Posted on 09/28/2020 4:53:13 AM PDT by BenLurkin
“... designed to literally sheathe an entire vehicle in laser and/or microwave-induced plasma...”
Wouldn’t be too hard to spot.
Photon Torpedo....
That was different than a plain old laser.
Regular Navy. Coming through.
This isn’t new. The late Gerald Bull employed the technology to substantially increase the range of artillery rounds way back in the 80’s. He chose who he was going to work for poorly and didn’t survive the faulty decision.
Hew ken ye hayv yer powddin eef yuh dond eat yer meat?
Yup
Now mill about smartly!
“... enabling flight speeds that can outpace even the most advanced and robust air defense systems.”
EXCEPT directed energy defense systems.
Seems like an ironic twist. Directed energy aimed ahead of the missile enables much higher speeds making it impossible to shoot down EXCEPT by directed energy defense systems.
Just strap a Democrat to the nose cone. The hot air will result in mega velocities unheard of in Bulgaria.
I recall seeing an object when I lived in RI.
I initially thought I was looking at landing lights because of the brightness, then it disappeared as if someone flipped a switch.
Within seconds it appeared again further north, became very bright, then dimmed and shot south across the horizon before gaining altitude and disappearing.
This was in the late 90’s. I’ve always thought I could have been looking at something experimental.
It’s an informed comment.
I’ll say no more.
Vehicle = missile or projectile.
The theme killing comment:
“Van Wie told The War Zone that while the levels of power required for the energy deposition systems cited above are indeed possible given today’s aircraft power systems, the accompanying weight that must be accommodated into any aircraft drag reduction system would offset some of the gains that system could produce. “A one-megawatt generator riding on a turbine engine is a fairly heavy system to get integrated into any practical aircraft,” he said. “It’s not that you couldn’t do it, but it ends up being a weight challenge to generate any appropriate level of power to have a reasonable drag reduction.”
That answer reflects the topic of my immediate question from the start - how much additional energy generating capacity (equipment & fuel) will be needed for the high level directed energy beams the concept requires? At present (as far as it goes so far) we have neither the materials (lighter and stronger) or equipment (more powerful yet much smaller) to make the concept practical now or even soon.
One editorial correction:
The editors of Drive made one factual error that I know of: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) is in Troy, New York, not Rochester. (My dad worked there back in the 1950s and the campus, while it has grown, did not get moved or extended to Rochester.
There is a Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT), in Rochester, and like RPI in Troy, it too seems to have some research centers that could be conducting studies like those discussed in the article. Maybe the editors just got the two schools confused.
;-).
My Integrated Transmogrifier is on the fritz.
kinda makes laminar flow obsolete for the most part?
That's interesting, the Russians (and probably US) have experimened with a gas bleed at the nose of missiles (and supersonic torpedoes) to jacket the fuselage and reduce drag. This plasma approach would obviate the need for carrying the gas, and would take advantage of advances in battery technology.
You never read the actual article?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
