Things that totally were going to be a thing

Until they weren't.

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Mack

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      :,^(

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        i miss him bros

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          what ever happened to dragon skin?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They ended with Dragon Cum and made high profit

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The glue that held the plates together melts in the heat.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The heat of the plates cooks the glue?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Sun hot

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                don't fly too close to the sun

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The heat of the plates cooks the glue?

              Oh no that’s the only glue substance in existence, pack it up boys we’re out of business.

              That’s like if Eugene Stoner and Armalite committed sudoku when countries said they’d be more interested in an intermediate caliber version.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its worse than that. Its like stopping at Bakelite when you want a plastic gun.

                WELP ITS UNPOSSIBLE!

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Company went bankrupt because they couldn't figure out the adhesive problem.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Sounds like bullshit to me. There are plenty of adhesives that would work nowadays, you can even spend a million and get a custom patented glue that does every fucking thing you want.

              Im not saying that they didnt say that, but i highly doubt thats really why.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Agreed. They could wire the plates together if they really had to.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Or riveting, basically modern day coat of plates. I assume there'd be some structural weakness issues or spalling concerns about the rivets. That, or whereas in the past material was expensive but manpower was cheap so making a lot of little plate bits was easy peasy now it's materials are cheaper and manpower isn't as necessary as skilled labor so it may just be easier to make a big ceramic plate. Since replacement is:
                >Go and unseal your coat of ceramic plates, replace broken ones ,worry about structural integrity of the rest of them
                versus
                >Your plate broke buy a new one you're the US military or other well funded apparatus this shit is peanuts.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It was because they were WAY too overenthusiastic about getting their military contract. They lied to the Air Force about having Level III certification, in the most retarded way possible. They had a verbal from the NIJ that they had passed the certification (even though the Army AND Air Force had shown they had a massive defect rate on delivery, mostly due to...you guessed it...the scales being fucked up). It's kind of like the MEG general. Lying about your certification to smoothbrained History Channel dipshits? GOOD. Lying to the DOD about having a body armor certification you didn't have on paper yet? BAD.

                If the people at Pinnacle could have kept their dick in their pants for two seconds, they could have gotten the contracts completed and used that time to iron out the production issues. But they were too busy clout chasing and waving their bare asses at Interceptor that they lost their contract, and couldn't make ends meet selling it just to LEO's. They went bankrupt in 2010, and their lawsuit against NIJ was dismissed in '13.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Didn't live up to the hype when the armor was actually tested in a controlled environment. Instead of fixing the problems, the company spent money on advertising trying to convince the public the military was out to get them.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Adhesive issues others mentioned and people coming up with smarter lighter ways to achieve the same thing

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Was also quite heavy.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It melted

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Heavy and melted in the hot desert environments. You know the place they were marketing it to.

            You could solve the problem by just making a nylon vest with like 100 pockets to place individual plates instead of using glue.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Company went bankrupt and the inventor opened up a new body armor company and he apparently solved the issues with the adhesive melting under hot temperatures since he now sells and improved version of Dragonskin's original concept. Stealth Armor Systems IIRC.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the front fell off

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Machowicz isn't a gnomish name fucking retard op in that thread as usual

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          for me its picrel

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            OH NO NO NO NOT HIM BROS
            MY CHILDHOOD

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          He was born to a Catholic family tho and died a Buddhist priest.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        didn't he start doing a punch of chud porn?

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they were real in my dreams

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I regret ever having started that absolutely pozzed retarded book series.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        show on the dolly where the author touched you

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I kinda feel sorry for guys like this. The mind virus they contracted online prevents them from ever having any innocent enjoyment. It must be a shitty way to live.
        You can enjoy a gun, like say a MP40, without agreeing with the politics of the people who made it. Likewise you can enjoy a story without necessarily agreeing with the message the author is trying to convey. Especially if it's light holiday reading like that series was.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Still not reading your shitty book john.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I kinda feel sorry for guys like this. The mind virus they contracted online prevents them from ever having any innocent enjoyment. It must be a shitty way to live.
        You can enjoy a gun, like say a MP40, without agreeing with the politics of the people who made it. Likewise you can enjoy a story without necessarily agreeing with the message the author is trying to convey. Especially if it's light holiday reading like that series was.

        whats wrong with the books?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The author is super libtarded, and sometimes that leeches into his books.
          I like John Birmingham's works, but really have to suspend some disbelief when reading.
          Consider reading Cruel Stars.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >nazi f-35 on front cover
      They never get past me262. Also prince Harry is a badass SAS commando who kills Otto Skorzeny and the Hillary has an aircraft carrier named after her.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Those where fun books, might reread them

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      *fixed

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >NATO
        True 15 months ago. NATO and EU were going to disappear by themselves
        Now Putin resurrect them and we will have NATO and EU a few generations more at least. And stronger.
        Fuck Putin. What the fuck were you thinking?

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It hurts bros

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      too fish for me but xm25 was sex

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I still remember when every single videogame was featuring it

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A buddy of mine has a sl8 and any time it's brought up he complains of how hard it has been for him to find a g36 kit. I keep telling him to just send it for the xm8 treatment since Tommy makes all those parts new, but he keeps deflecting

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That’s a g36

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      My first airsoft gun was an xm8 kek

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Even the airsoft xm8 was discontinued I think

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Service history
      In service 2010–present
      Used by Royal Malaysian Navy

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This. They landed the coveted Royal Malaysian Navy contract and didn't need anything else. Hardly a flop.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Where there is a failed future aesthetic assault rifle, Malaysia is there to give it the use it deserves. Never forget what they do for your favorite meme guns.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      At least we still have it in MGS4.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Come on everyone, I know this is a fucking old-ass millenial board.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Jerry Pournelle created the concept while working in operations research at Boeing in the 1950s before becoming a science-fiction writer.[8][9]

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >that fucking cover
        >the synopsis for the setting/premise
        I will now read your book

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you're in for a weird treat

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            damn I forgot they strapped shuttles to that thing, makes me want to read it again

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          it's good and worth reading. Also checkout Lucifer's Hammer, and More in God's Eye

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Holy shit I have had a cropped cut out image of that elephant-like thing with the gun for ever with no context as to the source.
        Someone used to spam it as a reaction image literal years ago and I had saved it.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Footfall is an awesome read. One of the authors has some weird cuck fetish though as every character seems to be in an unwittingly open relationship.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's the Air Force for ya. Didn't bomber crews promise each other to take care of each others' wives, which eventually ended up in swinger orgies?

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              No one should ever have to justify a swinger's orgy.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Niven and Pournelle have several other books that are awesome. If you like Footfall you should check out A Mote in God's Eye and its sequel The Gripping Hand.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Imho, A Mote in God's Eye is one of the best sci-fi books ever written.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Also check out Legacy of Heorot if you like killing murderous alien beasts and breeding women. I do not reccomend the sequels, however.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Someone used to spam it as a reaction image literal years ago and I had saved it.
          You know what you just restarted right?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Space Barbar is about to bayonet that man and elephant dick his girl while he looks on breathing in his last pints of blood

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I remember seeing this book at my grandma's house and being freaked out by the elephant alien thing.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why are they always depicted as rods, wouldn't you want to drop spheres or something for maximum surface area when it impacts? Rods would go straight into the ground.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        stabilization i guess? its got fins.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Rods would go straight into the ground.
        thats why they're better than nukes for nailing bunkers

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Rods would go straight into the ground.
        That's the point

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Subtle. Two internets points.

          https://i.imgur.com/QWU0pKg.jpg

          >Jerry Pournelle created the concept while working in operations research at Boeing in the 1950s before becoming a science-fiction writer.[8][9]

          Why are they always depicted as rods, wouldn't you want to drop spheres or something for maximum surface area when it impacts? Rods would go straight into the ground.

          In today's world, I suspect that depleted uranium would be a strong contender. The originals were envisioned as titanium, if I recall that correctly. There are other possibilities should they provide unique properties to make their expense worth it. Titanium provides a lot of resistance to burning up (as do various ceramics & composites) in the atmosphere. Such things might be used as cladding to provide a heat shield for a core (such as uranium) to ensure the payload reaches the ground at 60 or 80 miles per second.

          In a sense, it's a Good Thing that Rods From God wasn't implemented in the 1950s. Our understanding of how to effectively employ it today (and modify it with other concepts) is significantly evolved; such a system would be even more effective than originally envisioned by Dr. Pournelle.

          The reason that "rods" (or "spears") was considered originally was to vastly reduce the air resistance compared to the mass delivered, using gravity as the main accelerator, and delivering them with precision in the 1 meter radius rage. They were also envisioned as being the size of telephone poles, in part to compensate for ablation due to atmospheric drag that would burn off some of the mass.

          Today, we could make ceramic rods a dozen times thicker than a telephone pole that would be even more resistant to burning than titanium. Fill the core with depleted uranium and drop them with a hypersonic engine to give them an initial boost and they could reach ... well, fuck if I know the upper velocity limits. 200 miles per second? More? The kinetic energy & penetration power of that dwarfs Dr. Pournelle's original vision.

          One of those could be capable of a Meteor Crater event. Imagine having 20 permanent geostationary satellites with 50 each.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_Crater

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Being as how you start in space, i think just some kind of solid motor on a gimble to get it going and point it should be enough to get stupid velocities.

            I think the real issue is getting to be a coherent object at sea level at those speeds.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/UBJpeEG.jpg

            Come on everyone, I know this is a fucking old-ass millenial board.

            Rods from god are retarded and wouldn’t work. Satellites aren’t just abstractly floating above earth. They’re in orbit, which means moving very quickly and predictably. You can’t just drop something, you’d have to fire it - but in most cases it would also have a significant horizontal velocity relative to the atmosphere/earth, not just heading straight down. GSO has its own problems

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              the author of the concept worked as aerospace engineer for Boeing and as presidential science advisor for POTUS

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah and he was wrong + Boeing is gay. It has limited applications. Weapons in space pointing at earth are generally not very useful or practical until you start getting into the crazier theoretical stuff.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you're the one who thinks math doesn't exist

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >thinks math doesn’t exist
                Wut.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >oh no our projectile has inertia, this means our engineers will be unable to make it work

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are genuinely too stupid to understand the issues here holy shit.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              dude use a fucking calculator?
              hello?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The problem is not (solely) the calculations but the resistance and unequal forces and there’s issues with having the satellite be in a useful orbit in the first place because orbits are fairly complicated. All in all it’s just not a practical and useful weapon and though it’s possible it’s not… good.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                dude did you even read the book

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No I did not read a science fiction book

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                all the complaints against the system are made from perspective of the complaint maker being from a poor podunk backwater, literally

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Geostationary satellites also exists. But the problems you outline could be solved with a rocket booster to launch, and a navigation module + control surfaces once it enters the atmosphere.
              The real question is, is it worth the massive investment and r&d required to actually make it work.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                When I say wouldn’t work I mean “wouldn’t be practical to make work”

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >You can’t just drop something, you’d have to fire it - but in most cases it would also have a significant horizontal velocity relative to the atmosphere/earth, not just heading straight down
              I'm not going to say this is easy math, but it is very well understood math, and we have gotten very good at doing it. Give each rod a controllable solid booster so it can perform its own de-orbit burn and a scramjet for in-atmosphere corrections/acceleration, put the carrier in a polar orbit, call it a day.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Give each rod a controllable solid booster so it can perform its own de-orbit burn and a scramjet for in-atmosphere corrections/acceleration, put the carrier in a polar orbit, call it a day

                But thats the point.You can achieve exactly the same thing by a terrestrial launch - at a zillionth of the cost/hassle

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You can deliver a large payload, globally, quickly, without any of the signatures that are associated with a nuclear launch? No, you can't.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It isn't a very large payload unless you use rods that are too heavy to feasibly launch
                It isn't actually faster than ICBMS without using so many satellites that it would be prohibitively expensive
                And satellites are extremely easy to track + reentry vehicles are very much visible
                Literally everything about it is worse than ICBMS, and we already have ICBMS.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You aren't factoring in the political costs. Irradiating someone with a nuke is far less acceptable to the world community than dropping a heavy inert object on them.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                And we can already do that acceptably well with cruise missiles
                If we want to blow something up somewhere in the world we don't need a mad scientist level satellite network that would require an Apollo program level investment
                It just isn't a good idea for so many reasons

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Exactly

                You can deliver a large payload, globally, quickly, without any of the signatures that are associated with a nuclear launch? No, you can't.

                A satellite in polar orbit would be extremely vulnerable. It’s not something you can reasonably hide and it’s motion is generally very predictable

                >You can’t just drop something, you’d have to fire it - but in most cases it would also have a significant horizontal velocity relative to the atmosphere/earth, not just heading straight down
                I'm not going to say this is easy math, but it is very well understood math, and we have gotten very good at doing it. Give each rod a controllable solid booster so it can perform its own de-orbit burn and a scramjet for in-atmosphere corrections/acceleration, put the carrier in a polar orbit, call it a day.

                Solid rockets suck at that scale. They can’t be throttled or shut down and relighted. They do in fact degrade at an unacceptable rate for this kind of thing.

                >Satellites aren’t just abstractly floating above earth.
                Artillery batteries have been taking the Coriolis effect into consideration since 1916 and they had to do the math by hand. And with sixty years experience of launching satellites and firing intercontinental ballistic missiles, science has a pretty decent understanding of orbital mechanics.

                Yeah and orbital mechanics is pretty restrictive once you’re actually in orbit. You can’t just casually change orbits, not to a significant amount, certainly not discreetly, not without aero surfaces on the vehicle itself - which is basically the only advantage of a spaceplane.

                The idea was that it'd be an incredibly effective non-nuclear bunker buster that wouldn't be detectable by existing missile launch warning systems or be easily confused for a nuclear strike, and you could hit ANYWHERE on Earth in less than 15 minutes (half an ICBM's flight time). You can't do any of that with a conventional ballistic missile.

                Yeah and it wouldn’t work at that.

                >what you are describing would have far more mass than the entire ISS
                The ISS weights more than 50 tons, anon.

                On top of what the others said, this thing would be retardedly easy to spot and to target. You’d have to regularly refuel it because you can’t just do electric thrusters for something that big which needs to be that precise. It’s simply speaking not practical

                It becomes much more practical if, say, you are already in space and have the ability to process asteroids and manufacture things from them, and aren’t particularly fussed about where on the planet you hit with any given projectile. At that point it’s basically just a very big kinetic kill projectile and one of those that is big enough doesn’t need to be precise

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >A satellite in polar orbit would be extremely vulnerable. It’s not something you can reasonably hide and it’s motion is generally very predictable
                It can be as predictable and visible as it wants, you aren't going to intercept it during its acceleration phase because you won't have time, and what the hell are you going to do to a big chunk of heat-resistant ceramic and depleted uranium that's de-orbiting? You gonna nuke it? That's cute, nukes are just radiation bombs in space. Little flashbangs with tiny effective distances, much less against that. And you know what happens? You know the worst part?
                It only gets worse. It only falls faster. It only gets harder to stop.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The satellite is visible you retard not the payload. Christ on the cross

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Satellites aren’t just abstractly floating above earth.
              Artillery batteries have been taking the Coriolis effect into consideration since 1916 and they had to do the math by hand. And with sixty years experience of launching satellites and firing intercontinental ballistic missiles, science has a pretty decent understanding of orbital mechanics.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are still better off just using long-range missiles, even if you assume that said rod works as intended.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The idea was that it'd be an incredibly effective non-nuclear bunker buster that wouldn't be detectable by existing missile launch warning systems or be easily confused for a nuclear strike, and you could hit ANYWHERE on Earth in less than 15 minutes (half an ICBM's flight time). You can't do any of that with a conventional ballistic missile.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The idea was that it'd be an incredibly effective non-nuclear bunker buster that wouldn't be detectable by existing missile launch warning systems or be easily confused for a nuclear strike, and you could hit ANYWHERE on Earth in less than 15 minutes (half an ICBM's flight time)
                At the time he came with the idea it cost U$150.000.000,00 a pop minimum, hell even today it would cost +U$20.000.000,00.
                Also, you wouldn't be able to hit anywhere on Earth unless the satellite carrying the rod goes just above it, because of the way orbital mechanics work.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you wouldn't be able to hit anywhere on Earth unless the satellite carrying the rod goes just above it, because of the way orbital mechanics work.
                Orbital mechanics do not, in fact, work that way.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >you wouldn't be able to hit anywhere on Earth unless the satellite carrying the rod goes just above it
                I'll take "Polar Orbit" for $400, Alex

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > I'll take "Polar Orbit" for $400, Alex
                So you have to wait upwards to 12 hours to hit your target?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Why would they use just one satellite?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So now instead of one absurdly expensive, fragile weapon platform, you have MULTIPLE absurdly expensive, fragile weapons platforms. That don’t really do much more than a Tomahawk or MOP can do.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                If you are using multiple satellites, what is the point of a polar orbit that makes it useless for 90% of the time?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The idea is to be able to lunch an undetectable preemptive strike on an enemy force. The problem is submarines mean that even if you take out 100% of silos an air bases you're still getting nuked.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >even today it would cost +U$20.000.000,00.
                I see you've never seen what the military spends on shit

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              baffling post

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            RfG are very dumb because what you are describing would have far more mass than the entire ISS and is entirely impractical to launch let alone maintain station in orbit. You would need a huge number of these to approach the launch to impact times of existing ICBMs and the ultimate performance would be less than ICBMS. They are just bad

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >what you are describing would have far more mass than the entire ISS
              The ISS weights more than 50 tons, anon.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Bud you are describing something carrying multiple rods "several times thicker than telephone poles" and "filled with depleted uranium," that's gonna be a hell of a lot more than 50 tons

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A single one of the poles you are talking about would weigh nearly 50 tons, any satellite carrying multiples will quickly surpass the ISS which weighs 460 tons and that doesn't account for any station keeping engines or propellant on the satellite which would be critical, all so you can have something that performs worse than an ICBM

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You know there's this thing called an atmosphere, right?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's not like a shell retard, it's just the air/gasses caught in Earth's gravity field. It causes drag when the object getting close starts going through it. A sphere would be the most likely object to not burn up by impact. The rods are likely just due to them being easier to shoot accurately, and their design goes through the railgun better. I get how a rod words through it but not sure how a sphere would.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Rods would go straight into the ground.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Force equals mass times acceleration fren, an object with the same mass and the least amount of surface area for drag resistance is going to reach a much faster speed upon impact.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This is a subtle troll, right?

          In f=ma, for a constant ~9.8m/s^2 gravitational acceleration, mass increases the force delivered on impact. It does not accelerate to higher velocities.

          Or riveting, basically modern day coat of plates. I assume there'd be some structural weakness issues or spalling concerns about the rivets. That, or whereas in the past material was expensive but manpower was cheap so making a lot of little plate bits was easy peasy now it's materials are cheaper and manpower isn't as necessary as skilled labor so it may just be easier to make a big ceramic plate. Since replacement is:
          >Go and unseal your coat of ceramic plates, replace broken ones ,worry about structural integrity of the rest of them
          versus
          >Your plate broke buy a new one you're the US military or other well funded apparatus this shit is peanuts.

          I didn't think of spalling, good call, though as you said, it could probably be light enough for the anti-spall liner to catch it. Also, it would probably get caught in the other scales anyway.

          https://i.imgur.com/pTKxSOs.jpg

          [...]
          wasn't it kind of surpassed by the CIWS?

          No. Higher ROF on metal storm. It would be effective for CIWS shit, the problem is cost, slow reloading, and much lower barrel speeds on initial rounds.

          As anon said, it will likely see some single-tube applications.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >In f=ma, for a constant ~9.8m/s^2 gravitational acceleration, mass increases the force delivered on impact. It does not accelerate to higher velocities.

            Air resistance applies a negative acceleration vector in the opposite direction of gravity, resulting in a net acceleration less than 9.8m/s^2. Hence why parachutes work. A sphere will have more surface area than a spear shape of equal volume resulting in a greater negative acceleration vector and a lower net acceleration.

            You can also think of it as PE=mgh but enegry is lost due to friction against the atmosphere.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Right, I understand drag. The point that acceleration doesn't increase with mass still stands.

              > A sphere will have more surface area than a spear shape of equal volume resulting in a greater negative acceleration vector and a lower net acceleration.

              You might be quoting the wrong post.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I understand drag
                I bet you do, gay boy

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Solid.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                gottem

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Lel

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >what is Magnusson effect
        imagine dropping a fatass tungsten ball and it curveballs across an entire continent kek

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine the US accidentally tungstening a bunch of random countries because it entirely missed hitting the Soviets and Chinese.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Terminal velocity is higher with rod over sphere. The trick is to get as much mass going as fast as possible. The surface area doesn't matter. It's the kinetic energy.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/EbJyAMG.png

        Then they would have to name it spaceballs

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I appreciate the Tau'ri for naming this orbital weapon platform after me but I need your help with the replicators.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why are they always depicted as rods, wouldn't you want to drop spheres or something for maximum surface area when it impacts? Rods would go straight into the ground.

      the words of the day are "sectional density"
      Its a rod because a rod allows you to have the most mass with the least air resistance on the way down and its naturally stable in descent, all it needs is some fins on one end.

      [...]
      Rods from god are retarded and wouldn’t work. Satellites aren’t just abstractly floating above earth. They’re in orbit, which means moving very quickly and predictably. You can’t just drop something, you’d have to fire it - but in most cases it would also have a significant horizontal velocity relative to the atmosphere/earth, not just heading straight down. GSO has its own problems

      you can absolutely just drop it if you drop it at the precisely correct time. the whole point of an ultra dense long rod with a thin profile is to minimize atmospheric drag. All that needed is a calculated trajectory and a slight push out of orbit at precisely the right place and time, thats achieved with a relatively small motor. I mean shit this can be done EASILY in kerbal space program by children, you think DoD can't make it work?

      You make something dense enough and outside factors stop having much effect on its momentum, Rod from God/Project thor was all about exploiting this to make a clean, relatively cheap and completely unstoppable weapon, because at the end of the day its just a massive chuck of metal falling out of the sky. Theres fuckall that can be done about it because you need so much energy to alter its course and you have minutes at best to deliver it.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There is absolutely nothing cheap about putting a satellite loaded with 30-50 ton rods into orbit
        A whole ass delta IV heavy can only bring 30 tons to LEO and the kind of rods you have described ITT would weigh that much each
        Each delta IV heavy costs $350M btw so rather than put up a state of the art spy satellite, you want to put up a big dumb telephone pole of ceramic and DU so you can drop it on an extremely limited range of targets at not-very-short notice because you can neither afford nor logistically maintain a fleet of launchers
        Downscaling the reentry vehicles to the point where you could (1-2 ton rods) would result in embarrassingly poor performance compared to vastly cheaper conventional munitions.
        A JASSM is $1.2M, you can sling 300 of those for the price of a single Delta IV heavy launch to put one of your dumb rods into a single orbit with limited coverage
        Please go into KSP yourself and try this because it's very underwhelming

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    crewed missiles

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      dang, that lil propeller powers that whole thing?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >It was a ram-air turbine that drove an electric generator. The electricity from this was used to power the radio and some of the flight instruments, like the gyroscopic compass for example.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yup, it spins super fast to make up for its small diameter.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Imagine the torque they had to put on that rubber band to get to those speeds.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          if it snapped during wind up, reportedly, it could send chunks of the pilot to orbit

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Crewed missiles
      And you used the Me-163 as the picrel, not the X-20 Dyna-Soar, a literal crewed Titan III missile? Pathetic.

      Fun fact: Before Neil Armstrong joined NASA he had been selected for two different USAF manned space programs. He was one of nine astronauts selected in 1958 for the "Man In Space Soonest" program which hoped to beat the Soviet Union in putting the first man into space. Then in 1960, he was named as one of the seven initial pilots of the X-20 Dyna-Soar orbital bomber/reconnaissance spaceplane. He ended up flying on the Gemini 8 and Apollo 11 missions. Afaik, he holds the record for "most selections for a manned space program" with four.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I wish a IL-2 would model this plane. I want to see what it was like shooting into the air like a rocket and landing on those dinky skids.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You could play War Thunder, I guess.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/popular-science/20

    ^ interesting / kind of depressing scrolling through these. About 1/10th did end up a thing though, which is kind of cool.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      garden gnomes unironically killed the project because they wanted more congressional money for THAAD and Arrow/ David’s sling weapons.
      An aerial platform is the perfect utilization of Laser weapons since range is extended by the thinner altitude.
      >INB4 too ineffective and costly
      I have yet to see any anti-ballistic missile system with a success rate justifying their immense cost. The project got fucked by defense sequester cuts that killed research.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >INB4 too ineffective and costly
        Isn't this the defense procurement equivalent of "apart from that, how did you enjoy the parade, Mrs. Kennedy?"

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Bombers on flattops got canned because the USAF got their panties in a twist and complained that only they should have the ability to operate strategic bombers and the US government agreed and forever consigned to use only fighters and strike aircraft.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its the right choice. Strategic bombers off of a carrier would be full of compromises.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It hurts, but we had to let her go. Carriers can't really afford the hangar space for strategic bombers.
        >ywn poop nukes over some pinko shithole

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its revenge for the navy not allowing the air corps to operate over water.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Anon, that carrier is made of ice. You're reacting to the wrong part.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How do you refit a slowly melting conglomerate of ice and sawdust? Go drive in circles at the north pole while navies shoot sawdust slurry cannons at your mega ship?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Melting
        The point is there are coolant loops inside the ice that keep it cool.
        The only problem is the ship growing in size and odd shapes over time.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I want to see it for the lulz

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Was this actually considered as something the military thought of trying or was it just something the intern came up with that nobody actually took seriously?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They went so far as having built a 60 ft model on a lake in Canada. The model gained interest but by the time that was done Britain and the US decided that they would be better served putting those funds into conventional weapons than an experimental ice island.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      FUCK
      imagine if this thing actually was real and sucessful
      ice battleships...

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why isn't china making these instead of building fake islands in the ocean? Wouldn't it be a better use of their resources and projection of power?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They built the islands to extend their territorial waters, and thus, influence in the region. The fact that they can stick military shit on them is just a happy coincidence.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i could see metal storm making a comeback as an anti drone weapon on armored vehicles.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nothing like having to reload it by mailing it back to the factory.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    omg imagine this thing cutting down vatmorons in Donets Basin

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i could see metal storm making a comeback as an anti drone weapon on armored vehicles.

      wasn't it kind of surpassed by the CIWS?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no, the metalstorm is a dumb volcanic-pistol-style ammo system and the phalanx just uses ww2 era gatling gun with neat targetting.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This chunky fella

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Checked. For all the money they've pissed away trying to replace the M4/M16 over the years they should have just fucking finished the OICW.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Siemens Torpedo Glider comes to mind. Why yes, I would like an air-launched, guided cruise missile in World War 1, thank you for asking
    >canceled due to end of war

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >An alternate history scenario where Kaiser wins, the Cold War starts 25 years early, and instead of nuclear ballistic missiles, the German-American arms race involves poison gas cruise missiles.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      turd :DDDD

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    World War 1 had all kinds of stuff that just kind of vanished until late WW2 or the Cold War. While this one doesn't have active guidance, it is a cruise missile capable of striking targets over the horizon autonomously

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hudson H9

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this company going out of business made me sad
      i remember the CEO doing the reveal or whatever and he was so excited and said "i really hope people like the gun"
      i imagine he was crushed when people did not like the gun

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    that russian power armor shit they were showing off a few years ago

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ratnik
      you just can't make this shit up. the cope setup they went with is just
      well kind of sad, actually

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Rhodesia

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    these would be good to keep a mob at bay, like at at embassy or similar.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    G
    1
    1

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Lol, i used to masturbate to these vids when i was like 15. What happened?

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      never saw that plane before

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Northrop YF-23

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They promised me the Commanche ;(

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Recoil bolt in the Vector Kriss .45.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why did that one die. AEK whatever "balanced action" died too.

      Anyone remember the US light tank concept that raises up to fire from behind cover / has a moving armor plate?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I assume expense/complexity that didn't really make it better.

        KRISS has done a lot of 'should be a thing but didn't happen'. It's a bit like when they said they could reduce the weight of the M2 by 50% and recoil by up to 90% and it was probably because they'd either make it so expensive it isn't worth it or make the measuring for the recoil not actually measure it properly.

        Still would have been nice to see.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Do you mean picrel? It's the AAI Elevated Kinetic Energy Vehicle, which was part of a program to replace the M551 Sheridan. It used the ARES XM274 which was a 75mm autocannon designed by Eugene Stoner that had a rate of fire of 70(!) rounds per minute.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/6gHWP7O.jpg

        Do you mean picrel? It's the AAI Elevated Kinetic Energy Vehicle, which was part of a program to replace the M551 Sheridan. It used the ARES XM274 which was a 75mm autocannon designed by Eugene Stoner that had a rate of fire of 70(!) rounds per minute.

        Ares was also flogging a towed XM274 anti-tank gun for a while, including a version where a single operator could remotely control an entire battery.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Metal Storm is STILL around owned by another company. last i heard they were developing an apparently actually useful 3 shot mgl, and adapting their tech for bushfire fighting.

    I always thought these things might have worked great as like a smoke discharger or multi shot flare system for vehicles,

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >brushfight fighting
      how? Put out the fire with lead?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I solve practical problems!
        >For instance, how am I gonna stop some big mean wild-fire from tearin' me a structurally superfluous new behind?
        >The answer? Use a gun. And if that don't work, use more gun.
        >Like this, heavy-caliber tripod-mounted little-old-number designed by me. Built, by me. And you best hope...
        >Not pointed at you.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No idea, i'd assume some system for firing Phos-Chek or similar retardants in more concentrated lines on the ground?

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this stupid thing would only be useful on submunitions or elaborate claymores

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >stupid thing
      what if you mounted a pack of 1200 x 105mm APFSDS on an Abrams hull?

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Arsenal Ships.

    So massively retarded that even the fucking Navy smacked down the cock-gobblers that were pushing it.

    Every attack sub skipper alive had a boner the size and rigidity of a torpedo at the thought of putting one into one of those floating armories full of high explosives.

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm surprised no one else has tried. Is the technology really doomed to fail? Why aren't we all running arrow with caseless ammo?
    I imagine I'd make ammo much cheaper too.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Bullet cases are most useful as heat sinks. Caseless ammo builds up heat in the chamber until it's hot enough to cook off the next round fed from the magazine, and then the whole mag runs away. It will be hard to get around that until chamber cooling tech dramatically improves without water jackets.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So you're saying the rof increases the more you shoot?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        while this was the issue with the G11, it wasn't an issue at all for the LSAT, mostly because the LSAT is an open bolt weapon, all report done during test were positive about it

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          > all report done during test were positive about it
          Literally me in black ops 2

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          wasn't LSAT telescoped not caseless

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The idea of bayoneting someone with a G11 seems so bizarre to me.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    my hope hasn't died yet. one day, we will get portable plasma weapons

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Hey just what you see pal

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Underrated post

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Where are the rail guns? It's 2023 for Christ's sake.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Department of the Navy didn't request funding for them for FY2023 (2022?)
      Program is dead

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Before IEDs ruined the concept the army was pushing for ultra low profile vehicles.

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Dragonscale armor would like a word with you

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Dragonscale armor

      Dragon Skin you imbecilic shitball.

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hate siggers

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      XM7 contract is gonna be cancelled at less than 5% delivered resulting in a massive payout for the Sig execs.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        lmao, did you actually take that Army Tmes article seriously?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's fucking treason that this didn't win the bid.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The polymer ammo alone would have been a huge improvement to capabilities far beyond simply infantry rifles…

  34. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Return to tradition

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What was the point of it anyways? I just remember stumbling upon it when I was looking for funky weapons I didn't know yet. I still haven't really figured out how that thing is supposed to work

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Shrike upper from Ares
    > early 2000s
    > any day now
    > yeah, taking deposits
    > real soon
    > uh design improvement, slight delay
    Lather, rinse, repeat.
    I saw one at Knob Creek and the SAR show in Phoenix and almost put down cash. Glad I didn't.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      just get a fightlite mcr

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Then they would have to name it spaceballs

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *