usa will rule space!!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
dont forget that sub orbital craft are in development as we speak....sub orbital space bomber. that sounds nice = ) hopefully we can maintain our curent technology supiriority. we can monopolize space for our own economic juggernaut.... that is, if the US plays their cards right..... or perhaps im just a little too out of the box... = /




posted on May, 22 2004 @ 06:31 AM
link   
umm areu meaning ur tech superiority over the chinese or the iraqi's?
cause last time i checked we still had the same tech as u guys do



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 08:54 AM
link   
the x-33 could be used as a space bomber ,,,,does russia or china have anything like this in the works????



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 09:08 AM
link   
news.bbc.co.uk... here is some more info on the future space bomber..



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 11:01 AM
link   
warrants lets get some facts right
A the USAF has space bombers hell they are working on a special military shuttle craft
B china or russia dont care . china has been running thier programe for what not that long while how long has the US 40 years ?
also thats a shuttle craft not a bomber they have better designs for aircraft than that
and while we're on space topics US says its supperior to russia that why they spent millions on a pen that works in space where as the russians use ........a pencil which one is more technoligaicaly advanced =us which is smarter =russia



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Wrong Devilwasp about the pen,

"Space Pens are more dependable than lead pencils and cannot create the hazard of a broken piece of lead floating through the gravity-less atmosphere. "

www.snopes.com...

www.thewritersedge.com...

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by Laxpla]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
warrants lets get some facts right
A the USAF has space bombers hell they are working on a special military shuttle craft
B china or russia dont care . china has been running thier programe for what not that long while how long has the US 40 years ?
also thats a shuttle craft not a bomber they have better designs for aircraft than that
and while we're on space topics US says its supperior to russia that why they spent millions on a pen that works in space where as the russians use ........a pencil which one is more technoligaicaly advanced =us which is smarter =russia
devilwasp thanks for the info,,
...do china and russia have any orbital weapon plans???

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by wararts]

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by wararts]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 03:23 PM
link   
As with most military tech, the US is the first country to develope revolutionary weaponry. Russia, China, and UK will follow, but will be more or less "a step behind". Like all High tech military weapons, money plays the biggest part in what can be made, and the US has the most money............. So, yes, the US will rule space, just as it rules the modern battle field on earth - with overt dominance over all but a few other nations. It is a good thing we do this - better be the first to do something then the last. Weapons in space are inevitable - it already is the highway for the most powerfull weapons in the world (ICBMs), so why not put other weapons up there? How usefull would it be to have, say, a space based kenetic energy weapon or laser that could be fired on time critical targets such as terrorists? That is to say nothing of it's use in an all out war between the US and another nation(s).



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Colloquially called "Rods from God," this weapon would consist of orbiting platforms stocked with tungsten rods perhaps 20 feet long and one foot in diameter that could be satellite-guided to targets anywhere on Earth within minutes. Accurate within about 25 feet, they would strike at speeds upwards of 12,000 feet per second, enough to destroy even hardened bunkers several stories underground.
No explosives would be needed. The speed and weight of the rods would lend them all the force they need.


This is technically feasible, but politically difficult. Placing weapons platforms in space would cause all the usual suspects, from the angry left to our "allies" in Europe, to protest their deployment. Plus the cost would not be trivial. Each rod would weigh around 1500 lbs and each satellite would need at least 4 or 5 to be useful which means each satellite would need its own launch vehicle. And to get full coverage of the Earth from low Earth orbiting satellites requires around 50 satellites. With each launch costing around $100 million, and each satellite costing approximately the same amount, the cost of just the launches and satellites would be around $10 billion. This is just a rough estimate and it does not include design and testing of the satellites or program management of the system once it is in orbit. This would be a nice system to have, but the cost seems a little high to me.

The FALCON (an acronym for Force Application and Launch from the Continental United States) would be sent into the upper atmosphere by a boost vehicle and cruise at an altitude of 100,000 feet at speeds up to 12 times the speed of sound. The first flight demonstration is scheduled for 2006.
Besides being able to engage a target faster than conventional bombers, the FALCON would be virtually invulnerable. No fighter aircraft or anti-aircraft missile could fly as high, and at Mach 12, the FALCON could outrun antiaircraft missiles. No foreign bases would be needed because the FALCON's range and speed would allow it to be based on U.S. soil.



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:11 PM
link   
ahhhh, the good old 'rods from God'

I would think that the military would want it to be more accurate then a 25 foot radius though.

As for the FALCON - do you have a link to some good info on it by anychance?



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
ahhhh, the good old 'rods from God'

I would think that the military would want it to be more accurate then a 25 foot radius though.

As for the FALCON - do you have a link to some good info on it by anychance?

www.abovetopsecret.com... here is some falcon info from your freinds at ats enjoy!!



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:37 PM
link   
actuallly the US only seems to be inveting things for air and sub warfare
most of thier ground tech is over technoligised take the abrahms its parts cost more than the tank



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
The point to remember is Star Wars was never really canned...funding was stopped...temporarily. I say temporarily because The U.S. hunt for total dominance is unwavering...President Bush himself reaffirmed the United States stance on further space exploration in these past six months or so. Orbital stations and satellites are not out of the reach of the United States. When the Hubble Telescope was first built and sent up, it had a flaw in the lens...that flaw screwed up the Hubble and we put I dunno how many hundreds of millions into fixing it. Don't think for one minute that we are not willing to create Orbitally located/and/or controlled WMD's...in the race to make nukes, although Germany started to work on it, we perfected it and deployed two of them with extreme prejudice on Japan even after they expressed their willingness to surrender to the Potsdam Proclamation. I Don't like to say this much, but when it has to be said, it has to be said...The U.S. gets off on making examples of other people. It's in other nature...mess with the bull, you get the horns...bomb a little island off the coast of Hawaii, we muder hundreds of thousands of your people with two bombs...The U.S. is a nation of evil MacGuyver's! we can take an atom, split it and destroy nations...we did it first we did it best...and I hope everyone who reads this doesnt think im a kill happy type of guy...i hope you get the point of what im trying to say...that the U.S. WILL DO ANYTHING TO MAKE BIG BOOM COME OUT OF LITTLE BOMB FOR THE SAKE OF HAPPY BLISSFUL NATION.




Whether or not that means orbital space stations, underwater weapons Bays (Which I think are also a reality) or come what may. I don't want to hear anyone say the U.S. wont stoop to this or The U.S. bow so low or the U.S. would never this or The U.S. would never that. The philosophy of our nations military is never to engage in a fair fight if it can be helped...The U.S. military philosophy is in a nutshell to strike first, strike hard, strike best. I've heard many an enlisted man and officer alike tell me about how our nations military will never do anything even remotely resembling a fair fight if it can be helped. We like to be sneaky. When we bombed Hiroshima and nagasaki, the Japanese saw our planes they thought we were from the relief efforts...that we were gonna drop supplies. All we supplied them with is mass death in a hundred vibrant colors. The next time you think the U.S. won't do something because they go so low as russian said or because it wouldn't be a viable course of action, take a look at the picture attached and think again. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were two cities that had ONLY woman and children in it...their men were off fighting in the war. Japan knew that. We knew that also in the form of intercepted radio messages they sent to russia, urging them to tell the U.S. that they (Japan) was willing to surrender. When is the mass murder of innocent women and choldren ever a viable course of action? But the U.S. still did it. The U.S. will put weapons in space, underwater, launch ICBM's...hell, they'll even sprinkle fairy dust on the enemy if they knew it would kill them quick and with minimal engagement! Take a look at the picture...is that a picture that tells you The U.S. has a can't do or won't do attitude...I don't think so.



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
[Edited on 22-5-2004 by Hard Red]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 05:00 PM
link   
"I would think that the military would want it to be more accurate then a 25 foot radius though." thats plenty accurate considering the blast radius of their bombs are around 900 ft!

i read an article in popular mechanics about gyro planes....they can lift 2,000,000lb, just think of the military aplications! they could drop an entire army onto a country. space bombers could bomb the country then a half dozen gyro planes come through and drop thousands of troops and tanks! for the invasion...they are making it just too easy for us.....




posted on May, 22 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Kogi, such is the nature of The U.S. The quickest and most impactful resolution of the problem is our way and to hell with fair fights, come what may. The F-22 Raptor is such an example...it is the only fighter in existence that can fire its missles from more than 300 miles away through the use of such helpful aids as AWACS of FLIR...the enemy never even sees the jet...just the missle...and sometimes not even that!






posted on May, 22 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   
hard red,,thanks for the post..very informative and fun to read,,,

kogigaiden,,wow im going to have to look into them planes,,thank you all for posting.

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by wararts]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 06:11 PM
link   
just wonderin why does america do all this?
and some 1 please change the title!



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 07:00 PM
link   
devilwasp,everybody that has power abuses it..as far as the title? what should it be??

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by wararts]

[Edited on 22-5-2004 by wararts]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 07:04 PM
link   
the name of the post is what the name of the post is...dont check it out if it doesnt agree with you...leave it the way it is i say...let the authors stick to their true vision of what they want the thread to be





top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join