Slashdot Mirror
Land Speed Record Broken: 0-6,400 in Six Seconds
linuxwrangler writes "Researchers at Holloman AFB have broken their own two decades old land speed record for rail vehicles. The rocket powered sled covered the 3 mile track in roughly 6 seconds. Preliminary numbers put the sled's speed at mach 8.6 or about 6,400 mph - it covered the last 1.8 miles in just 1.3 seconds. The previous record of 6,122 mph was set on Oct. 5, 1982. Other accounts are at the Alamogordo Daily News, the Denver Post, and CNN."
Why stick to a car-like design when you can improve on it? Cars are a lazy, Victorian, inefficient idea.
Wouldn't it be nice if humanity could do this super cool stuff without the ultimate aim being to find more efficient ways of killing people.
The arms industry often shocks me, rarely awe's me.
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
Every once in a while, the quest to build the fastest car, train, whatever, is on Discovery.
But these vehicles are merely planes touching the ground. The real quest, in my eyes, would be building a vehicle that is powered through its wheels, not a giant rocketmotor. At least if the quest is to build a car or a train, not a rocket!
Call me cynical, but I'm trying to figure out if this type of research has real merit, or if it is entirely masturbatory. What's the point exactly?
It's a military project, i.e., tax-payer funded, so I'd like to hear some relevant, practical uses for said technology. It sounds like it was used to deliver a bullet-type missle in this case. Something tells me that you couldn't really use this delivery method in an actual *war* . . .
Ok, I'll bite....
First of all, a (rifle) bullet would not be able to break the land speed record - it would be travelling through the air.
Secondly, a (long-range) rifle may have a high exit velocity (muzzle? I am not an expert), but this will only decrease after being shot - the bullet will be slowed down by air resistance.
Finally, I know that laser pointers shout around 1c (speed of light), so it wouldn't be too hard to... oh wait, perhaps it IS hard? Perhaps that is why this is a record 20 years old being rebroken?
Please feel free to think before you next post.
I'm sure we could take care of this using XML (or maybe not - I am ingorant in the area of XML). But if the W3C had included some "weights and measures" tags in the HTML standard then we could leave it up to the browser and/or client OS to apply localization rules and perform the proper conversions.
Just a thought, but does anyone know of this was ever suggested?
My user name was a mistake. Input wasn't restricted, my bad.
Actually you did, it was called Nike-Zeus and introduced in 1958.
The Russian system is a hangover from the days of the SALT talks. Each of the two signatories (the US and the USSR) were able to retain one ABM system that had been deployed or was in the process of deployment, on three conditions: 1. That there were no future developments; 2. That the technology was deployed at no more than two sites; and 3. That no site possessed more than 100 interceptors.
A further appendix to the treaty then reduced the number of sites to one.
The US was in the process of deploying its own AMB system known as Safeguard, originally authorised in 1970. It was deployed at Malmstrom USAFB in Montana and Grand Forks USAFB in North Dakota. It would have then been rolled out to Whiteman USAFB in Missouri, and Warren USAFB Wyoming.
When the SALT negotiations proved to be a success, the US abandoned the second two sites. Malmstrom was abandoned when the final section of the talks were concluded.
The Grand Forks base was completed and brought into operation in April 1975, and was fully fitted out with all 100 missiles by October 1975. A day later, Congress cancelled all funding for Safeguard and the system was withdrawn.
The Soviet system was called Galosh and as you said operated around Moscow. It is doubtful whether it is operational any longer.
And as for your, NMD is a good idea - well even if you overlook the horrendous spending projections needed to build the system, the dubious statistics used by the Pentagon, the faked test results you're left with the obvious pork-barrelling in a time when the US economy and budget aren't looking too healthy.
If you choose to ignore the message this sends to China - build up your missile fleet before its made obsolete. If you want to forget that the Chinese already see the US as a long-term strategic threat - and the Indians see the Chinese as a threat and the Pakistanis see the Indians as a threat...
You still have severe questions about the political implications of such a system. The US and its political catamite the UK have shown themselves willing to trample over international law to get their own way with Iraq. We broke international law and the UN Charter to take on a country we knew we could beat without retaliation.
Imagine the temptation to get involved in a conflict with ANY country if you thought your country was immune from any retaliation.
Bush and co. are scary enough without NMD, with it - well I won't be sleeping much.
Best wishes,
Mike.