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 Future Of War

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   


[edit on 5-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]

[edit on 5-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]

[edit on 5-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]

Mod Edit: Fixed ALL CAPS TITLE

[edit on 8/5/06 by FredT]




posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   
I think your idea is reasonably probable, except I think it will be less erliant on undercover personnel.

I do have some questions:


  1. Have your laser powered egines even been tested/prototyped/proven?
  2. Arent there easier ways to heat the air in the tube?
  3. Why do the UAVs have nodes for light to enter and exit?



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I realize it’s a pretty #ty drawing but what do any of you think about the concept. No conventional ground forces.......any thoughts



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
I think your idea is reasonably probable, except I think it will be less erliant on undercover personnel.

I do have some questions:


  1. Have your laser powered egines even been tested/prototyped/proven?
  2. Arent there easier ways to heat the air in the tube?
  3. Why do the UAVs have nodes for light to enter and exit?



1. Yes ill pull up a link from howstuff works or something. science.howstuffworks.com...
2. Yes, but with my way there is an unlimited amount of fule in a sence.
3. Point defence and shooting the beam at friendly crafts to keep them aloft.

[edit on 5-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]

[edit on 5-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_DARK_KNIGHT
1. Yes ill pull up a link from howstuff works or something. science.howstuffworks.com...

The link details laser propulsion but in a completely different form to what you described.


Originally posted by THE_DARK_KNIGHT
2. Yes, but with my way there is an unlimited amount of fule in a sence.

Thats not true ... you still need energy to create the Laser beam and to get that energy you need fuel.


Originally posted by THE_DARK_KNIGHT
3. Point defence and shooting the beam at friendly crafts to keep them aloft.

I dont really know what you mean



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
The link details laser propulsion but in a completely different form to what you described.

Thats not true ... you still need energy to create the Laser beam and to get that energy you need fuel.


Princess, do you really think that the propulsion won't work?

Nuclear power.

To attack and to redirect the beam at friendly crafts to keep them flying.

[edit on 8/5/06 by FredT]



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Princess??

Its not that Im saying the propulsion wont work, but apparently it hasnt been tested in any form. Can you really base your vision of the future on an unproven technology that you have just come up with?

Nuclear power still requires fuel.

"redirect the beam at friendly crafts to keep them flying". All youev done is repeat yourself and I still dont understand how having effectively a window on the UAV will keep it flying. You cant create laser light from normal light if thats what you are implying.



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
Princess??

Its not that I’m saying the propulsion won’t work, but apparently it hasn’t been tested in any form. Can you really base your vision of the future on an unproven technology that you have just come up with?



Ok, this is sketchy I admit. I'm not an expert on mirrors so I don't know if this would work or just end up melting the mirrors but I was hoping that the nodes could redirect the laser toward a friendly craft as to propel that craft too.

It's a theory not a government report on what the future will bring. I just wanted to see peoples views on it.

But, thanks for the replies.

Mod edit: Trimmed down big quote. Please read your u2u messages located in the upper right corner of your screen

[edit on 8/5/06 by FredT]



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Nice ideas, however, your forgetting the reason there are military officers.....to manage people...regardless of UAVs, smart weapons the lot, you cannot beat on the ground intelligence, work and effort.

With you way of things, the USAF and RAF and the other airforces of the world would need very very little manpower. I do not see those in power allowing that to happen, nor should it.

Good concept mind, it will not happen though imo.

Cheers

CodexK



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   
It's a nice drawing, but I don't think you understand exactly what the Light Propulsion systems will be used for. They are an unproven technology too, so far, from what I understand, it's just a theory and it MIGHT work.

Where are all the ground troops?

And I saw your bit about nuclear power... How are you going to fit a nuclear power plant, and it's fuel into a UAV? And you said nothing about UCAVs, and UAVs have no battle ability. You might want to fix that little error.

I still don't see how you can only use UCAVs/UAVs that are nuclear powered and a spotter to fully combat an enemy, the Air Force is only one part of a war, there are many things in a theatre of combat that need to come together precisely in order for a true modern military to take control and come out on top.

I believe that your UAVs are pure fantasy, as the space required for everything you have mentioned would be astronomical, and this job can be done much better coordinated with a simple AWACS and some strike squadrons and some ground troops, you can't win a ground war without ground troops, and last time I checked, all wars seem to take place on the ground.

Now I'm just being anal and touching up on alot of technical details, but don't get me wrong, I totally understand exactly how you're thinking, and at first it seems like a good idea, but if you think further into it, and the different components of it, then you begin to realize exactly where and why this will go wrong.

A few things to ponder, maybe you can come up with a revised version of your strategy, only less dependent on UAVs, and a technology which is still in the concept stage.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 08:59 PM
link   
THE_DARK_KNIGHT your getting a WAB for effort


You have voted THE_DARK_KNIGHT for the Way Above Top Secret award.



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
THE_DARK_KNIGHT your getting a WAB for effort


You have voted THE_DARK_KNIGHT for the Way Above Top Secret award.


Thanks man. I appreciate it.



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
It's a nice drawing, but I don't think you understand exactly what the Light Propulsion systems will be used for. They are an unproven technology too, so far, from what I understand, it's just a theory and it MIGHT work.

Where are all the ground troops?

And I saw your bit about nuclear power... How are you going to fit a nuclear power plant, and it's fuel into a UAV? And you said nothing about UCAVs, and UAVs have no battle ability. You might want to fix that little error.

and a spotter to fully combat an enemy, the Air Force is only one part of a war, there are many things in a theatre of combat that need to come together precisely in order for a true modern military to take control and come out on top.

I believe that your UAVs are pure fantasy, as the space required for everything you have mentioned would be astronomical, and this job can be done much better coordinated with a simple AWACS and some strike squadrons and some ground troops, you can't win a ground war without ground troops, and last time I checked, all wars seem to take place on the ground.

Now I'm just being anal and touching up on alot of technical details, but don't get me wrong, I totally understand exactly how you're thinking, and at first it seems like a good idea, but if you think further into it, and the different components of it, then you begin to realize exactly where and why this will go wrong.

A few things to ponder, maybe you can come up with a revised version of your strategy, only less dependent on UAVs, and a technology which is still in the concept stage.

Shattered OUT...

You asked how my UAVs would use nuclear power. I don't think you understand. A nuclear power plant is used as a power source for a main laser which fires a beam which in turn powers a UAV through light propulsion.

Also light propulsion has been used in air craft by NASA. Ill find a link.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 06:48 AM
link   
OK ... so you are going to build a nuclear power plant on every battle field??


That is just totally impractical and why does it have to be nuclear power? Because it is relatively new tech?

Quick lets go to Iraq ... build a new nuclear power plant ... then we can go to WAR!!

Secondly I dont think your idea of firing a laser at a craft to power it would ever work. Your idea of a laser engine has never been flown or tested. It would require a VERY accurate, mobile and fast reacting laser on the ground and optics inside the UCAV which Im not even sure are possible.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Actually, I was thinking of building the powerplant into a boat. Like an aircraft carrier. It's your choice to believe that my engine would not work. But well see what the future holds.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
OK ... so you are going to build a nuclear power plant on every battle field??


That is just totally impractical and why does it have to be nuclear power? Because it is relatively new tech?

Quick lets go to Iraq ... build a new nuclear power plant ... then we can go to WAR!!

Secondly I dont think your idea of firing a laser at a craft to power it would ever work. Your idea of a laser engine has never been flown or tested. It would require a VERY accurate, mobile and fast reacting laser on the ground and optics inside the UCAV which Im not even sure are possible.



So you think my tech wouldn't work www.spaceref.com...

[edit on 6-8-2006 by THE_DARK_KNIGHT]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   
OK for the third time now ... you are just quoting sources that use a laser to power an aircraft, but in a totally different way to your idea of a laser powered engine. They dont prove that your idea will work because they are two different ways of using the same tehcnology. Its like comparing an ocean-going ship thats blown by the wind to a flying jet engine, just because moving air is integral to both designs!

Also if you are using the above link to show that a ground based laser could be shone onto a flying plane to keep it aloft, you are again comparing two different ideas. The NASA plane in the link is powered by an electric engine which runs off electricity generated by large solar power panels. Your engine works on a laser shone into a hole in the planes fuselage which is then focused onto the right part of an "engine" which warms the air and provides thrust. The only thing common to both is the use of a laser.

Oh and yes, I dont believe your idea would work!

[edit on 6/8/06 by gfad]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I may be misunderstanding the science, but what happend when the UCAV goes beyond the "line of sight" with the powerstation? As far as I know cannot go around corners (i.e. over the horizon).

Also, what happens when atmospheric conditions diffuse the light?

Just curious

Regards



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Even if you solved all the other issues, the efficiency would be terrible.

Lasers are notoriously inefficient and cranky. Say you got 20% optical power output, which would be a feat, then you have to radiate it up to the UAV, losing power all the way due to the inverse square rule, then you have to reconvert it to heat, etc.

By the time you're finished, there's not much left.

Why not just put JP8 in the UAVs? A turbine is way more efficient.

Not to mention the sad part where if your lasers or reactor are damaged, all your craft hit the ground. You've got one huge totally critical single point of failure.

Next, clouds, rain, fog, smoke. Nuff said.

Finally, you would most likely have to focus multiple lasers on any UAV so as to keep the power density below a critical level coming out of your ground lasers. You see, the atmosphere also absorbs laser energy. That depends on the laser frequency, the air pressure, humidity, etc but it absorbs some no matter what.

If that power density exceeds a critical factor based on these variables, whoops! You get a plasma flare. Now the air "burns" in the beam path, and that's it for the beam. All the laser power now goes into causing a big honkin' inverse Bremsstrahlung plasma bloom right at your laser optics, bang! Your mirror is toast, down goes the laser, no more UAV.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Excellent critique TomBedlam.

I know from using a laboratory grade laser at uni just how hot they get ie. inefficient.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join