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.

 

US Air Force Wants a Laser for the Spectre by 2020

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

NIF is intended as such. However, it is also being used for other things as well. They did a whole campaign to try to break even on the energy output for energy and propulsion work. They had a positive gain (ie more energy out than they put in). Inertial fusion really is the way for space drives and NIF is pretty much the only game in town.

As for supporting nuclear weapons work, what would you prefer? Testing out in the Nevada desert? Or a tool that might be useful for other things, too. Hard choice that.

Additionally, as much as MAD was insane, it was also insanely brilliant. If you look at the history of the world, especially in Europe, at least as far back as the 1750s, there was a MAJOR war, even world war, every generation (+/- 10 years). Had nukes not shown up in 1945, we'd have gone to war with the Soviets probably around 1960 to 1970 with tanks and rifles. THAT would have been a war to make the world bleed. And guess what? No world wars for 70 years now. Deterrence works. Its scary as shbt, but it works.

As for ending MAD, its really impossible. There is no economical way to defend ourselves perfectly. Even with insane spending on missile defense, there are still ways to trash us with nukes. And, as I said, MAD is cheaper.

For that matter, circa 2001, the US decided it could NOT secure the internet. Its really impossible. So, they went MAD there, too. Given the insanity of the 'internet of things' that is coming, that was probably the only rational approach. STUXNET was the equivalent of the F-117: when it was revealed, it was old news.




posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Im sorry but Boeing is deving a fusion reactor the size of a small truck that puts out more enerygy than i t takes to run but thats likely to go black"again" if it does not get enough investors.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Lockheed is building that reactor BTW.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

The Lockheed reactor is an magnetohydrodynamic device. Its not nearly as good for propulsion (and I mean in space not on the ground). We could get into why, but inertial confinement is far, far better than MHD for big space ship propulsion.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: yuppa

Lockheed is building that reactor BTW.
what you say is true. it is lockheed that is building the reactor referred to above.

But what you say is also false. Lockheed is not alone in making a reactor and judging from the progress Lockheed almost cannot possibly catch up to the other similar fusion projects that have a headstart. to name a few Helion, MSNW Working with NASA , LLP, Tri-Alpha Energy, Polywell Fusion (former company of Dr Bussard of Bussard Ramscoop fame) ... there are a few more who escape me at the moment.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: mbkennel

NIF is intended as such. However, it is also being used for other things as well. They did a whole campaign to try to break even on the energy output for energy and propulsion work. They had a positive gain (ie more energy out than they put in). Inertial fusion really is the way for space drives and NIF is pretty much the only game in town.

As for supporting nuclear weapons work, what would you prefer? Testing out in the Nevada desert? Or a tool that might be useful for other things, too. Hard choice that.

Additionally, as much as MAD was insane, it was also insanely brilliant. If you look at the history of the world, especially in Europe, at least as far back as the 1750s, there was a MAJOR war, even world war, every generation (+/- 10 years). Had nukes not shown up in 1945, we'd have gone to war with the Soviets probably around 1960 to 1970 with tanks and rifles. THAT would have been a war to make the world bleed. And guess what? No world wars for 70 years now. Deterrence works. Its scary as shbt, but it works.

As for ending MAD, its really impossible. There is no economical way to defend ourselves perfectly. Even with insane spending on missile defense, there are still ways to trash us with nukes. And, as I said, MAD is cheaper.

For that matter, circa 2001, the US decided it could NOT secure the internet. Its really impossible. So, they went MAD there, too. Given the insanity of the 'internet of things' that is coming, that was probably the only rational approach. STUXNET was the equivalent of the F-117: when it was revealed, it was old news.
you can't secure the internet? How about this no sensitive system communicates over the internet. All infrastructure control systems, all critical records nodes, all military, all government and corporate sensitive systems have a public net and a separate secure net for stuff that does not need to be accessed by spies, script kiddies, real hackers, curious bystanders, martians and Khomeini's pet goat.

secure nodes have a squad of genetically modified super-goons that beat anyone carrying a thumb drive, cell phone, cameras and so on into a secure access terminal to death with a 50 foot long log replete with branches. or at least send them to jail.

there is no reason except stupidity to have something that controls traffic lights, train track switches, dams, water treatment plants, power plants or contains schematics of our secret fleet of star cruisers and our plans to attack Canada to even be within 100 yards of an unsecured computer with access to and from the public internet. the damned secure access people do no need to be able to surf for porn and chat with preteens or post in forums from those machines.
edit on 17-9-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Tri Alpha is the only one of those I'd call really interesting. Polywell, I think, lost their navy funding because they didn't make much progress. I could be wrong, but that's what I recall.

I'd not count on NASA at all in this.

Bringing it back to the laser on a gunship, here's a bit more on the subject. The AFSOC is already working on tactics for the laser armed bird.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Tri Alpha is the only one of those I'd call really interesting. Polywell, I think, lost their navy funding because they didn't make much progress. I could be wrong, but that's what I recall.

I'd not count on NASA at all in this.

Bringing it back to the laser on a gunship, here's a bit more on the subject. The AFSOC is already working on tactics for the laser armed bird.


yup. acknowledged. but i do think there is more than just TA and MSNW that are making progress and the polywell guys are finding alternative partners and funding. plus there are various universities and foreign contenders in places like the UK and Japan.

Fusion power is coming in less than a decade. my only real concern remaining is i want one of the direct conversion schemes to be one of the ones to succeed. if they do the space age will truly be upon us at last.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Anza; after thoughts. You see NASA is in partnership with MSNW but MSNW has a private side too. NASA is not really the driver of the basic fusion research. MSNW is. But NASA has a contract with MSNW's main guy to develop thier fusion concept into a rocket. It's really kind of two different projects.

(MSNW get a new name or stop using that impossible dreary acronym. I have to look it up to get it right every time i post about it)
edit on 17-9-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Direct schemes?



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Direct schemes?


msnwllc.com...

They also make ELF Ion Thrusters. tiny little 4rth generation ion engines that pack more power than VASIMR and you can mount like a gabillion of them on a single platform



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Direct schemes?
yes.
Direct schemes means: charged particles from the fusion process shoot through an induction coil producing electricity directly. this eliminates complexity, mass and points of failure. such systems are more suited for portability to include use in space.

Tri alpha is one example. there are one or two other contenders using direct conversion. but some of these projects use turbines or radiation to tungsten metal target to thermal-electric conversion.
edit on 17-9-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: yuppa

Lockheed is building that reactor BTW.
what you say is true. it is lockheed that is building the reactor referred to above.

But what you say is also false. Lockheed is not alone in making a reactor and judging from the progress Lockheed almost cannot possibly catch up to the other similar fusion projects that have a headstart. to name a few Helion, MSNW Working with NASA , LLP, Tri-Alpha Energy, Polywell Fusion (former company of Dr Bussard of Bussard Ramscoop fame) ... there are a few more who escape me at the moment.


Samm thanks for the correction.

Lightning id bet you money that Lockheed i s going to get there first. Weapons manufacturer prolly is using a dirivitive of the Black worlds version they already have. They already got it. I never bet on anything but a sure bet.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: yuppa

Lockheed is building that reactor BTW.
what you say is true. it is lockheed that is building the reactor referred to above.

But what you say is also false. Lockheed is not alone in making a reactor and judging from the progress Lockheed almost cannot possibly catch up to the other similar fusion projects that have a headstart. to name a few Helion, MSNW Working with NASA , LLP, Tri-Alpha Energy, Polywell Fusion (former company of Dr Bussard of Bussard Ramscoop fame) ... there are a few more who escape me at the moment.


Samm thanks for the correction.

Lightning id bet you money that Lockheed i s going to get there first. Weapons manufacturer prolly is using a dirivitive of the Black worlds version they already have. They already got it. I never bet on anything but a sure bet.
If web lore is correct you'd be right of course. But i am not ready to commit to believing web lore.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Cant forget the other fun but deadly lights they are playing with in the desert..



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: yuppa

Lockheed is building that reactor BTW.
what you say is true. it is lockheed that is building the reactor referred to above.

But what you say is also false. Lockheed is not alone in making a reactor and judging from the progress Lockheed almost cannot possibly catch up to the other similar fusion projects that have a headstart. to name a few Helion, MSNW Working with NASA , LLP, Tri-Alpha Energy, Polywell Fusion (former company of Dr Bussard of Bussard Ramscoop fame) ... there are a few more who escape me at the moment.


Samm thanks for the correction.

Lightning id bet you money that Lockheed i s going to get there first. Weapons manufacturer prolly is using a dirivitive of the Black worlds version they already have. They already got it. I never bet on anything but a sure bet.



From what I've read, it seems the Lockheed program is a hybrid polywell device. I was following the navy's polywell program 6 years ago when they built there second prototype and it then went away. If you look at lockheeds early promotional materials from last year, there is a single photo in their montage, that has a device in it that sure looks like the navy's second polywell.
I do believe they have a working device, and that it was tested in space on the x-37b's record breaking flight, and Lockheed shared tech with boeing and that is the basis for this boeing patent,





Boeing's Fusion Engine

And from other events in the last decade I also believe that they have a working fusion rocket motor, that just might be what is powering the "Green Lady".

Aneutronic fusion puts out a lot of light as part of the reaction, and maybe if you are using a boron doped containment vessel that light may be green.

as a side note a commercial fusion venture attained laser ignition of deuterium last week. Funny thing is I read the article a few days ago and for the life of me I cant find it anywhere now.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10

Aneutronic fusion puts out a lot of light as part of the reaction, and maybe if you are using a boron doped containment vessel that light may be green.



The very best aneutronic reaction USES boron. For what it's worth.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Only on this forum will the thread start on lasers mount in a C-130, and end in Fusion and the Green Lady. I love it.



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

AHh thank you for the confirmation. i recall seeing that in that montage too. good catch. Yeah we have all these neat toys...but we cant play with them yet. I want i want i want!!



posted on Sep, 18 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa
Like I said , I was following the navy program pretty closely, mainly because I am in stainless steel fabrication for a living, and I could totally have built that prototype polywell vessel in my shop.
I certain that project went black, because they had less money allocated to it than the cost of single jet engine yet had positive results, why cancel it?




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join