Ummm..... your satellite attack scenario has a few holes in it. Orbital mechanics is well understood. Also NORAD finds and tracks items as small as a bolt in space. Keep dreaming, you'll might come up with a plan that is good enough to get yourself on the watch list someday.
Secretly detonate a nuclear warhead... Lets ponder the stupidity of that statement for a moment.... I think someone will notice... Also detonating a nuke would be a full fledged war
A nuclear EMP can be produced by any nuclear detonation. Although an enemy might choose a high detonation to try to knock out just electronics the vast majority of nuclear warheads are going to be used for their blast effect. Thus a bunker would be useful
Barringer Crater mineral rights were granted to Daniel Barringer in 1903 thus granting him owner ship of the iron from that meteor. So if minerals are brought back to earth, they belong to who ever brought them back. In space however its up to them to keep them.
Note: the outer Space treaty only applies to governments, not individuals or corporations.
You need expensive materials(platinum) to do it efficiently.
Also no matter how efficient you make a hydrogen generator you won't improve mpg of a vehicle with it if the power to run it comes from the engine out put such as being run off the alternator or car battery. This has been proven time and time again.
This ignores the big problem of hydrogen, leakage. Currently about 10% to 20% of all hydrogen produced is lost to leakage. This has serious environmental ramifications. Hydrogen leakage will cause bigger and longer lasting holes in the ozone layer. By making hydrogen production cheaper and easier it just makes the leakage problem worse.
http://www.nature.com/news/200...
Well this requires an antenna which would have to be outside the equipment. Just damage the antenna, jam the signal, or send out false codes and you have crippled the equipment. Besides, the threat of failure of this system out weighs the risk of our weapons being used against us.
Also currently a requirement for US tanks is that the turret/gun must be able to be hand cranked to aim and fire with no electrical or mechanical assistance.
This requirement was implemented because of lessons learned the hard way in combat.
Maybe you should watch some episodes of failed tanks on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Ummmm..... no Exocets were disabled. They were used effectively against British ships sinking 2 of them. This just shows how gullible some people are. Hardly anything was networked with cables in 1982, what makes anyone think missiles would have wireless communications back then that would allow disable codes to work? I don't know where this idiot got that story from. I think he just made it up to try and support his article.
Where did this idiot get his history? The Exocet missile had no kill switch. In fact British ships were sunk by the Exocet in the Falklands war. IF there were kill codes and Margret Thatcher used them disabling the Exocet missiles how did these ships get sunk?
Because when someone is shooting at you you tend to drop the keys or forget them or lose them. This is why tanks don't require keys now. Someone was attacked and got taken out because they were fumbling with the keys.
Military equipment MUST just work on demand!!! Our fighting men aren't going to want their tank to shutdown right in the middle of combat and have to enter a new key code. There are very good reasons why stuff tanks don't require keys and that discovery was paid for with blood. It sounds like some idiot with no clue on combat requirements wants to impose a technical problem on our fighting men to solve a political problem.
Not really, your latency will be based on the time it takes to receive a few wave lengths (a 10MHz signal would be one ten millionth of a second for a single cycle and one millionth for ten). The radio energy would travel at the same speed as a higher frequency signal however. Accuracy lost to latency of a plane traveling at Mach two would be about 0.68mm since Mach two is about 680 meters per second (assuming a 10MHz signal and you could detect with ten wavelengths).
while what you say is true its an exponential relationship. Rather than accomplish what you suggest it would just be easier to fry the stealth planes from ground radar stations pumping out gigawatts.
I'm surprised that F-35 critics have latched onto this DARPA paper written in 1985 that talks about using higher order harmonics to get accuracy out of long wave radar. To them it could be gospel for arguing against any stealth aircraft. http://tinyurl.com/Darpa-longw...
Well the big limitation of long wave radar is its accuracy. Any fighter sent to the area would have to locate the craft visually and use an infra red missile or gun to shoot it down.
Note: all infra red guided missiles are short range. This is due to light scattering and IR absorption by co2 in the air that limits the range of the seeker.
Slashdot Mirror
you forgot to mention its slow too
Like nobody's credit card has ever been compromised on the internet before or Apple never got hacked.
Not like this won't be abused. I can see them getting pranked a lot with this idea.
Ummm..... your satellite attack scenario has a few holes in it. Orbital mechanics is well understood. Also NORAD finds and tracks items as small as a bolt in space. Keep dreaming, you'll might come up with a plan that is good enough to get yourself on the watch list someday.
Secretly detonate a nuclear warhead... Lets ponder the stupidity of that statement for a moment.... I think someone will notice... Also detonating a nuke would be a full fledged war
A nuclear EMP can be produced by any nuclear detonation. Although an enemy might choose a high detonation to try to knock out just electronics the vast majority of nuclear warheads are going to be used for their blast effect. Thus a bunker would be useful
Its about damn time!!
Barringer Crater mineral rights were granted to Daniel Barringer in 1903 thus granting him owner ship of the iron from that meteor. So if minerals are brought back to earth, they belong to who ever brought them back. In space however its up to them to keep them. Note: the outer Space treaty only applies to governments, not individuals or corporations.
You still need something to create the electricity to do the separation in the first place since you will get less out of the fuelcell membrane.
You need expensive materials(platinum) to do it efficiently. Also no matter how efficient you make a hydrogen generator you won't improve mpg of a vehicle with it if the power to run it comes from the engine out put such as being run off the alternator or car battery. This has been proven time and time again.
This ignores the big problem of hydrogen, leakage. Currently about 10% to 20% of all hydrogen produced is lost to leakage. This has serious environmental ramifications. Hydrogen leakage will cause bigger and longer lasting holes in the ozone layer. By making hydrogen production cheaper and easier it just makes the leakage problem worse. http://www.nature.com/news/200...
Fortunately the most the flare is going to miss us http://www.foxnews.com/science...
In VHDL and Verilog you use loops to write code :)
Heh! :)
you'll enjoy this
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bw...
Why is it people like this need to post anonymously?
Well this requires an antenna which would have to be outside the equipment. Just damage the antenna, jam the signal, or send out false codes and you have crippled the equipment. Besides, the threat of failure of this system out weighs the risk of our weapons being used against us. Also currently a requirement for US tanks is that the turret/gun must be able to be hand cranked to aim and fire with no electrical or mechanical assistance. This requirement was implemented because of lessons learned the hard way in combat. Maybe you should watch some episodes of failed tanks on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Ummmm..... no Exocets were disabled. They were used effectively against British ships sinking 2 of them. This just shows how gullible some people are. Hardly anything was networked with cables in 1982, what makes anyone think missiles would have wireless communications back then that would allow disable codes to work? I don't know where this idiot got that story from. I think he just made it up to try and support his article.
Where did this idiot get his history? The Exocet missile had no kill switch. In fact British ships were sunk by the Exocet in the Falklands war. IF there were kill codes and Margret Thatcher used them disabling the Exocet missiles how did these ships get sunk?
Because when someone is shooting at you you tend to drop the keys or forget them or lose them. This is why tanks don't require keys now. Someone was attacked and got taken out because they were fumbling with the keys.
Military equipment MUST just work on demand!!! Our fighting men aren't going to want their tank to shutdown right in the middle of combat and have to enter a new key code. There are very good reasons why stuff tanks don't require keys and that discovery was paid for with blood. It sounds like some idiot with no clue on combat requirements wants to impose a technical problem on our fighting men to solve a political problem.
Not really, your latency will be based on the time it takes to receive a few wave lengths (a 10MHz signal would be one ten millionth of a second for a single cycle and one millionth for ten). The radio energy would travel at the same speed as a higher frequency signal however. Accuracy lost to latency of a plane traveling at Mach two would be about 0.68mm since Mach two is about 680 meters per second (assuming a 10MHz signal and you could detect with ten wavelengths).
while what you say is true its an exponential relationship. Rather than accomplish what you suggest it would just be easier to fry the stealth planes from ground radar stations pumping out gigawatts.
I'm surprised that F-35 critics have latched onto this DARPA paper written in 1985 that talks about using higher order harmonics to get accuracy out of long wave radar. To them it could be gospel for arguing against any stealth aircraft. http://tinyurl.com/Darpa-longw...
Well the big limitation of long wave radar is its accuracy. Any fighter sent to the area would have to locate the craft visually and use an infra red missile or gun to shoot it down. Note: all infra red guided missiles are short range. This is due to light scattering and IR absorption by co2 in the air that limits the range of the seeker.
Actually very little performance is being traded for stealth these days. The F-22 is just as good as the typhoon at dog fighting.