It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The ultimate weapon?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 07:45 PM
link   
And how big would these rods be?



Odd

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 07:56 PM
link   
It's not really the size of the rod... just the velocity of impact.














posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Good point... Another thing to do is to throw bits of the Moon at enemy countires, they'd be new weapons of mass destruction...



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nox
Tungsten has the highest melting point of any metal. It's also very resistant to corrosion.

I think that's why the rods are made of tungsten instead of some other metal.

A lot of other metals would melt before hitting the ground.

Yeah but one little problem i got on my idea which occurs here, the speed of the rod hitting the atmosphere is like the rod hitting solid ground.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:43 PM
link   
the utlimate weapon really depends on the target, i guess.....and secrecy, so i don't think we'll ever know what the ultimate weapon is, really


Nox

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:53 PM
link   
You'll have to look this up online.

Since it's all speculation and planning (no real results), sources have given me ranges from "1 foot wide, 30 foot long tungsten rods" to "half meter wide, 30 meter long tungsten rods".

The ratio of the rods' width to length 1:30, means that it would be pretty aerodynamic. Hitting the atmosphere would only guarantee that the rod shoots STRAIGHT down, instead of spinning (less air resistance).


Nox

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:57 PM
link   
When I told my genius little brother (who's still a freshman in high school) he told me something that I hadn't thought of:

"I think they're probably going to turn the 'rod' into a screw. Spinning would stabilize the rod and give it more kinetic energy when it hits the ground, allowing it to pierce even deeper through bunker shields."

I think that makes sense, but I don't have time to go through with the calculations.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I smell bs too!

Come on give us some kind of evidence, only the truth will do-LOL




posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 08:59 PM
link   
hmm mabye....hey my control rod idea might actualy work!
yay! actually no its a bad idea for a thing but its better than a nuke.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:37 PM
link   
This is absolute BS, I don't buy it, miniguns are not the most effective weapon since they eat bullets faster than a sports fan eats pop-corn/what have ya watching finals...

sure sounds amusing though...



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
This is absolute BS, I don't buy it, miniguns are not the most effective weapon since they eat bullets faster than a sports fan eats pop-corn/what have ya watching finals...

sure sounds amusing though...

What about goal keeper or phalanx? They handy?
Kinetic weapons have been used since the invention of violence, and will still be used , these rods from god will work well. Gravity does the work.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nexus
And how big would these rods be?

Probably bigger than a shell but smaller than the barrel of a tank, i have no idea what the size may be , but the theory is sound.
The rods theoretically can be any size.
Hell just load up a C5 trasport with metal rods and fly it to its highest level then unload them. With some little thrusters or fins you could guide it to its target relitively simply.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
[sarcasm]although i wont mention any names....*coughrandom hippie 9cough*
i think 'someone' has been watching too many James Bond
movies. [/sarcasm] lol-j; )


[edit on 20-12-2004 by Nine Inch Nails]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join