Skip to comments.
To Armor or Not to Armor? That is the Question
Defense Tech ^
| February 7, 2006
| David Axe
Posted on 02/07/2006 9:18:46 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
To: Cannoneer No. 4
I want those E-field deflectors like the chick in Metal Gear 2 had - the bullets just fly away from you like water rolling off a duck's back. I want that, AND I WANT FLYING CARS RIGHT NOW.
2
posted on
02/07/2006 9:22:38 AM PST
by
domenad
(In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
To: Cannoneer No. 4
Didn't a fellow freeper post something recently about a new fiber that is something like 200 times stronger than steel and has twice the hardness of diamond? I didn't bookmark it and just relying on my fuzzy memory here, BUT it seems to me that would have a lot of potential for a new lightweight armor.
3
posted on
02/07/2006 9:24:08 AM PST
by
AZRepublican
("The degree in which a measure is necessary can never be a test of the legal right to adopt it.")
To: Cannoneer No. 4
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
4
posted on
02/07/2006 9:25:18 AM PST
by
exnavy
(God bless Amreica)
To: af_vet_rr; ALOHA RONNIE; archy; Calpernia; cavtrooper21; centurion316; colorado tanker; ...
5
posted on
02/07/2006 9:28:11 AM PST
by
Cannoneer No. 4
(Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
To: Cannoneer No. 4
Every kid knows the solution is "gobots"
Equipment that is modular and interchangable.
It should be possible to build "connector knobs" on all equipment that interfaces with other "connector knobs".
Then different types of lightweight and heavier armor, or no armor can be quickly attached to the bottom, sides or top on any piece of equipment.
It doesn't just have to be "armor". Water tanks, fuel tanks, ammunition, and all other types of supplies and small equipment should have "connector knobs" so it can be attached to any other "connector knob".
To: Cannoneer No. 4
Yes our previously lightweight equipment is getting heavier. However, these vehicles are still much lighter than an Abrams tank.
Our military is getting lighter and more mobile in general. These smaller and lighter vehicles are taking on roles that they couldn't take on before.
To: AZRepublican
Google buckyballs and armor.
8
posted on
02/07/2006 9:50:40 AM PST
by
Blood of Tyrants
(G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
To: Cannoneer No. 4
Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on.
9
posted on
02/07/2006 10:25:29 AM PST
by
Dilbert56
To: Cannoneer No. 4
All very well, until you come up against someone with Chinese tanks, whose guns out range yours. Then you just have to hope you can stay away from them long enough for your air to come kill them... assuming you have any that's not busy fighting outnumbered for it's own survival.
10
posted on
02/07/2006 10:34:14 AM PST
by
El Gato
To: spintreebob
Equipment that is modular and interchangable. You are correct. This idea has been around a long time, going back to before object oriented design and programming, but few seem to have embraced it. Glad to see you advocating it.
It would save a lot of money and improve performance while eliminating duplication and the continuously reinventing of the wheel. Maybe that is why it is ignored, too much money in doing it the way it is.
Thanks for the observation.
Since this article is from Defense Tech, I suspect someone is selling their product through an infomercial.
11
posted on
02/07/2006 10:35:56 AM PST
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
To: Proud Legions; Paridel
Ping! What say you, Proud Legions?
12
posted on
02/07/2006 10:45:16 AM PST
by
June Cleaver
(in here, Ward . . .)
To: untrained skeptic
Yes it is lighter than an Abrams and an RPG7V will go through it like a bullet through a piece of paper
13
posted on
02/07/2006 10:54:16 AM PST
by
reluctantwarrior
(Strength and Honor, just call me Buzzkill for short......)
To: Dilbert56
"Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on." Man Dilbert56! I just love how you think!
14
posted on
02/07/2006 11:04:30 AM PST
by
Desron13
(If you constantly vote between the lesser of two evils then evil is your ultimate destination.)
To: Dilbert56; Squantos
Since the IEDs are triggered by cell phone calls, wouldn't it be fun if the cell towers automatically called every cell phone as soon as it was turned on? Might blow up a few IED placers until they caught on.IEDs are NOT being triggered by cell phones.
15
posted on
02/07/2006 2:07:32 PM PST
by
SLB
("We must lay before Him what is in us, not what ought to be in us." C. S. Lewis)
To: SLB
IEDs could be triggered by a walkie talkie, cellphone, ham radio or ANY thing that transmits a radio signal provided the frequency of the IED's receptor is the same as the transmitter.
It would be possible for an approaching vehicle to broadcast a "sweep" accross "all" frequencies. This would trigger the "dumb" IED's. Of course, then, the terrorists would have to develop a sequence of signals (a code) that the IED would recognize. Both us doing this and them doing this makes it more expensive.
To: spintreebob
It would be possible for an approaching vehicle to broadcast a "sweep" accross "all" frequencies. This would trigger the "dumb" IED's. Of course, then, the terrorists would have to develop a sequence of signals (a code) that the IED would recognize. Both us doing this and them doing this makes it more expensive. The level of sophistication is way beyond this.
17
posted on
02/07/2006 6:25:44 PM PST
by
SLB
("We must lay before Him what is in us, not what ought to be in us." C. S. Lewis)
To: Dilbert56
18
posted on
02/07/2006 6:44:02 PM PST
by
Wiz
To: spintreebob; SLB; Cannoneer No. 4
Terrs started using remote controlled (RC) switches to initiate improvised explosice devices in the '80's. Since then the bidness of countering these devices has been keping pace - understandibly under deep wraps for op sec reasons.
Now, with their widespread use in Afghanistan & Iraq these developments are coming more and more out in the open, commercially-wise.
Coalition forces are now investing heavily in technologies designed to detect and detonate RCIED's prior to their contact with troops.
These devices are in two primary classes:
Low-power devices - low frequency, low power devices such as garage door openers, key fobs and door-bell activator switches. Jamming/activator devices used to counter these use relatively low-power RF frequency energy to jam their freq's and prevent their functioning at a distance thereby enabling adequate protection. These jammers are intentionally low-power to prevent interference betweenan RF emitter (the jamer) and our own SINCGARS (VHF) radios and Blue Force (satellite) communications.
The second class is:
High-Power microwave systems - These devices cause greater interference and require more power to operate. This increase in the power amplifier of the jammer also draws more power from vehicle generators, detracting ferom other vehicle systems.
This is a newly created class of anti-IED devices that ranges from man-portable to vehicle mounted to truck based microwave emitter devices.
The technology is keeping pace with the threat. But there really is no secure protection to a terr who will do the suicide/homicide trip on Coalition forces.
With attributes to Janes IDR, Vol. 39, Jan 2006 - RCIED Countermeasures.
19
posted on
02/07/2006 7:18:42 PM PST
by
Khurkris
("Hell, I was there"...Elmer Keith.)
To: Khurkris
20
posted on
02/07/2006 8:23:55 PM PST
by
Cannoneer No. 4
(Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson