search results matching tag: Satellites

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (324)     Sift Talk (12)     Blogs (28)     Comments (566)   

Vicious Dog Pack Attack

newtboy says...

My thoughts exactly.
Elysium had the fantasy saviour satellite with technology capable of fixing most of the world's problems just waiting to be ordered to do so. In reality, there is no army of multipurpose robots in shining armor poised to fly down and save humanity from itself.
We don't even have president Camacho.
We are so hosed.

NaMeCaF said:

My idea of hell is the current world we live in, which we saw in that movie: Idiocracy.

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

Mordhaus says...

The simple point is that as soon as we realized the capability of the Zero we easily and quickly designed a plane(s) capable of combating it.

The Yak-3 didn't enter the war until 1944, at which point the war had massively turned in Western Theatre. For the bulk of the conflict, they were using the Yak-1.

The Mig 25 and Mig 31 are both interceptors, they are designed to fire from distance and evade. The Su 35 is designed for Air Superiority. We have held the edge in our capabilities for years compared to them.

Every expert I know of is skeptical of China's claimed Railgun weapon. As to why they would bother mounting it and making claims, why not? It is brinkmanship, making us think they have more capabilities than they do.

The laser rifle is a crowd deterrent weapon. It would serve almost no purpose in infantry combat because it cannot kill. Yes, it can burn things and cause pain, but that is all. Again, this was claimed to be far more effective than experts think during our diplomatic arguments over China's use of blinding lasers on aircraft. We have no hard evidence of it's capability.

Yes, Russia could sell such a missile to our enemies versus using it directly against us. The problem is that as soon as they do so, the genie is out of the bottle. It will be reverse engineered quickly and could be USED AGAINST THEM. No country gives or sells away it's absolute top level weaponry except to it's most trusted allies. Allies which, for all intents and purposes, know that using such a weapon against another nation state risks full out retaliation against not only them but the country that sold it to them.

Our carriers are excellent mobile platforms, but they are not our only way of mounting air strikes. If we were somehow in a conventional war situation, we could easily fly over and base our aircraft in allied countries for combat. Most of our nuclear capable aircraft are not carrier launched anyway. Even if somehow all of our carriers were taken out and somehow our SAC bombers were destroyed as well, we would still have more than enough land launched and submarine launched nuclear warheads to easily blanket our enemies.

My points remain:

1. It is in the greatest interest of our enemies to boast about weapon capabilities even if they are not effective yet.

2. Most well regarded experts consider many of these weapons to either be still in the research stage, early production stage (IE not available for years), or they are wildly over hyped.

3. There is no logical reason for our enemies to use these weapons or proliferate them to their closest allies unless the weapons can prevent a nuclear response. Merely mentioning a weapon that would have such a capability creates a situation that could lead to nuclear war, like SDI did. I don't know if you recall, but I do clearly, how massively freaked out the Soviets got over our SDI claims. For two years they started threatening nuclear war as being inevitable if we continued on the path we were, all the while aggressively trying to destabilize our relations with our allies. 1983 to 1985 was pretty fucking tense, not Cuban missile crisis level maybe, but damn scary. Putin has acted similarly over our attempts to set up a missile barrier in former satellite states of Russia, although we still haven't got to the SHTF level of the early 80's.

scheherazade said:

The Zero's Chinese performance was ignored by the U.S. command prior to pearl harbor, dismissed as exaggeration. That's actually the crux of my point.

Exceptional moments do not change the rule.
Yes on occasion a wildcat would get swiss cheesed and not go down, but 99% of the time when swiss cheesed they went down.
Yes, there were wildcat aces that did fairly well (and Zero aces that did even better), but 99% of wildcat pilots were just trying to not get mauled.

Hellcat didn't enter combat till mid 1943, and it is the correction to the mistake. The F6F should have been the front line fighter at the start of the war... and could have been made sooner had Japanese tech not been ignored/dismissed as exaggeration.


Russian quantity as quality? At the start they were shot down at a higher ratio than the manufacturing counter ratio (by a lot). It was a white wash in favor of the Germans.
It took improvements in Russian tech to turn the tide in the air. Lend-lease only constituted about 10% of their air force at the peak. Russia had to improve their own forces, so they did. By the end, planes like the yak3 were par with the best.


The Mig31 is a slower Mig25 with a digital radar. Their version of the F14, not really ahead of the times, par maybe.

F15 is faster than either mig29 or Su27 (roughly Mig31 speed).
F16/F18, at altitude, are moderately slower, but a wash at sea level.

Why would they shoot and run?
We have awacs, we would know they are coming, so the only chance to shoot would be at max range. Max range shots are throw-away shots, they basically won't hit unless the target is unaware, which it won't be unaware because of the RWR. Just a slight turn and the missile can't follow after tens of miles of coasting and losing energy.


Chinese railgun is in sea trials, right now. Not some lab test. It wouldn't be on a ship without first having the gun proven, the mount proven, the fire control proven, stationary testing completed, etc.
2025 is the estimate for fleet wide usage.
Try finding a picture of a U.S. railgun aboard a U.S. ship.


