US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Bernard
Junior Member
Saw this on
I don't understand why they don't just build stationary posts to form a jamming bubble around all strategically "known" GSC bases. Pair them with drone "net"/( or more lethal(sentry guns think land CIWS)) weapons to take down any and all unidentified drones, small 1 manned aircraft, trying to make it's way onto or around important bases. Me thinks it would be cheaper than a drone. Unless they really want the drone for forward military bases, White House, etc.
The website didn't link it to anything so I couldn't find the full article or anything on google but I'm interested in this kind of cool stuff so I posted it anyways
*EDIT* Found this later on in an article of something I was thinking of
I don't understand why they don't just build stationary posts to form a jamming bubble around all strategically "known" GSC bases. Pair them with drone "net"/( or more lethal(sentry guns think land CIWS)) weapons to take down any and all unidentified drones, small 1 manned aircraft, trying to make it's way onto or around important bases. Me thinks it would be cheaper than a drone. Unless they really want the drone for forward military bases, White House, etc.
by the USAF’s Global Strike Command for a small UAV capable of defeating small commercial drones with electric jamming. The winner must weigh not more than 2.72kg and carry an on board jammer that operates on 433MHz, 915MHz, 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz. It must also be able to disrupt GPS L1 and GLONASS L1 signals. 38 anti-drone systems are being requested, and will be distributed across eight Global Strike Command bases, including Barksdale, Dyess, Ellsworth, FE Warren, Kirtland, Malmstrom, Minot and Whiteman, housing the USAF’s strategic bomber fleet and managing intercontinental ballistic missiles.
The website didn't link it to anything so I couldn't find the full article or anything on google but I'm interested in this kind of cool stuff so I posted it anyways
*EDIT* Found this later on in an article of something I was thinking of
Last edited:
Brumby
Major
There is a 1972 at sea agreement between the US and the Soviet union to avoid incidents that might result in escalatory actions. In other words, there are limits to acceptable behaviour and the recent incident just crossed that line. The 1972 agreement includes "not simulating attacks at, launching objects toward, or illuminating the bridges of the other party's ships;"
In my view the US in its diplomatic protest should remind the Russians that it considers the 1972 agreement as still current and binding even if that agreement was made with the Soviet Union. It puts the Russian on notice because if the Russians continue to behave outside that agreement then any consequence of such actions shift the responsibility onto them including loosing aircrafts. There is only one way to deal with such belligerent behaviour - put them on notice.
Brumby
Major
I think it is to do with preventing signal fratricide. Jamming bubble would affect all signals within those jamming frequencies. A targeted solution is a more surgical and discriminatory approach.Saw this on
I don't understand why they don't just build stationary posts to form a jamming bubble around all strategically "known" GSC bases. Pair them with drone "net"/( or more lethal(sentry guns think land CIWS)) weapons to take down any and all unidentified drones, small 1 manned aircraft, trying to make it's way onto or around important bases. Me thinks it would be cheaper than a drone. Unless they really want the drone for forward military bases, White House, etc.
The website didn't link it to anything so I couldn't find the full article or anything on google but I'm interested in this kind of cool stuff so I posted it anyways
*EDIT* Found this later on in an article of something I was thinking of
MwRYum
Major
In one of the pictures we can spot the Guards badge on the Su-24...according to wiki materials, only 2 regiments that operates Su-24 that also has Guards status:
47th Guards Reconnaissance Aviation Regiment stationed at
1st Guards Instructor Bomber Aviation Regiment stationed at
Problem is, both outfits stationed far from the area...although Ivan can easily forward deploy the planes to pull off the airshow.
Jura The idiot
General
have you heard Hyten: Let Industry Buy ICBMs for Space Launch At Fair Price
?
source:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I heard about it.
It does make business sense for Orbital ATK as they already launch with those for the government and being a surplus part it would be cheaper. Like buying a used car instead of a new. It would be a major win for ATK of course by contrast it would mean that other makers would be placed at a competitive disadvantages as until they run out of surplus rockets ATK would be in a dominant position. I mean SpaceX made a dent by going in house for there rocket and is now working on their recovered rocket for the same reason. If you have a plentiful supply of first stage boosters from either surplus or reusing then you can keep your launch costs down as for each launch you have to invest in less and less expensive building of new parts. That said the most expensive part of the booster is just the engine block itself not the rest of the assembly. The rest of the booster is just a pressure vessel with some veneer and maybe some aerodynamic surface control features. I mean in the past NASA looked into other jobs for such parts. I mean Skylab was just a Saturn V stage that was cleaned up had the engine replaced with a docking node and a solar array tacked on some life support systems and added, there was also a proposed Skylab 2 that would do the same just using a SLS tank. But as a pressure vessel its purely structural. Hence why ULA when looking at reusable components wants to just eject the engine and reuse those.
Of course what most people don't know is that Falcon 9 is also gaining data from their reentry that is valuable for NASA and a understanding of theoretical landing on mars and Hypersonic flight. He also has a edge because he has been doing this on his dime IE his innovation has been trialed after launching the payload, after the rocket has done its job.
However if OrbitalATK rolled in with 800 low low cost rocket engines it would seriously under bid everything else. I mean they would have years of surplus launches. To think about it, the first stage of the Russian Soyuz Rocket is a R7 ICBM from the 1960s. Its the same rocket that they used for Valstok and Sputnik. They keep using it as its plentiful and cheap. And unless the Russians change payloads they don't bother with other platforms.
Jura The idiot
General
I don't understand the technical side of this problem at all, just wonder if instead of so much competing (you don't need to explain to me how competitive the American system is) it wouldn't be more beneficial to choose some "path" yet ... now I read my own post again
Feb 20, 2016
EDIT
now I noticed
Lockheed-Boeing Rocket Venture to Lay Off Hundreds of Workers
source:
EDIT AGAIN
DoD Embraces Commercial Space Boom, But Warns of Its Limits
source:
Last edited: