Military space craft.

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13
 


It is a intresting concept and one I cant beleive the US military could pass up.


It is an interesting concept that 1 believes would be an option of interest to be obtained if a certain global peace was wanted kept. Not sure if such defense craft are sanctioned in the open W/o some cosmic type permission for these type craft could enter other planetary spaces but again doubt the potential would be overlooked if opportunity existed to design such craft was granted...




posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Sandalphon
 


SPOT ON RIGHT THERE!!!



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Um? Rods from God?

And then, a set array of satellites that can focus sunlight on any target anywhere like a kid burning insects with a magnifying glass?
These satellites could do primary work as communications, optics, GPS, and other typical sat duties, but also be readily available to burn some "insects".
Benefits: No nuclear radiation. No requirement for ammunition. No missile for defense systems to target. Tanks, buildings, or whole cities simply experience a sudden 5000 degree heat wave. Poof!



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by blkcwbyhat
 


It's the X-37B, not XB-37. There's a huge difference between the two. The X-37 can't carry much of a payload, but it can service satellites already in orbit.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sandalphon
In space, every action creates and equal and opposite reaction. Ballistics in space, upon shooting a projectile, the space ship would force itself in the opposite direction. Think like a cannon on an old ship of the Earth ocean, it shoots, it rolls backwards, there is a rope tied to the ship tied to the gravity of earth to stop it -- recoil. Ballistics would force a craft out of orbit. That's why the astronauts have to velcro themselves to things when they do simple things, there is no gravity drag. Their ships have ceramic shielding on them to accept the ballistic impact of space debris, that something as small as a BB can zip through their ship walls and cause problems. It's just not worth it at the moment.

The military industrial complex is working on particle beam weapons by researching superconductors. Laser beams that can take apart atomic bonds by ripping the boson field off of them. Stuff the aliens have that can reduce a being into a pile of minerals. Ballistics is for cavemen on earth.



Wait a minute. Satellites in LEO travel around 17,500 mph to keep their orbit around the earth. your telling me that if one shoots a missile in the direction it is traveling that all the sudden it would reverse its course and go backwards? That would rip a satellite to shreds. I'm not an expert by any means and don't know too much about physics, but it seems a little extreme that a LEO satellite would change directions in the blink of an eye.

Edit: reminds me of the A-10 who can only shoot the depleted uranium shells at 3 round bursts or else the plane would stall. Big difference from 200 knots and 17,000 mph.
edit on 22-7-2013 by boomer135 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Sandalphon
 


The term is "disruptors" like us Klingons use.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by boomer135
 


The Soviets put a 23mm cannon in orbit on the Almaz "station" and fired it without any problems. The biggest drawback to it was that they had to turn the entire satellite, instead of just the gun. They fired it unmanned towards the end of the mission, because they were concerned about noise and vibration problems from it, but it worked.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 04:40 AM
link   
To clarify something that came up earlier, the US did withdraw from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, but they did not withdraw from the Outer Space Treaty. The first forbids anti-ballistic missiles as a proper defense might nullify the idea of "mutually assured destruction." I think it's a dumb treaty in the first place. The Outer Space Treaty is the one that establishes outer space law, forbidding claims of ownership and weaponization in space. The U.S. hasn't withdrawn from that one.

www.armscontrol.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

With that said, I don't doubt that the U.S. and others have thoroughly weaponized space;

www.youtube.com...

That last link is a discussion of high energy weapons by Bob Fitrakis - in my mind a genuinely respectable journalist and professor.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by boomer135

Originally posted by Sandalphon
In space, every action creates and equal and opposite reaction. Ballistics in space, upon shooting a projectile, the space ship would force itself in the opposite direction. Think like a cannon on an old ship of the Earth ocean, it shoots, it rolls backwards, there is a rope tied to the ship tied to the gravity of earth to stop it -- recoil. Ballistics would force a craft out of orbit. That's why the astronauts have to velcro themselves to things when they do simple things, there is no gravity drag. Their ships have ceramic shielding on them to accept the ballistic impact of space debris, that something as small as a BB can zip through their ship walls and cause problems. It's just not worth it at the moment.

The military industrial complex is working on particle beam weapons by researching superconductors. Laser beams that can take apart atomic bonds by ripping the boson field off of them. Stuff the aliens have that can reduce a being into a pile of minerals. Ballistics is for cavemen on earth.



Wait a minute. Satellites in LEO travel around 17,500 mph to keep their orbit around the earth. your telling me that if one shoots a missile in the direction it is traveling that all the sudden it would reverse its course and go backwards? That would rip a satellite to shreds. I'm not an expert by any means and don't know too much about physics, but it seems a little extreme that a LEO satellite would change directions in the blink of an eye.

Edit: reminds me of the A-10 who can only shoot the depleted uranium shells at 3 round bursts or else the plane would stall. Big difference from 200 knots and 17,000 mph.
edit on 22-7-2013 by boomer135 because: (no reason given)



I think he forgot about the fact that gravity is pulling the satellite down, sort of, if it's in the right orbit then the balance between pushed out of orbit and pulled down to earth are equal. Something like a bullet fired wouldnt be enough to break the balance and push it out of orbit.

Satellites have to use there thrusters to reposition and you don't see them going far off into space


As far the USAF spaceship goes I doubt it lol people think stealth can do anything and everything, but even stealth satellites can be tracked, most things in orbit can and are tracked.





new topics
top topics
 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join