Well, if you jump out of a spacecraft that's orbiting the earth won't you just....orbit the earth?
Say you slow down enough to start hitting atmosphere, using that retro rocket, even in the extremely thin atmosphere you should be going fast enough to break the molecules apart.
The best way I can think about doing this is to strap everyone to the outside of the last stage of a rocket. Have it go up a hundred miles, everyone detaches and falls back to earth.
Man, riding a rocket on the OUTSIDE, that's extreme sports.
Later
ErikZ
Re:Cool but a BFT (Big F*SCKING Target)
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 2
The laser has to stay on target for some duration to do damage (several minutes, apparently - more than enough time for a maneuverable plane to fly a loop and get out of the way). The moving aircraft should be more than enough to compensate for a sustained hit. Especially if the aircraft maintains it's distance and stays behind the laser plane.
Why do you think that if the laser can shoot for seven minutes, it MUST shoot for seven minutes to do any damage? Where did you get this info? Nowhere in the article does it say this, in fact it DOES say The laser has about only an 18-second "kill window" in which to lock on and destroy a rising missile, said Wills
Wow, I found something to support my argument, your turn.
And just like AWACS, it's a valuable target - in a real air war, AWACS would be a strategic target - the enemy would fly sorties against AWACS, presumably enough to take out the surrounding guards as well.
I apologize that all the conflicts the US has gotten into haven't been 'Real' enough for you. The reason the enemy hasn't been able to fly a sortie against them is because the CO does his damnest not to let them. I'm still curious on how you're going to shoot this thing down.
Again, I stay over the horizon (out of your LASER range) and fire my AA missiles at you. I don't know the official range of AA missiles, but it's more than enough for me to fly behind you and not actually cross the horizon and be in the line of sight of the laser. And I can do a quick 180 vertical loop and then rotate level and hit the afterburner to get away after the missiles are away.
Ahh, more "Wing Commander" tactics. Last time I looked, an Over the Horizon Missile required an AWACS to operate. I don't believe any other country besides the US even has the tech, for the missile. Lets assume you're a fully supported rogue pilot, for the sake of argument. You're directly behind me, beyond the range of my weapon, and you fire off your missile, which has the range to hit me.
ASSUMING, this new pride and joy of the Air Force has ABSOLUTELY no Electronic Warfare gear on it and
ASSUMING there is no friendly AWACS in the area to warn me of incoming fighters and
ASSUMING that this Anti-missile aircraft is the only one within 400 miles.
What would happen is this, the missile would be picked up on infra-red, I turn the plane, say, 90 degrees, shoot down missile. Yawn.
I have no idea how fast your missile is going, lets be generous and say 10,000 mph. To cross 400 miles it would require 2 minutes and 24 seconds (Ignoring acceleration time) leaving me plenty of time for me to turn my plane.
(Most counter-measures rely on the craft being smaller and being able to move rapidly away from the counter-measure - I'm not sure how much flares/chaff would help a 747.)
Flares? Chaff? How cute. I was a EW tech in the USAF. The stuff that goes on big planes can scramble missile guidance pretty easily due to the MASSIVE power supplies available to it.
To sum, you're shooting a missile at a plane DESIGNED TO SHOOT DOWN MISSILES, how can you think this would be an easy kill?
ErikZ
Re:Who does this protect? and civil flights are sa
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
Not only did I read the article, but I read the post I replied to also.
I said "I find it hard to believe that it CAN'T".
I don't care what the article says, this laser shooting down a missile at 400 miles will only weaken the metal. A 1 megawatt laser shooting down a missle at 10 miles will do physical damage.
I don't believe this, you're actually COMPLAINING that you didn't get nuked? That the missle blew up somewhere else instead of in town?
Later
ErikZ
Re:Cool but a BFT (Big F*SCKING Target)
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
Er, have you ever heard of an AWACS? It's amazing how few of those are shot down.
And jets have this annoying tendency to A) fight back and B) fly evasive patterns.
Ok, you get in your jet, I'll get into my 747. You have to cross 400 miles to get to me. What's the range of your missiles again? I don't care how much you jink, I'm shooting at you with a computer controlled LASER. Near instantanious man.
ErikZ
Re:Who does this protect? and civil flights are sa
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
Your first sentence is wrong. The Laser is used during the accent phase of a missile launch because that is when the missile is most vulnerable. Read any text on "Star Wars" tech.
It's pouring out infrared as it's boosting up to full speed, and because it's not at full speed it's supposed to be easier to hit.
As to whether it is powerful enough to melt/vaporize it, you'll have to ask someone who works with high-powered lasers. Personally, I find it hard to believe that it can't.
It's obvious your military knowlege has been gained though 'Wing Commander' and "Battlestar Galactica'. To help you understand what this is, I'll stick to the sci-fi theme. Start thinking along the lines of a 'Spinal Mount' weapon. Did you read the article? An entire section of the plane is sectioned off and being in that section when the weapon fires can kill you.
Like so many other war machines, the vehicle itself is merely the transport for the weapon.
Later,
ErikZ
Re:...but will it keep up with the upgrades?
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 3
I was looking at the description of this a few years back also. (Can't find the article now either, stange.) The impressive hurdle they had to overcome was getting the laser to actually hit the target.
They had a problem with the atmosphere curving the beam. They were using something new, a mirror that could be adjusted on the fly, extremely fast, it's in the nose. Turbulence is very very slow compared to targeting and firing. The only other thing they mentioned was that it was a chemical laser.
Reagan years went away and SDI was dropped because the "enemy" collapsed (= the cold war was won by economics). But now, Dubyia thinks that some major contributors of his campaign must make some bucks building an eighties-idea with new-millenium technology and Daddy's advice.
Wow, that's harsh. Is the idea that bad or are you just blinded by your hate?
Impossible? What nonsense. It's digital to begin with, so it's even EASIER to copy. With current tech, I'd just set my computer to automatic. Copy over 15 minutes of movie, compress it, copy over another 15 minutes.
By the time this thing gets out, I'll have enough space to copy the whole thing at once though.
You know, like Anime is a different animation style?
As far as I can tell, in any of Disneys future movies, anything with detail will be done by computers. That kind of detail is very expensive for animators to do.
Out of curiousity, how much does it take for Disney to make an animation movie?
Wow, and someday they'll invent a black hole generator, and someday they'll create a horrible plague, and someday they'll destabilize the sun and destroy the Earth, and someday....
Look, ignore nanobots for a second. Build me a robot of ANY size that survive and reproduce.
You can't. It will be a very VERY long time before anything like this happens. There's no watchdog because THERE'S NOTHING TO WATCH.
I'm beginning to suspect you're a troll. I've never seen any scientist come close to claiming a tech they've produced will 'cure all our ills'.
Ah well. Guess I'm just used to dealing with ignorance.
I think it will be more political than that. If any of the other countries want to send someone up to the space station, Nasa will probably have to let them.
Otherwise, what's the point of helping the US fund their space station?
Also, I'd be surprised if the contestent will be that big. He/she will probably be around 5' and 125 pounds. Why? Fuel savings! Or you can use the extra weight allowance to send other things up into space, say, 60 pounds of cremated remains.
Slashdot Mirror
The soil got there from the Glaicers pushing down topsoil from Canada.
Later
ErikZ
WHAT!?
You plan on using Nuclear power?
Later
ErikZ
Well, if you jump out of a spacecraft that's orbiting the earth won't you just....orbit the earth?
Say you slow down enough to start hitting atmosphere, using that retro rocket, even in the extremely thin atmosphere you should be going fast enough to break the molecules apart.
The best way I can think about doing this is to strap everyone to the outside of the last stage of a rocket. Have it go up a hundred miles, everyone detaches and falls back to earth.
Man, riding a rocket on the OUTSIDE, that's extreme sports.
Later
ErikZ
Why do you think that if the laser can shoot for seven minutes, it MUST shoot for seven minutes to do any damage? Where did you get this info? Nowhere in the article does it say this, in fact it DOES say The laser has about only an 18-second "kill window" in which to lock on and destroy a rising missile, said Wills
Wow, I found something to support my argument, your turn.
And just like AWACS, it's a valuable target - in a real air war, AWACS would be a strategic target - the enemy would fly sorties against AWACS, presumably enough to take out the surrounding guards as well.
I apologize that all the conflicts the US has gotten into haven't been 'Real' enough for you. The reason the enemy hasn't been able to fly a sortie against them is because the CO does his damnest not to let them. I'm still curious on how you're going to shoot this thing down.
Again, I stay over the horizon (out of your LASER range) and fire my AA missiles at you. I don't know the official range of AA missiles, but it's more than enough for me to fly behind you and not actually cross the horizon and be in the line of sight of the laser. And I can do a quick 180 vertical loop and then rotate level and hit the afterburner to get away after the missiles are away.
Ahh, more "Wing Commander" tactics. Last time I looked, an Over the Horizon Missile required an AWACS to operate. I don't believe any other country besides the US even has the tech, for the missile. Lets assume you're a fully supported rogue pilot, for the sake of argument. You're directly behind me, beyond the range of my weapon, and you fire off your missile, which has the range to hit me.
ASSUMING, this new pride and joy of the Air Force has ABSOLUTELY no Electronic Warfare gear on it and
ASSUMING there is no friendly AWACS in the area to warn me of incoming fighters and
ASSUMING that this Anti-missile aircraft is the only one within 400 miles.
What would happen is this, the missile would be picked up on infra-red, I turn the plane, say, 90 degrees, shoot down missile. Yawn.
I have no idea how fast your missile is going, lets be generous and say 10,000 mph. To cross 400 miles it would require 2 minutes and 24 seconds (Ignoring acceleration time) leaving me plenty of time for me to turn my plane.
(Most counter-measures rely on the craft being smaller and being able to move rapidly away from the counter-measure - I'm not sure how much flares/chaff would help a 747.)
Flares? Chaff? How cute. I was a EW tech in the USAF. The stuff that goes on big planes can scramble missile guidance pretty easily due to the MASSIVE power supplies available to it.
To sum, you're shooting a missile at a plane DESIGNED TO SHOOT DOWN MISSILES, how can you think this would be an easy kill?
ErikZ
Not only did I read the article, but I read the post I replied to also.
I said "I find it hard to believe that it CAN'T".
I don't care what the article says, this laser shooting down a missile at 400 miles will only weaken the metal. A 1 megawatt laser shooting down a missle at 10 miles will do physical damage.
No need to get snotty about it.
Later,
ErikZ
I don't believe this, you're actually COMPLAINING that you didn't get nuked? That the missle blew up somewhere else instead of in town?
Later
ErikZ
And jets have this annoying tendency to A) fight back and B) fly evasive patterns.
Ok, you get in your jet, I'll get into my 747. You have to cross 400 miles to get to me. What's the range of your missiles again? I don't care how much you jink, I'm shooting at you with a computer controlled LASER. Near instantanious man.
ErikZ
Your first sentence is wrong. The Laser is used during the accent phase of a missile launch because that is when the missile is most vulnerable. Read any text on "Star Wars" tech.
It's pouring out infrared as it's boosting up to full speed, and because it's not at full speed it's supposed to be easier to hit.
As to whether it is powerful enough to melt/vaporize it, you'll have to ask someone who works with high-powered lasers. Personally, I find it hard to believe that it can't.
Later,
ErikZ
It's obvious your military knowlege has been gained though 'Wing Commander' and "Battlestar Galactica'. To help you understand what this is, I'll stick to the sci-fi theme. Start thinking along the lines of a 'Spinal Mount' weapon. Did you read the article? An entire section of the plane is sectioned off and being in that section when the weapon fires can kill you.
Like so many other war machines, the vehicle itself is merely the transport for the weapon.
Later,
ErikZ
I was looking at the description of this a few years back also. (Can't find the article now either, stange.) The impressive hurdle they had to overcome was getting the laser to actually hit the target.
They had a problem with the atmosphere curving the beam. They were using something new, a mirror that could be adjusted on the fly, extremely fast, it's in the nose. Turbulence is very very slow compared to targeting and firing. The only other thing they mentioned was that it was a chemical laser.
Later,
ErikZ
Excuse me? How many passanger 747s, or ANY passanger planes do you see flying in and out of US war zones?
None.
Later,
ErikZ
Amazing, they didn't tell you how to design you missiles to avoid from being shot down by this thing? Who would of thought of that?
Later
ErikZ
Wow, that's harsh. Is the idea that bad or are you just blinded by your hate?
ErikZ
Dude, have you seen the prices on an HDTV?
:-)
I was at Best Buy yesterday, and for one large HDTV, I could buy several large regular TVs.
Hell, they knocked 33% off a floor model projection tv, and some guy was still trying to justify buying it. He was trying really hard though.
Later
ErikZ
Impossible? What nonsense. It's digital to begin with, so it's even EASIER to copy. With current tech, I'd just set my computer to automatic. Copy over 15 minutes of movie, compress it, copy over another 15 minutes.
By the time this thing gets out, I'll have enough space to copy the whole thing at once though.
Later
ErikZ
Hm, I bet the earth's entire biosphere could power a machine the size of....
:-)
Well, the size of a planet.
Later
ErikZ
I was in the USAF.
I picked the AF over the Navy because the AF treats their people better.
Still, I stayed in for 4 years then I got out. Out of all the Armed Services, I'd say the Navy has is the worst to be part of.
Later
ErikZ
My computer has been powered by an 800Mhz Celeron @100Mhz now for months. It's called overclocking.
Later
ErikZ
You mean, like going to the store?
ErikZ
Hercules was done is a different animation style.
You know, like Anime is a different animation style?
As far as I can tell, in any of Disneys future movies, anything with detail will be done by computers. That kind of detail is very expensive for animators to do.
Out of curiousity, how much does it take for Disney to make an animation movie?
Later
Erik Z
Wow, and someday they'll invent a black hole generator, and someday they'll create a horrible plague, and someday they'll destabilize the sun and destroy the Earth, and someday....
Look, ignore nanobots for a second. Build me a robot of ANY size that survive and reproduce.
You can't. It will be a very VERY long time before anything like this happens. There's no watchdog because THERE'S NOTHING TO WATCH.
I'm beginning to suspect you're a troll. I've never seen any scientist come close to claiming a tech they've produced will 'cure all our ills'.
Ah well. Guess I'm just used to dealing with ignorance.
Later
ErikZ
I'm curious to see what a manual like that looks like.
Later,
ErikZ
"It will be a long time before you see a system like this on your desktop."
If they had a 300Ghz model available at 30k, I'd buy one today.
Later
ErikZ
"That would also imply that the average programmer is 9 times better than a bad programmer."
I still have a program back when I just started. My 'Bad' programming days.
I have no problem saying that my current average programming skills are 9 times better overall.
Later
ErikZ
I think it will be more political than that. If any of the other countries want to send someone up to the space station, Nasa will probably have to let them.
Otherwise, what's the point of helping the US fund their space station?
Also, I'd be surprised if the contestent will be that big. He/she will probably be around 5' and 125 pounds. Why? Fuel savings! Or you can use the extra weight allowance to send other things up into space, say, 60 pounds of cremated remains.
In the end, it's all about the money.
Later
Erik Z