Customer Discussions > Science Fiction forum

The Real Upcoming Space Wars?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 701-725 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 24, 2011 7:22:58 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 24, 2011 7:24:21 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"China has also successfully attacked an orbital satellite, demonstrating capabilities that even the other super-powers (like the U.S. and Russia) currently lack."

The USA has demonstrated several ASAT weapons, as has Russia. In 1985 the US shot down one of its own satellites using an ASM-135 ASAT anti-satellite missile, and in 2008 also destroyed its own malfunctioning spy satellite using a RIM-161 Standard Missile 3. India is also developing its own capability.

Posted on Nov 24, 2011 6:16:40 PM PST
so it's pretty much up in the air as to who has the upper hand, but how long can we go before some one decides to assert their supremacy.

Posted on Dec 5, 2011 8:58:36 AM PST
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/12/carbon-nanotube-coating-would-allow.html#more

CARBON NANOTUBE COATING ON PLANES WOULD ABSORB RADAR
Making the plane undetectable by radar. Expensive stealth planes already have this capability, but a simple coating would allow more planes to be "invisible" to radar.

Posted on Dec 5, 2011 2:03:43 PM PST
Actually, I like this one->
http://gizmodo.com/5864987/those-crazy-russians-use-retrorockets-to-slow-down-tanks-dropped-from-planes?autoplay

It reminds me of the Tank drop scene in the remake of the A-Team.

Posted on Dec 29, 2011 10:00:06 PM PST
For lack of a better thread to put this, I'm putting it here as it kind of fits. It is sort of a history of the world (constant fighting) in stop-motion with some sci-fi and aliens thrown in. It's kind of fun and a catchy tune. 3-1/2 minutes long. I hope you get a kick out of it.

"Thick as Thieves"
http://player.vimeo.com/video/23986237?autoplay=1

Posted on Jan 6, 2012 10:44:27 AM PST
"The next battlefield will be in space." Russian General

http://io9.com/5873447/the-future-of-the-us-military-drones-computer-viruses-and-outer-space?tag=space
THE FUTURE OF THE US MILITARY: Drones, Computer Viruses, and Outer Space

http://io9.com/5873641/usaf-military-shuttle-is-chasing-chinas-space-station-in-orbit?tag=space
IS USAF MILITARY SHUTTLE CHASING CHINA'S SPACE STATION IN ORBIT?

One provision in the just released Defense Budget, is to get out of the MidEast and Europe. So what to make of this?

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/jpost-several-thousand-us-troops-to-israel-for-unprecedented-joint-missile-defense-exercise.html
THOUSANDS OF US TROOPS DEPLOYED TO ISRAEL
Supposed to be just a "joint military exercise". But we are also going to establish Command Posts in Israel and Germany. The Yo-yo Principle: Pull troops out of Iraq to great fanfare - then turn around and quietly send them back.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 6, 2012 11:07:10 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"IS USAF MILITARY SHUTTLE CHASING CHINA'S SPACE STATION IN ORBIT?"

No.

USA-226 launched March 5 2011.

Tiangong 1 launched September 29, 2011.

Posted on Jan 17, 2012 9:54:21 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 17, 2012 9:56:12 AM PST
http://www.complex.com/rides/2012/01/gallery-25-crazy-vehicles-the-military-wont-let-us-have?nocache=1#19

COOL HYBRID HOVERCRAFT!
Thanks again, "Star Wars".

(This is from a gallery of 25 military war vehicles. Since we are relying more on drones these days, I doubt most of these ground vehicles got beyond prototype stage.)

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 17, 2012 12:05:31 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 17, 2012 12:07:57 PM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"COOL HYBRID HOVERCRAFT!"

Nyet, a ground effect vehicle.

What an old fashioned machine. Why is it so small?

"Thanks again, "Star Wars"."

Nyet, USSR.

In Russia, they have had much much larger ekranoplans for decades such as the Caspian Sea Monster.

The Lun-class ekranoplan ground effect vehicle was in service in the 80s and was equipped for anti-submarine warfare, armed with missiles. It was as large as a jumbo jet, and... the Russians are building them again.

There's an sf nuclear powered version in Stross' chilling Missile Gap (reprinted in Wireless), commanded by Yuri Gagarin on a mission to cross the ocean surrounding the transplanted Earth, to seek out new worlds and new life forms and offer them fraternal communist association... It's a bleak tale (and not for the reasons you might think) and well worth reading.

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 10:46:46 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 19, 2012 10:58:45 AM PST
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/social-radar-sees-minds/
AIR FORCE CHIEF SCIENTIST WANTS 'SOCIAL RADAR'
Or sensors to peer into minds to predict future wars.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/18/us-space-debris-idUSTRE80H02E20120118
(CORRECTED URL)
U.S. NEGOTIATING NEW OUTER SPACE CODE
We refuse to sign the European Union draft, that would impinge on our military's use of space. But the "cover story" is that they're all arguing about Space Debris ...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 11:06:07 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"But the "cover story" is that they're all arguing about Space Debris ..."

It's hardly a cover story, but an actual objective, as it wouldn't be hard for an orbital cascade to severely damage global use of low Earth orbit, the Kessler syndrome, which could render space exploration, and even the use of satellites, unfeasible for decades. Anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) testing poses a very real risk to the exploitation of space, both manned and unmanned.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 19, 2012 12:16:26 PM PST
TO: Marilyn Martin

RE: "Since we are relying more on drones these days..."

Drones didn't get Osama Bin Laden. As long as human beings engage in warfare, there will always be a need to have "boots on the ground". They might be as technologically enhanced as were the cap troopers in Robert A. Heinlein's classic novel "Starship Troopers", but they will still be "the poor bloody infantry".