Why would a laser rifle not work, when you can buy crap like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7baI2Nyi5rI
There's ones made in China, too : https://www.sanwulasers.com/customurl.aspx?type=Product&key=7wblue&shop=
That will light paper on fire ~instantly, and it's just a pitiful hand held laser pointer.
An actual weapon would be orders of magnitude stronger than a handheld toy.
It's an excellent covert operations weapon, silently blinding and starting fires form kilometers away.


Russia does not need to sink a U.S. carrier for no reason.
And the U.S. has no interest in giving Russia proper a need to defend from a U.S. carrier. For the very reasons you mentioned.


What Russia can do is proliferate such a missile, and effectively deprecate the U.S. carrier group as a military unit.

We need carriers to get our air force to wherever we need it to be.
If everyone had these missiles, we would have no way to deliver our air force by naval means.

Russia has land access to Europe, Asia, Africa. They can send planes to anywhere they need to go, from land bases. Russia doesn't /need/ a navy.

Most of the planet does not have a navy worth sinking. It's just us. This is the kind of weapon that disproportionately affects us.

-scheherazade

Net Captures Space Debris

newtboy says...

I would assume, in it's current form, it has to be deployed in the proper orbit, direction, and speed to intercept it's target without much maneuvering on it's own. Perhaps eventually they'll make capture satellites armed with dozens of these that can chase down rogue objects and catch them, but as far as I know not yet by far.

Also,,,,

Mordhaus said:

What I mean is that space debris travels at speeds up to 17,500 mph or slightly more, depending on what height it is orbiting at. If you place this device in the path (or near it) of a known mass of debris, it is going to have to adjust and fire that net at a speed relative to the debris. If you have the device speed up or slow down to try and match the debris speed, it is going to rise or drop it's orbit height comparatively to the adjusted speed.

That is what I am wondering, will this device be able to catch something travelling at that speed? I'm assuming it would have to try without excessive movement changes or it would require too much fuel.

Oroville Spillways Phase 2 Update August 29, 2018

BSR says...

These videos got me interested. Opened up ole Google Earth and checked out the older satellite pictures from before and after the collapse.

Great videos.

Finally There Is Bipartisan Agreement: Trump Blew It

newtboy says...

There's a big difference between peace and appeasement, Trump is offering the latter, we already had the former.
Russia is expanding both it's borders and influence in Europe. Their actions merit some hysteria. Using nerve agents on foreign soil is an act of war against our allies and humanity, as were the invasions of Crimea and the Ukraine. Is Alaska the next lost satellite Putin has his eye on? Who's going to come to our aid if so?

Spacedog79 said:

There are many good reasons to oppose Trump but I don't think thawing relations with Russia should be one of them. Sure they may have meddled in elections but they are rank amateurs compared to America who do it to just about everyone, friend or foe.

I get the distinct impression that there is a powerful section of the American oligarchy who are terrified of peace with Russia and are trying everything they can to stir up fear and hatred in the public, and its working. Mention Russia and it's borderline hysteria, it's really not healthy.

The New Highway to the Arctic Ocean

Rocket In The Sky Plus Accident

Lendl says...

It was not a test launch. It was an instantaneous launch just after sunset to launch 10 satellites. The clock on the dash cam must not be set to local time.

https://youtu.be/wtdjCwo6d3Q

"SpaceX is targeting launch of Iridium-4 from Space Launch Complex 4E (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The instantaneous launch window is at 5:27 p.m. PST on Friday, December 22"


https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/12/23/spacex-launch-dazzles-delivering-10-more-satellites-for-iridium/

"The two-stage, kerosene-fueled rocket climbed into the rarefied upper atmosphere a few minutes following liftoff shortly after sunset at 5:27:34 p.m. PST (8:27:34 p.m. EST; 0127:34 GMT) from Space Launch Complex 4-East Vandenberg Air Force Base northwest of Los Angeles.

The Falcon 9 left a brilliant white plume of exhaust in its wake, catching rays of sunshine as it soared above the stratosphere. The ever-expanding plume left a teardrop-shaped mark in the sky, prompting countless social media posts from rush hour drivers and others who happened to catch an unexpected glimpse of the rocket’s trip to space."

spawnflagger said:

at first I thought, "why don't they do these test launches late at night when fewer people are out on the roads?" then I saw the timestamp at the bottom was ~1:30am.

Accident was here: Google Maps
Highway 10, between LA and Phoenix.

Nephelimdream (Member Profile)

Nasa Tracking 2017 Weather by Imaging Aerosols

Nasa Tracking 2017 Weather by Imaging Aerosols

Nasa Tracking 2017 Weather by Imaging Aerosols

Nephelimdream (Member Profile)

2017 Hurricanes and Aerosols Simulation

2017 Hurricanes and Aerosols Simulation

2017 Hurricanes and Aerosols Simulation



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon