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.

 

Future weapons tv show

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Hey folks,
has anyone heard of this show starting on discovery channel jan 15th at 9pm. looks to be a fairly decent show. It will be interesting to see what new weapons will be shown, along side the ones that you see on the site.

Future Weapons on Discovery Channel




posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Yes, I have seen the previews for it, and am honestly anticipating
seeing it.

I liked the first season, so I figure this season will be just as good,
if not better.



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Yeah, I've watched the show a few times. He gets to have all the fun.

Cool show.


Roper



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 09:43 PM
link   
I'm sure they're not going to show off any of the really good stuff... it's all top secret. There's always something to hide so I'm not sure I even trust that what they're showing us is even real stuff.



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by annestacey
I'm sure they're not going to show off any of the really good stuff... it's all top secret. There's always something to hide so I'm not sure I even trust that what they're showing us is even real stuff.


Well that wasn't really necessary, watch the first season and ask if what is portrayed isn't real. You can google similar videos for 60 percent of what is shown in the episodes. It's a great show and I am definitely curious what season 2 presents.



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Incredibly Boring.

The Bald Headed Homosexual Stereotype 'SEAL' does damn near nothin' to justify his own narrative presence as a function of showing HIS understanding of the employment realities (tactical scenarios) of these weapons in a combined arms fashion, spending 10 minutes chatting up what could be said in two.

'And another ten minutes worth of commercials later' they show a guided MLRS projectile plow into a bunker or airburst over a howitzer target with typical slow-and-stuttery testrange imagery that is often the _very_ same as the preview glimpse you saw at the start of the show.

And vastly less interesting and explanatory than the CGI they used in the middle.

The sadness being that these are not so much future weapons as immediate QRC answers to a losing war in Iraq which will soon be over, leaving the military to return to 'winning the top ten percent of high intensity wars' that they feel necessary and competent to sport-war competing in with other 'big players'.

It would be NICE if they showed the alternatives, the costs per round and the countermeasure likelihoods from a real world deployment and force integration perspective.

Preferrably within a single episode as service/mission role. They then could take several episodes (armor, robots, RT, ATGW) and integrate them as a final presentation 'hypothetical' **FUTURE WAR** environment.

Repeating as necessary with aerospace, naval and marine units until eventually, at the end of the season, they had shown how a full campaign would play out. What we suspected of the opfors response and how we would be _vulnerable_ as well as dominating in certain areas (you might even consider 'by country' or 'by region' reviews of the opfor status just t break up the monotony of U.S. superweapon X crap).

Instead, they come across as an ultra-dry propogandistic advertisement for Lockheed Martin or Raytheon and particularly for those of us who have already read the bloody brochure, it frankly gets OLD, real quick.


KPl.



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 06:46 AM
link   
ch1466, you must have had a competing show and got beat out of the market.

It's still a cool show because we get to see stuff that we didn't know was out there.

Did y'all see the shock wave off those air burst? Awesome!!

Roper



posted on Jan, 16 2007 @ 12:37 PM
link   
This is a good show because they show stuff being blown to bits!
Also it shows "new" weaponry from many parts of the world, and it could be that they only show things they want you to see a sort of disinformation or propaganda driven leak. But if you are interested in newer technologies and explosions it is worth listening thru the crap.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Oh
, another 50 lb man portable crew served weapon. Just what the poor bloody infantryman wants - on top of the 120 - 160 lbs worth of kit he usually carries!

Who the
thinks up these ridiculous weapons? What's wrong with the current 40 milly automatic grenade launchers and associated weapon systems?

Is this yet another example of the tail wagging the dog and industry forcing changes it wants on a military that spends billions of dollars, so they can reap the financial whirlwind?

Is this family of weapons something that the US armed forces desperately needs?



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   
great show, just watched it for the first time this week, it makes my imagination run wild thinking about those being used that are top secret


Personal favorites: the land mine dentonation digger

[edit on 17-1-2007 by Eden]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Fritz, it's a crew served weapon, which means at a minimum two operators, it is not an individual carry on, I'd even be surprised if it's fielded in squad size units. For field use at least, it's meant for larger forces because it offers heavy, long range, suppressing fire. However it will primarily be mounted, APC's, light trucks (HUMVEES), buildings etc...


ape

posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
im pretty sure the future weapons show was salvaged from the military channel ( a sister channel of discovery ), they were playing all of the previous episodes on discovery getting geared up for the discovery premiere which will do awesome.

I have dish network and noticed the future weapons program when they were advertising the military channel ( which costs money to add on ) and saw they showed cool stuff like the NLOS cannon and metal storm among others. it should do great.

[edit on 17-1-2007 by ape]



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ch1466

The Bald Headed Homosexual Stereotype 'SEAL' does damn near nothin'


SEALs are stereoptypically bald and gay??

Oh well, your posts are nothing if not consistent.



posted on Jan, 17 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ch1466

It would be NICE if they showed the alternatives, the costs per round and the countermeasure likelihoods from a real world deployment and force integration perspective.

Preferrably within a single episode as service/mission role. They then could take several episodes (armor, robots, RT, ATGW) and integrate them as a final presentation 'hypothetical' **FUTURE WAR** environment.
KPl.

While you have an excellent idea, most TV producers are going to be using stock footage provided by the manufacturer to cut costs, have some androgenous hunky stud as the host and plenty of fantasy X weapon fluff talk with which to mesmerize an audience of Jerry Springer, Muary Povitch, Ellen watchers - to glean all the ratings they can.

They really don't care about specifics and countermeasures, etc. as most in this forum would be interested in.

When I was at RayCo I had to deal with a couple of TV producers suffering from "recto-cranial inversion" - the last thing they were interested in was (as you say) "critical thought".

They wanted "all flash and no trash" as one guy from NY told me... "flash" (sensationalism) is money in the bank and critical thought is trash to them.

Critical thought has no sensationalism which ='s no ratings, which ='s no sponsorship, which ='s no money for the executive producers, which ='s "ain't gonna happen".

Too bad though, because although I did not see the show in question, your idea sound truly intriguing.



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Fritz, it's a crew served weapon, which means at a minimum two operators, it is not an individual carry on, I'd even be surprised if it's fielded in squad size units. For field use at least, it's meant for larger forces because it offers heavy, long range, suppressing fire. However it will primarily be mounted, APC's, light trucks (HUMVEES), buildings etc...


Westy old chap, I have lugged around crew served weapons - Charlie 'G', Milan ATGW, 81 mm Mortar - so please don't assume that I have no knowledge of this type of weapon, how it is deployed or the type of vehicle it can be mounted on/in.

It always comes down to the P.B.I - the modern battlefield's donkey. He or she always has to carry everything on his or her back. Period.

The average weight that a British infantryman carries is between 120 - 160 lbs depending on role, specialist equipment and equipment to task.

However, whilst this particular weapon may initially be mounted in a vehicle, at the end of the day, it will at some stage be dismounted. This is where the so called man portable theory comes in. [A theory I might add, that was dreamed up by faceless morons who have never lugged anything heavier than a cup of tea or coffee across an office and almost certainly not on a battlefield]

Your assumption that the XM307 will not be deployed at section or troop level but as a company support weapon, does little to reassure me that some P.B.I will not land up having to lugg this monster around the battlefield.




top topics



 
0

log in

join