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 9:12:48 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 10:06:08 AM PST
Walter -

"As long as human beings engage in warfare, there will always be a need to have "boots on the ground"."

Quite true. But the American public has become increasingly unhappy with human casualties in distant countries as we play 'global-policemen', where our "true motives" are a little muddied.

Even a recent poll found that only 35% of the American public are in favor of getting involved against Iran, if that blows up into another war.

So unmanned drones may be the best option, to participate in combat without human casualties. And drones are becoming more sophisticated all the time. They are even working now on drones with biometric capabilities, where they can recognize and track a terrorist's face, even in and out of buildings and in crowds.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 9:41:35 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 9:46:30 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"They are even working now on drones with biometric capabilities, where they can recognize and track a terrorist's face, even in and out of buildings and in crowds."

Fortunately, terrorists are unlikely to ever utilise hi-tech occlusion techniques to counter biometric surveillance such as hats, keffiyeh, turbans, fake beards, wigs, masks, sunglasses...

"So unmanned drones may be the best option, to participate in combat without human casualties."

There will doubtless be "human casualties", both intended, and collateral.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/collateral-damage-us-drone-attacks-fighting-terrorist-pakistan-cost-of-war-politics-14893810

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 10:15:12 AM PST
TO: Marilyn Martin

RE: "And drones are becoming more sophisticated all the time."

Please...don't become enamored with the hype of "sophisticated biometric capabilities". Even if robot soldiers are developed that are fully humanoid in form and function and with autonomous functionality (a.k.a. "terminators"), human infantrymen will always be easier and cheaper to "produce" (the old fashioned way). I will admit, however, that a hunter/killer robot would be easier and cheaper to "train". After all, once a successful program (probably a series of programs) has been written and validated, thousands of copies can be made and downloaded into thousands of units. The software development costs can thus be amortized over the entire production run.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 10:34:09 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
Walter,

"After all, once a successful program (probably a series of programs) has been written and validated, thousands of copies can be made and downloaded into thousands of units. The software development costs can thus be amortized over the entire production run."

Software costs are only a tiny fraction of the production costs. Drones, whether the "terminators" of Hollywood fantasy, or more realistic configurations will require expensive hardware for the servos, sensors, power packs etc.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 11:05:04 AM PST
I wasn't talking about human-drones, like the fictional Terminator. I meant that they are working on biometric software for flying drones. It would mostly be for surveillance and intelligence gathering. But if the biometrics could be combined with armed drones (also in the super-secret stage of development), you could have surgical-strike kills with little or no collateral damage.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 11:10:08 AM PST
chas says:
Ok, I'm curious, if it's "super-secret" how is it that you have such assured knowledge of it?

And the levels of clearance go like this: confidential, secret, & top secret. There is no "super secret". For instance, I personally have held a presidential-level top secret clearance for my work in the military.

What are your credentials that allow you to have this inside information, Marilyn?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 11:46:48 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 11:59:48 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"I meant that they are working on biometric software for flying drones. It would mostly be for surveillance and intelligence gathering. But if the biometrics could be combined with armed drones (also in the super-secret stage of development), you could have surgical-strike kills with little or no collateral damage."

For one, these 'speculations' are widely available on the web, and secondly, "surgical-strikes" with "little or no collateral damage" are highly improbable, because even with "biometric software", target identification is rarely error free, especially as the effectiveness of biometric surveillance in the real world can be reduced using relatively low tech methods; more expensive surveillance counter-measures are also practical.

Even highly precise precision-guided munitions only reduce the probability of collateral damage. The Fast Assessment Strike Tool -Collateral Damage protocol doesn't remove such damage, and its failures are due to erroneous target identification or weapon malfunction.

Armed drones have been deployed for some time; whilst they've enjoyed some successes, they've also suffered significant failures and ranked up worrying levels of collateral damage.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 12:47:31 PM PST
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-09/army-wants-drones-can-recognize-your-face-and-read-your-mind

ARMY WANTS DRONES THAT CAN RECOGNIZE YOUR FACE AND READ YOUR MIND

Also, DARPA is working on mini-drones, although I naturally couldn't locate anything on individual-lethality.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 12:48:54 PM PST
Ronald Craig says:
"What are your credentials that allow you to have this inside information, Marilyn?"

Supposedly she used to be a WAC.

Now we just drop the indefinite article and capitalization and suffix a K. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 12:50:09 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 12:50:37 PM PST
Ronald Craig says:
"individual-lethality"

Nice one! You've just out-word-coined yourself! Have you considered writing for a living? :D

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 1:06:21 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 1:08:12 PM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"Also, DARPA is working on mini-drones, although I naturally couldn't locate anything on individual-lethality."

The term does not refer to the capability to kill a specific individual, but the kill capability of an individual weapon system.

For instance many of the older and/or cheaper SAM systems available to many nations have a relatively low "individual-lethality" but can reduce the effectiveness of attacking aircraft by forcing them to keep to a greater stand-off range, or force them to adopt a reduced attack profile; even if one such system has a low kill probability, several combined have a cumulative kill probability.

Posted on Jan 20, 2012 1:13:40 PM PST
Hey RC -

Negative, vengeful, ridiculing cyber-parasite - Have you ever considered becoming a teacher? Kids just thrive on abuse, you know.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 1:24:22 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 20, 2012 1:26:26 PM PST
Ronald Craig says:
LOL. Aw, Marilyn, is that the best you can do as comeback? (ComeBack? Come-back?)

(Edit: And just to be clear, I meant "comeback" in the sense of "witty retort". You've never actually been anything before to make the other meaning plausible. LOL)
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science Fiction forum
Participants:  57
Total posts:  1114
Initial post:  Oct 8, 2009
Latest post:  Nov 5, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 8 customers

Search Customer Discussions