a nanotechnological weapon that randomly "deactivates" 66% of the people it is sprayed on and drop it on the other side, giving them all temporary medium-term paralysis of their limbs.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:What a ridiculous application by InfoVore · · Score: 2
      Not that I think the application likely, but they could feed on the energy of the "host" that they are destroying...

      The technical name for that is "combustion". You don't need nanotech for that. White phosphorus or napalm work just fine.

      I.V.

      --
      "These laws they're passing won't even compile anymore, let alone execute." - anon
    7. Re:What a ridiculous application by Winged+Cat · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but you could use nanites to smuggle the napalm into all the body's cells inside inert packages, so you could combust the tagged person at the touch of a button - or not, if said person did what you wanted. (Including getting retagged every so often, if the tags would naturally degrade into non-flammability over time.)

  20. Excellent.. by grub · · Score: 2, Funny


    If it is as good at filling cracks as they say, Phyllis Diller could certainly use some.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  21. Something else to maintain... by citking · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was in the Army for three years as a mechanized infantryman (grunt). Anyhow, every Monday we were forced to perform 3.5 hours of 'preventative maintenance'. You wouldn't believe how much preventative maintenance actually would caause more harm than good. Good ol' Joe would try and test that fuel line and pull just a bit too hard...you get the picture. As it is now, I don't think the military can afford this expense. Sure, the initial costs can probably be quickly absorbed, but they tend to forget that, like many things, the initial shock of cost is usually outweighed by maintenance. But, I will admit, I am curious....

    --
    "This food is problematic."
  22. How long .... by taniwha · · Score: 2

    before they decide it's a great weapon too and start spraying drab olive goo over other parts of the world?

  23. Do you hear it? by sielwolf · · Score: 2

    That's the sound of your tax dollars being flushed right down the crapper. I hope they had the decency to wipe first. ;)

    Still... it sounds cool. But then Star Wars sounds pretty fly as well. Can't they just come up with something that kills everybody instantly and be done with it? Oh wait...

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
  24. More information here: by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2
  25. Also reports it... by mmol_6453 · · Score: 2

    If you read the article, you'd see that it mentions the problems to the "user"...discression as to what to do after that would countless use many trees of regulations.

    --
    What's this Submit thingy do?
  26. Paint Wars by sssmashy · · Score: 3, Funny
    Vehicle operators might quickly change the camouflage paint scheme on vehicles with "smart" coatings with an electrical impulse, Battista explains. "What we hope this coating can do is amazing. We're also looking at making it seem invisible."

    Of course, there's always the danger than an enemy might be able to "hack" the smart paints by zapping vehicles with electrical impulses of their own.

    "What's going on, Sarge? The color of our tank just changed to hot pink! Mayday! Mayday!"

    1. Re:Paint Wars by Zathrus · · Score: 2

      If you can hit the tank with an electrical impulse strong enough to do that (and capable of breaking the crypto command chain on the paint), why didn't you just hit it with a missile and remove the threat?

      By the time you can do the former then the latter is equally trivial.

  27. Counter Intellegence and Maint. by Havoc'ing · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Having been in the military and ground units on the R&D side of the house, its goes with out saying anything that is of an increased technical difficulty is more prone to failure and less likely to be repaired in a combat environment. Second what to say that this technology couldnt be easily detected over a regular paint job. We're assuming that sensors are dealing with the visible light spectrum, I'm sure these gems would send off thier own display of some sort. Given that maybe this is the answer to friendly fire?

  28. Today's Creative Engineering assignment... by Dannon · · Score: 2

    ...should you choose to accept it, is to come up with an application/product combining nanotech paints, Organic LEDs, and Light-Emitting Silicon.

    Any suggestions? I'm stumped.

    --
    Good judgment comes from experience.
    Experience comes from bad judgment.
  29. Legislation... by mmol_6453 · · Score: 2

    ...backed by both environmentalists and auto makers would require recyclement of cars older than X years.

    Environmentalists would like it, to reduce pollution. It would also force development of effecient recycling of complex devices, or development of easier-to-recycle devices.

    Auto makers would like it, to gaurantee sales every so often.

    --
    What's this Submit thingy do?
  30. DURTA? by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Funny

    I am pretty sure that a physical vapor deposition machine would harm living tissue...

  31. Depends on the construction of the device. by mmol_6453 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If they're electrically powered, then, yes, there'd be EM radiation.

    If they're chemically powered, the only people who could see them would be environmentalists.

    --
    What's this Submit thingy do?
  32. Pentagon and $10m hammers by ruzel · · Score: 2, Funny

    "As a result, Army leaders estimate the total cost for U.S. Department of Defense corrosion-related problems at $10 billion per year -- $2 billion of which is related to painting and paint-scraping operations. "

    Thankfully, the research, development, and manufacturing of nanotech robots for the first deployment will only cost $40 billion, thus saving the DOD... uh, well, nevermind.
    ______________

  33. Excellent by idfrsr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Soon we will have transformer type vehicules that I have dreamed about

    Of course, if these machines could be hacked, just imagine all the fun and mayhem that could be caused...

    "Soldier, look at your tank, that's not camoflauge!"

    soldier turns and reads on the now hot pink armour: "you've been H4x0red by Cowboy Neal"

    --
    "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -Tom Waits
  34. I wonder... by C0LDFusion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...if this is another case of concept plagiarism. We know of the concept before being stolen from Radix. I get the feeling some R&D guy got stoned and played Metal Gear Solid.

    --
    Only in slashdot are posts of solidarity modded at -1 Redundant, while posts of antagonism are modded as -1 Flamebait.
  35. Re:Wow, that's so cool... by scott1853 · · Score: 3

    homeless areas could look good thanks to the self-repair process

    Homeless people don't have houses, so what's to repair? And even if you meant low-income areas, they couldn't afford the paint to begin with. I'm betting the cost to paint a tank with this stuff would be equal to the cost of providing aluminum siding for an entire block.

  36. Potentially bad situation by Waab · · Score: 4, Funny

    Heaven help the crew of the first tank to have its nano-tech coating go BSOD.

    1. Re:Potentially bad situation by Winged+Cat · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Our tank just went BSOD, and rolled about a quarter mile off the beach before the motor died. The good news is, no one can see us - it's a good match for the local waters - and the hatches jammed closed so we didn't have to worry about bailing out. The bad news is, no one can see us, not even the rescue crews, and we're starting to run out of air in here."

  37. Yeah, riiiiiiight... by tomzyk · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "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! ;-)
    --
    Karma: NaN
  38. And thus... by mmol_6453 · · Score: 2

    ...the first nanoluddite.

    This isn't going to be a cool trend.

    --
    What's this Submit thingy do?
  39. Change the color of my car? by jhines0042 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know, I'll let people upload pictures to the web and have them display as the shell of my car. Because when the cops pull you over you can just flip a switch.

    Or better yet....

    I'll make a "license plate" that nano-tech changes to whatever I want. Then I can go to a parking lot and "steal" the plates off of some undercover cop car that matches the make and model of mine and never get pulled over!

    Or better yet... advertise!

    Oh wait... I got it... Bumpersticker of the Month/Day/Hour/Minute !!!!

    Turn signals will be obsolete... I'll just flash a portion of my car!

    Who needs brake lights? Just turn the whole back of your car into a giant stop sign!

    I could go on...

    --
    42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
  40. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by Gorm+the+DBA · · Score: 5, Funny
    Good thing this is the Army and not the Navy, or else the old "If it moves, salute it, if it doesn't move, paint it gray" motto would be right out the window!

    Of course...I believe the Army has the same motto...save for the global search and replace of Green for Gray

  41. Two words by iastor · · Score: 4, Funny

    duct tape and cuddlefish

    Okay...four but who's counting?

    iastor

    "Remember your weapon was made by the lowest bidder."

    1. Re:Two words by psoriac · · Score: 2, Funny

      What are cuddlefish, the "safe for children under the age of 5" version of cuttlefish?

      --
      I browse Slashdot at +3, Funny
  42. As the saying goes by Ilan+Volow · · Score: 3, Funny

    And suddenly the expression "It's as fun as watching paint dry" takes on a whole new meaning.

    --
    Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
  43. Just what we need by forkboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Another toy for the military to spend millions of dollars on while people remain unemployed, homeless, or just plain poor here.

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    1. Re:Just what we need by forkboy · · Score: 2

      You think that researchers and manufacturers will get anything more out of a war with Iraq? This isn't world war II, we don't need to steep up production of rubber or invent a new weapon to win a war anymore. The only domestic companies making anything from this are aerospace and weapons manufacturers.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    2. Re:Just what we need by forkboy · · Score: 2

      It's called social infrastructure. There are programs that provide assistance without creating a societal leech out of a person. (Or at least there used to be, they're more scarce since Gee Dubya came into office)

      Things like scholarships, job training, subsidized housing, domestic violence shelters, health care programs, even better unemployment coverage. I don't know about you, but I'd like to collect social security when I'm retired, too.

      All that money wasted in the military isn't helping anyone. It would be much better served working on domestic issues....remember how great the economy was when Clinton was president? Part of the reason is because of all the money he took out of the military and put back into social programs. (yes, part of it was the upside of the dot bomb, but that was certainly not the extent of it)

      But we wouldn't want to make the unemployed or the poor depend on the government, now would we? That might actually give the government a purpose to exist. And think of all the non-conformist foreign bastards we'd miss out on bombing for their evil ways of rejecting american culture.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    3. Re:Just what we need by forkboy · · Score: 2

      So what was invented 5-10 years ago for military purposes that has benefitted the rest of society?

      Hell, what was invented 5-10 years ago that even benefits the military now? Not a whole lot. It's all a big waste of money...we should be putting a lot less money into military, and part of what DOES go in should be dedicated to defensive equipment, (missile defense, mine detection/removal, etc) rather than ways to spend an over-inflated budget.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    4. Re:Just what we need by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      Another toy for the military to spend millions of dollars on while people remain unemployed, homeless, or just plain poor here.

      Uhh, the military isn't spending any money owned by the unemployed, homeless or poor. It's spending the ordinary taxpayer's money. If anyone's complaining, it should be them.

  44. I was expecting this... by carlmenezes · · Score: 2, Troll

    This is what happens when you increase defense spending by a huge amount - they don't know what to do with it, so at that point, crazy little applications like smart paint start getting approved.
    How about worrying about improving the 50% chance that the National Missile Defense program has of intercepting an incoming nuke? And even THAT's assuming that the missile follows a plain vanilla trajectory with no fancy moves.
    Flame me if you want, but this is what you get when you put a kiddish idiot who likes to play with guns in the white house.

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
  45. Potential for human rights abuses by vaxer · · Score: 4, Funny
    Actually, it goes beyond proposal -- and beyond paint, as it would allow vehicles to change camo patterns very easily
    ...and Bob Hope could stand in for the missing stripper at the USO show.

    My God, people, *we* *have* *gone* *too* *far*.
  46. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "[...] it shouldn't be that difficult," she says.

    Famous last words.

  47. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by Helmholtz+Coil · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, the Navy's current favourite paint-replacement is the applique, basically like a plastic wallpaper for planes and ships. Pretty easy to apply, very good weight advantages (paint can account for 800 lbs. on an average fighter because of all the repaints). 'Course, they haven't figured out how to get it off completely yet...the last I saw the scheme was to use lasers and dry ice to alternately heat and cool the applique until it basically flaked off.

    Humph. Lasers and dry ice. Throw in a couple of dancers and you could sell tickets.
  48. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by dave_mcmillen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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.

  49. Imagine a case mod of this by bramez · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I am sure I put it somewhere over here." CLUNK! "Ohw!"

  50. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by FeloniousPunk · · Score: 4, Informative

    All of those operations are performed by 'lowly' soldiers.
    Actually, they aren't anymore. Army vehicles must be painted with CARC (Chemical Agent Resistant Coating) paint, which is very hazardous to apply and generally is only applied by contractors or at the depot (like the one where I work). Big, special sealed paint booths are required to CARC paint a vehicle. This is why painting stuff is so expensive.
    Of course, this could mean labor problems at the depot and with contractors, but that only affects civilians.
    Unless they work up a nanopaint formula that's meant to be applied to rocks in the company area, soldiers will have plenty of painting to do for the forseeable future. ;)

    --
    I know this because Tyler knows this.
  51. Can this really be true? by beaverfever · · Score: 3, Funny
    As a result, Army leaders estimate the total cost for U.S. Department of Defense corrosion-related problems at $10 billion per year -- $2 billion of which is related to painting and paint-scraping operations.

    Could this possibly be true or just a hyper-inflated figure to help sell/make the idea of bleeding-edge tech coatings seem realistic and feasible?

    I mean, come on... $2 billion a year just for painting and paint removal? What are they doing? Hiring only the most intelligent and beautiful virginal labourers to paint tanks with paint made from elements only found in asteroids, using fine, #10 ultra-sable brushes, gently scraping paint off with custom made, solid gold, diamond tipped scrapers?

    jeez...

    1. Re:Can this really be true? by Big_Breaker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

  52. LCD + Photoreceptors by kevlar · · Score: 3, Interesting


    There have been rumors milling around that during WWII the US military was playing around with under-wing/fuselage lighting to camoflage bombers during daytime. It was considered useless at the time, but recently (I think the 80's?) there was a project that combined lighting with photoreceptors (CCD's maybe) where they were able to make a drone virtually invisible above a certain altitude. Rumor is it was classified after a few tests. Anyone heard anything like this?

  53. Paints and camouflage by acgetchell · · Score: 5, Informative

    A long time ago (1986 or so) I worked for a summer at the Night Vision Electro-optics lab at Ft. Belvoir, Maryland. The topic of study was infrared camouflage.

    Visual camouflage works by fooling your eye into thinking the object is part of the background. This is done by breaking up profile, matching background colors, and various other tricks.

    The same problem exists in the infrared, except you have the additional wrinkle of controlling IR emission (just like carrying around a flashlight blows visual camouflage).

    IR happens to be a useful wavelength for detection, because it readily propagates through the atmosphere without loss (over 99% transmission, with exception of two frequencies near 2500 and 25000 where water absorbs and another absorbion band for CO2), and because most objects radiate it (e.g., people, sunlight on the hood of a vehicle, engines, leading edges on wingtips. etc.).

    In the 2500 - 25000 nanometer range, to match up with the forested/vegetation background in Maryland, we needed to duplicate the chlorophyl curve, which is the dominant background emission spectra. And, pretty much, they were able to do so, with some expensive nets and other mechanisms. They were trying for an integrated visual/IR/radar camouflage system (the radar folks worked in the same lab).

    It's very interesting to read about these paints, since this appears to be the first reasonably viable mechanism for achieving this. They would need a chlorophyl pattern for vegetated regions, a desert pattern for deserts, etc. They would also still need to baffle and reduce IR exhaust, since paint won't help camouflage heated air or hot gun barrels.

    The mechanisms previewed so far in the literature (electromechanical gears, electroptical properties) wouldn't likely generate much signature, if any. However, there might be some operation characteristic (e.g., power on) that could be detected with a SQUID (superconducting quantum interference device). However, the SQUID would pick up the spark plugs in the tank long before the electronic signals to the paint.

    --Adam

    --
    "Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
    1. Re:Paints and camouflage by Vaystrem · · Score: 3, Funny

      perhaps the best part about it is that it sounds suspiciously similar to the "SEP" (Somebody Elses' Problem) field from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

    2. Re:Paints and camouflage by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      Visual camouflage works by fooling your eye into thinking the object is part of the background. This is done by breaking up profile, matching background colors, and various other tricks.

      Or "shape, shadow, silhouette, surface, spacing" as they drilled into us when I was a cadet. Along with "proper planning prevents poor performance".

  54. Buy used by jabber01 · · Score: 2

    You buy a new car every 3-5 years? Dude, the bubble burst... You shouldn't be buying a car less than 3 years old in the first place. Going $30k into debt every few years isn't REALLY helping the economy. HONEST.

    But to address your point... Yes, the auto industry does make a mint on after-market touch-up paints. This is why they use yellow plastic on all dark cars, and black plastic on all light colored cars... So when the paint chips, it's obvious, and you have to go and drop either $30k on a new car, or at least $5 on a bottle of nail polish for your bumpers. It's quite literally, highway robbery.

    As for perpetually self-repairing cars, I'm sure Ford is talking to Monsanto right now, about making nano-paint with a patented "terminator" gene. Don't worry. Your contribution to the well-being of the economy will not be made obsolete in the near future.

    --

    The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
    What you do today will cost you a day of your life

  55. military R&D spending produces more REAL resul by cryofan2 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ...most of the R&D spending from the corporate world seems to be calculated to generate news stories, and most of it seems to be vaporware. PLus, corporate R&D is ephemeral--as soon as enough research is done so as to generate the desired publicity/news stories, which causes the stock to go up, or the IPO to become viable, the R&D funding is pulled. As the corporate types care about is getting that money up front for themselves. SO what happens is the promising research is never completed...
    At least in military R&D, enough research is done so that fundamental breakthroughs are accomplished. yes, it's true that the weapons systems may not work as promised, but, the important thing is that the fundamental research is done, and we get the benefit of it.


    SO that is why I hope the military spending is angled more toward biological weaponry and bio-defenses--the resulting R&D could trigger breakthroughs in biology, which could help all of us live longer. Corporate funding has been aimed to this area as well, but it goes for the low-lying fruit; plus, it never goes far enough to generate breakthroughs; only goes far enough to generate executive bonuses...


    Back to the good old days of the cold war, I say.


    That will also mean the draft, and more jobs and more money for us old guys....

  56. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by eaolson · · Score: 2
    U.S. Army experts are trying to embed microscopic electromechanical machines in paint that could detect and heal cracks and corrosion in the bodies of combat vehicles, as well as give vehicles the chameleon-like quality of rapidly altering camouflage to blend in with changing operating environments.

    Well, "trying" sounds like they're actually doing stuff. If you look a little farther down on the article, it looks like they haven't finished brainstorming what they want to do with smart paints that don't even exist yet. This sounds to me like they are about to convene a committee that will put out a document title "Neat Things We Could Do With Smart Paint." It's not like this stuff is even close to being anything other than vaporware, even in a lab setting.

    At the moment, this stuff is about as mature a technology as replicators from Star Trek.

  57. camo by Roadmaster · · Score: 2

    I want my car to have something like solid snake's stealth camo. *whine*

  58. Re:As if the military wasn't ass kicking enough by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  59. Combine it with cameras, get a cloaking device. by rebelcool · · Score: 3, Insightful
    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.

    --

    -

  60. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by plover · · Score: 5, Interesting
    No, the point of this article is that no one has done anything useful yet with nanotech on virtually any scale. This may be the first Real World(TM) application of nanotech on a large scale.

    The sci-fi books have little bloodwork nanobots, star-trek-like replicators, and other, well, sci-fi uses. The only Real World application I've heard of before this was arrays of nanomirrors on microscopic rotors, and I don't know if that made it past the prototype stage.

    This is real work. The army likes to throw money at a technology problem until it is solved. That probably means a real solution will come of this. And that's why this is News for Nerds, etc, and not just another sci-fi proposal.

    --
    John
  61. Read between the lines here by serutan · · Score: 2

    Yeah the crack repair thing was mentioned, but according to the article the main goal seems to be chameleon-like camouflage for ground vehicles. Various high-tech sensing technologies keep moving closer to making visual recon obsolete. That and the time-frame mentioned, 2009 or so, makes me think this technology is aimed at battling low-tech opponents on their own turf, i.e. conquering the 3rd world.

  62. Pie in the sky by spun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Prototype by 2005? I doubt that. They admit to not even knowing what types of nanotech "gears and switches" they are going to need, let alone how to hook it all up to make the paint do what they want. How will they address individual pixels? How will they power it? Nanotech isn't magic, folks. As far as the military already having this technology, I doubt that too. Creating a coating with radar absorbing qualities is one thing, creating one that thinks and moves in a combat environment is entirely different.

    Sounds like they've been smoking that "gotta spend our increased budget or lose it" crack.

    One way to make color changing paint would be to create a grid of fins that could be moved closer together or farther apart. A butterflies wings are colored not with pigments, but with particles that have a gap sized to create interference cancelling out all but a specific wavelength of light. By adjusting the gap, maybe mechanically, maybe electrically, you could adjust the color.

    Another way would be balls, with say 6 different spots of color on different sides. Rotate the ball to get different colors.

    Another way would be pigment sacks, like a cuttlefish uses.

    Now try to think about how to address all the pixels on, say, a tank, with any of those systems. Then think about how you would go about making a system like that self-repairing.

    I would bet that by 2005 they have a prototype that looks bad, changes color slowly, fades quickly in sunlight, breaks down often, and doesn't self repair. They may have a working color changing paint by 2009, but I doubt they will get the self repairing bit down that soon.

    Just thought about it a bit more. They may develop a self repairing undercoating which could fix small cracks in the metal or undercoating by reacting to oxidation and releasing a sealer or catalyst that would bond paint or metal It's making the color changing bit itself self repairing that sounds hard to me.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Pie in the sky by ghutchis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No offense...

      You clearly haven't studied much materials science or chemistry at the moment.

      I can make a colloid of gold particles of a certain size and it's a red vial.

      I can make a colloid of gold particles of a slightly different size and it's a blue vial.

      What's different is that the slight change of nm dimensions changes the wavefunctions of the gold particles. Quantum Mechanics at work! Most of these systems not only absorb certain frequencies of light but also have particular scattering phenomena.

      -Geoff

  63. No. How would this product make your life easier? by Havokmon · · Score: 3, Funny
    It's the dream of every geek and habitual speeder out there: car paint jobs that change at the tap of a button.

    I can't believe you'd think of cars... You've obviously never had your wife do any painting.

    I'd love to just have all the woodwork looking like wood again at the touch of a button.

    --
    "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
  64. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by plover · · Score: 3, Insightful
    As a matter of fact, they do.

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

    --
    John
  65. Does this sound like skin to anyone else? by Emugamer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    other then the whole camo-stealth thing doesn't it sound like skin? self healing with micro fissures (cuts and bruises anyone) sounds very bio to me. do we need to feed it something other then petroleum products now?

  66. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Unless they work up a nanopaint formula that's meant to be applied to rocks in the company area

    For anyone who doubts him, this comment alone proves he is genuinely involved with the military. ;-)

  67. How about for personnel? by phorm · · Score: 2

    Anyelse else who thinks it would be rather cool to have military personnel who were able to on-the-fly merge themselves with the backdrop due to nano-camoflague jackets.

    Well actually, I really just want one for myself, to heck with the military. :-)

  68. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by florescent_beige · · Score: 2, Funny
    Reduction: 5000 truck painters

    New Requisition for: 143,000,000,000 nanotech machine mechanics.

    --
    Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
  69. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by susano_otter · · Score: 2

    Actually, while Navy culture seems to focus heavily on maintaining the paint jobs on their vessels, the Army has no congruent urge to paint things. The closest match you'd get in the Army would be "if it moves, salute it, if it doesn't, don't", which isn't nearly as interesting.

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  70. An Army Lives On Its Paperwork by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First requisition one pint of nanotech paint, splash it on your ream of paper.. then you can program it to display your requisition without needing a printer.

  71. DARPA by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Funny
    Ever hear of DARPA? Ever use any of their inventions? (Hint: think Al Gore.)

    No, I never used Al Gore. They should have worked on him some more before releasing him.

    1. Re:DARPA by plover · · Score: 4, Funny
      Hey, I *invented* Al Gore.

      :-)

      --
      John
  72. Invisibly repaired cracks by kilonad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  73. How about dynamic camo? by vrmlguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Imagine connecting the nontech-based paint job to the vehicle's speedometer. As the vehicle moves, the camo pattern could scroll at the same speed in the opposite direction. In the proper environment, this could make the vehicle difficult to spot when moving, since the observer's eyes would be presented with data not normally present in nature.

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    1. Re:How about dynamic camo? by rat7307 · · Score: 3, Funny

      magine connecting the nontech-based paint job to the vehicle's speedometer. As the vehicle moves, the camo pattern could scroll at the same speed in the opposite direction. In the proper environment, this could make the vehicle difficult to spot when moving, since the observer's eyes would be presented with data not normally present in nature.

      Screw that, make my car jet black and as i speed up, make all the leading edges start to glow like an SR71 plane (or shuttle on re-entry).....

      How cool would that be????

      --
      Burma?
  74. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by The+Raven · · Score: 2

    There are current, actual uses for nanotechnology, mostly in the realm of sensors so far. However, you are correct that this is the one of the first macroscopic uses granted funding by the government... I'm sure there have been classified projects receiving funding in nanotechnology before now.

    But I agree with the parent post... this is not news, this is a notice that there may be news sometime in the future, that the army hopes there will be news if they throw enough money at the problem, and they are detailing what they hope the news will be several years from now.

    Hope and speculation... not news.

    --
    "I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
  75. Haxor meets grafitti ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hmm - I can just see it - enemy hackers attach US military by compromising their tactical networks and command all ordanence to change to international orange.

    Or reprogram the nanotechs to start eating whatever they are painted on.

    Not to mention 'future war' syndrome where people inhale nanotech particles emitted when dislodged by bullets and turn up green in more ways than one.

  76. Imagine a Beowulf painting done with that stuff by billstewart · · Score: 2
    Oh, come on now, somebody had to say it...


    So you've got your nanotech computing surface paint, why not put it to work? The processors are presumably a lot slower than modern CPUs, but so what, they don't have much better to do other than decide what color to be (What color is a chameleon in a mirror?) So give it some solar power source and let it compute things in its spare time.

    The other problem is what kind of computation a system like that would do "Why am I here?" "How do I get somewhere else that nobody will shoot at me?" "I smell paint remover! Run away! Run away!"

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  77. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by Fat+Casper · · Score: 5, Funny
    Of course...I believe the Army has the same motto...

    No, in the Army we only salute people that we want snipers to hit. And it seems that people who want salutes are the ones we already want to salute...

    --
    I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
  78. Today Altering Camoflage ... by brandido · · Score: 2

    Tomorrow - Engage the cloaking device!

    --
    First Falcon-1 to orbit, then Falcon-9. Then I can die a happy man.
  79. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by Fat+Casper · · Score: 2
    There are current, actual uses for nanotechnology, mostly in the realm of sensors so far.

    And if the "paint" means not having to tape M-8 paper to things any more, that's awesome.

    And I agree with you... this is not news, this is a notice that there may be news sometime in the future, that the army hopes there will be news if they throw enough money at the problem, and they are hoping for public support for their funding. Surprised?

    --
    I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
  80. Re:As if the military wasn't ass kicking enough by duck_prime · · Score: 2, Insightful
    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.
  81. Rorschach by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This reminds me of the mask used by Rorschach in "Watchmen". It is supposed to be liquid ink between sheets of plastic.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
  82. Invisible Paint by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Funny
    "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.

    Oooo. Invisible paint. For billions of dollars.

    Can I sell anyone an $800 hammer before some dumb little kid says, "Look Mommy! That tank isn't wearing any paint!"

    --
    ~Idarubicin
  83. And that's not all... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2, Funny

    "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."

    And crabs won't be the only thing our boys will have to worry about when overseas!

    "Don't ride on top of that tank son or you'll be ichin' lick crazy tonight. You'll wake up with one hell of a tattoo and your butt sowed shut."

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  84. Indirect detection methods would still work by EnlightenedDuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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:)

    --
    Quack!Quack!.....QUACK!!
  85. Re:military R&D spending produces more REAL re by forkboy · · Score: 2

    At least in military R&D, enough research is done so that fundamental breakthroughs are accomplished

    At least corporate R&D doesn't use my tax dollars.

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
  86. Street stealth by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 2

    You should look into getting some road vehicle stealth technology, dude.

    http://www.blinder.dk/

  87. Yes, well by KnightStalker · · Score: 2

    Note that I'm a lazy slob and not a four-star general. ;-)

    --
    * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
  88. That's just an option for four wheels by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 2

    When you drive a Suzuki Hayabusa (like I do), not speeding is not an option. :-)

  89. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by srmalloy · · Score: 2
    Good thing this is the Army and not the Navy, or else the old "If it moves, salute it, if it doesn't move, paint it gray" motto would be right out the window!

    And for those of you who were curious, this does explain the occasional gray admiral...
  90. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by srmalloy · · Score: 2
    No, the point of this article is that no one has done anything useful yet with nanotech on virtually any scale. This may be the first Real World(TM) application of nanotech on a large scale.

    The sci-fi books have little bloodwork nanobots, star-trek-like replicators, and other, well, sci-fi uses. The only Real World application I've heard of before this was arrays of nanomirrors on microscopic rotors, and I don't know if that made it past the prototype stage.

    I wonder just how many things we use in the Real World(tm) came about because someone was reading SF, thought 'That would be really useful to have' or something similar, and went out and found a way to do it. Let's see... water beds, waldoes, artificial satellites... William Keith's Warstrider series are the books I've read most recently that incorporate nanoflage on military vehicles. I think that perhaps this project depended more on the salesmanship of some SF reader seeing the potential to turn SF into reality than on the military command structure itself having the vision to come up with an idea like this on its own.
  91. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by plover · · Score: 2
    I apologize, I said "nanotech" when I should have said "nanomachines."

    Yes, nanotubes (and even C-60 buckyballs) are seeing real world applications. But those are not "smart" or "machines", those are just useful and conviently shaped tiny tiny particles.

    I hadn't really considered self-cleaning glass a nanomachine, but I guess now I agree with you. According to the PPG web site, UV light provides the "energy" required to clean it (it doesn't work at night), so there must be some "mechanism" at work (although the web site mentions only a transparent coating of titanium dioxide.)

    --
    John
  92. Re:Because you know they're going to get slashdott by plover · · Score: 2
    Nowhere did I say that we shouldn't pursue anything just because it was sci-fi. All I'm saying is that so far, the sci-fi uses for nanotech have remained mostly out of reach.

    Sci-fi is a great motivator! Without dreams of wonderful gadgets, no one would create them.

    --
    John