Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 53 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 49 guests


Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

One for D_hall to play with ??

All non-spudgun related discussion goes here such as projects, theories, serious questions, etc. All "off-topic" posts (aka useless posting, determined by moderators) will be removed.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

One for D_hall to play with ??

Unread postAuthor: evilvet » Sun Nov 20, 2011 12:51 am

http://www.theage.com.au/world/america- ... 1nofy.html

As long as someone can work out how to prevent an invalid ICBM launch detection it would seem to be quite a toy. I presume a warhead in the 500lb range given what the Minuteman III can carry ?

500lb delivered with CEP of maybe 50m after 5000km flight would be like having a virtual carrier battle group anywhere in the world at all times. Not a good look if you are DPRK or Iran.
  • 0

User avatar
evilvet
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 2:48 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Sun Nov 20, 2011 5:06 am

Travelling that fast, does it need a warhead?

The Navy's railgun developments are planned to use kinetic energy along.

In order to kill area targets, it could have a warhead of separate projectiles that would be the equivalent of a modern day shrapnel shell, maybe using something similar to these babies from theCBU-107... or zoom up and launch 5 x 100lb "tactical" rods from god :D
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: evilvet » Sun Nov 20, 2011 3:17 pm

rods from god


The idea of dispatching your enemy by hitting him with a tungsten telephone pole moving at 3000 m/sec lacks the whole "kabooom" bit that you need to get airtime on Al Jazeera :)
  • 0

User avatar
evilvet
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 2:48 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Sun Nov 20, 2011 5:15 pm

The idea of dispatching your enemy by hitting him with a tungsten telephone pole moving at 3000 m/sec lacks the whole "kabooom" bit


Except for the part where the rod is actually moving at ~8000 m/s, has ~40 times the volumetric energy density of the best current high explosives, and releases a good chunk of that energy on impact...

Also "five times the speed of sound", while likely not an accurate figure, is vastly slower than what one would expect from something in the general ICBM format. This is probably more along the lines of a scramjet cruise missile.
  • 0

Spudfiles' resident expert on all things that sail through the air at improbable speeds, trailing an incandescent wake of ionized air, dissociated polymers and metal oxides.
User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Unread postAuthor: evilvet » Sun Nov 20, 2011 5:46 pm

and releases a good chunk of that energy on impact...


Fair point :oops:
  • 0

User avatar
evilvet
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 2:48 am
Reputation: 0

Re: One for D_hall to play with ??

Unread postAuthor: D_Hall » Sun Nov 20, 2011 6:37 pm

evilvet wrote:As long as someone can work out how to prevent an invalid ICBM launch detection it would seem to be quite a toy.

Which - when you get right down to it - is the only purpose for a toy like this. ICBMs can do the same job better, faster, and cheaper. But ICBM launches make some folks very nervous....

...So we're stuck with the question: How do you reach out and touch somebody WITHOUT somebody mistaking it for a nuke launch?

Answer: Develop a very different weapon (ie, won't be mistaken for an ICBM) and keep nuclear warheads as far from that new weapon as possible. That way, when OtherPeople see the launch they'll know both by the launch location and the trajectory that it is NOT a nuclear weapon. Note that for this approach to work, you'll probably have to allow the OtherPeople to inspect the new weapons in their silos (or however they're stored/launched).
  • 0

Simulation geek (GGDT / HGDT) and designer of Vera.
User avatar
D_Hall
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: SoCal
Reputation: 6

Unread postAuthor: evilvet » Sun Nov 20, 2011 7:22 pm

@DYI

You know how to work the numbers on this sort of thing, are we talking kiloton ranges ?
  • 0

User avatar
evilvet
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 2:48 am
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:36 pm

But ICBM launches make some folks very nervous....
even tomahawk missiles can have nuclear warheads

so while I get the idea and all I don't think this is going to work the way you explained

besides I suspect that as soon this is ready the chinease will show their own version - 5 times cheaper, better and in greater numbers
[/making fun of f22]

:D
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: D_Hall » Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:28 pm

POLAND_SPUD wrote:even tomahawk missiles can have nuclear warheads

Sure, but it's never going to be mistaken for an ICBM launch which means the opposition has a lot more time to think about it. Also, it's comparatively short range means that you're not likely to be overflying...say...Russia on your way to Iran.

so while I get the idea and all I don't think this is going to work the way you explained

You are aware that for the past 15+ years Russians have been allowed to inspect our ICBMs, SLBMs, and nuclear-capable bombers, right? There absolutely is precedent for such arrangements.
  • 0

Simulation geek (GGDT / HGDT) and designer of Vera.
User avatar
D_Hall
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:37 pm
Location: SoCal
Reputation: 6

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:03 am

POLAND_SPUD wrote:besides I suspect that as soon this is ready the chinease will show their own version - 5 times cheaper, better and in greater numbers [/making fun of f22]


If you mean the Chengdu J-20 it doesn't seem that impressive at this point.

This seems like a more viable competitor.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:08 am

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:This seems like a more viable competitor.
Damn, they're cheap too!
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:23 am

MrCrowley wrote:Damn, they're cheap too!


You can get three for the cost of one F-22 ;)
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Mon Nov 21, 2011 7:00 am

You are aware that for the past 15+ years Russians have been allowed to inspect our ICBMs, SLBMs, and nuclear-capable bombers, right? There absolutely is precedent for such arrangements.
but not the chinease

If you mean the Chengdu J-20 it doesn't seem that impressive at this point
PAK_FA would be my choice too as the russians have more experience...

though on the other hand the chinease have proven to be very resourceful (and secretive so I am not sure if j-20 is just a technology demostrator as some ppl claim or not)
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:45 am

POLAND_SPUD wrote:though on the other hand the chinease have proven to be very resourceful (and secretive so I am not sure if j-20 is just a technology demostrator as some ppl claim or not)


It doesn't make sense to be 100% secretive with this sort of technology.

Unless you're planning to launch a global sneak attack - very unlikely - you want your rivals to maybe not know exactly how your technology works, but to know that you have it, available for use.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:01 pm

It doesn't make sense to be 100% secretive with this sort of technology.
well not if you're planning to offer them for export but if you're developing technology there is no need to post youtube vids of tests you know...

Sure, today we can watch documentaries on sr71 on Discovery... but it wasn't the same back when it was being developed
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Next

Return to Non-Spudgun Related Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'