| Author | Message | ||
     Cityxslicker |
their experience with remote drones in test mode has not been impressive lately. The Navy 'lost' an unmanned helo copter UAV drone over DC; there were conflicting reports as to whether it was armed at the time. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
As Blake didn't see fit to include a translation with the article, I have undertaken it on his behalf. More than nine minutes of data was collected before an anomaly caused loss of signal. Initial indications are that the aircraft impacted the Pacific Ocean along the planned flight path." “Here’s what we know,” said Air Force Maj. Chris Schulz, DARPA HTV-2 program manager and PhD in aerospace engineering. “We know how to boost the aircraft to near space. We know how to insert the aircraft into atmospheric hypersonic flight. We do not yet know how to achieve the desired control during the aerodynamic phase of flight. It’s vexing; I’m confident there is a solution. We have to find it.” “Prior to flight, the technical team completed the most sophisticated simulations and extensive wind tunnel tests possible. But these ground tests have not yielded the necessary knowledge. Filling the gaps in our understanding of hypersonic flight in this demanding regime requires that we be willing to fly,” said DARPA Director Regina Dugan. “In the April 2010 test, we obtained four times the amount of data previously available at these speeds. Today more than 20 air, land, sea and space data collection systems were operational. We’ll learn. We’ll try again. That’s what it takes.” According to Schulz, three technical challenges exist within this HTV-2 flight regime. They are categorized as aerodynamic; aerothermal; and guidance, navigation and control. And each phase of flight introduces unique obstacles within these areas. “To address these obstacles, DARPA has assembled a team of experts that will analyze the flight data collected during today’s test flight, expanding our technical understanding of this incredibly harsh flight regime,” explained Schulz. “As today’s flight indicates, high-Mach flight in the atmosphere is virtually uncharted territory. ” In the coming weeks, the assembled independent Engineering Review Board will review and analyze the data collected. This data will inform policy, acquisition and operational decisions for future Conventional Prompt Global Strike programs—the goal of which, ultimately, is to have the capability to reach anywhere in the world in less than one hour. "It broke before it even did 10 minutes" "We can get it up there we just don't quite know where it's coming down yet" "We're whistling in the dark" "We have lot's of problems" "We think we know someone who can fix it" "We're not sure how, but we just want to go really fast" There, hope that helps. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
please send us more money. | ||
| Boogiman1981 |
The chinese carrier was bought from the ukraine to be used as a floating casino or so the story went at the time. From what we've been told they are a few years off from being able to effectively field that thing let alone actually use it for combat. Looks like the are working diligently at both. As for them coming here meh I ain't really worried. On a war of that scale mad still applies. Besides they'd lose their biggest market for all their wares. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
MAD only works if the guy in the whitehouse is willing to give the order to launch | ||
| Aesquire |
We have treaties on ballistic launches. Have to notify lots of folks when you lob something into space, whether it's orbital or not. Russia would be a little nervous if we tossed ICBM's at ( just as an example ) an Afghan village that a sat or drone showed had the new head of AQ having lunch. A Minuteman launched from N. Dakota would pass over Russian territory on the way. You'd be upset if Russia was fighting terrorists in Venezuela and decided to toss warheads over your house to hit them. So... hypersonic atmospheric missiles to hit fleeting targets. It's not that they are unstoppable, ( though that's important ) it's that you can hit a precision target, like the AQ guy having lunch, ( or a Chinese Carrier ) before it's moved on. It's 45 minutes to anywhere on earth at orbital speed. It's a couple of days to get the refueling planes and a B-1 to anywhere. ( not even counting the humans at risk in the planes ) Lunch was over 2 days ago. Something NOT mentioned is that the "fastest plane" is a freaking Glider. No engine. The Scramjet needed to fly that fast is still in development. The air screams through the engine so fast it's hard to keep the fire lit. What's being tested is the ability to control and survive the speeds ( and intense heat friction gives ) of such a Scramjet missile. Let's say I, in NY, toss a suborbital payload at Blake, in Texas. In seconds after being picked up by radar, someone in Kentucky or Florida could calculate that they are not the target. If that payload could maneuver in the upper atmosphere at near orbital speed? Total game changer. | ||
| Aesquire |
...bought from the ukraine to be used as a floating casino or so the story went at the time... So, the cover story worked? Remember, the orbital/guidance technology sold to the Chinese a few admin's ago was to improve commercial launch capacity.  | ||
| Cityxslicker |
the guy that brokered the deal is legend in Nikolaev, the boat was in 'refurb' since getting it from the Soviets, and had been scavaged thoroughly from looting. It was in 'mothballs' silly chinese wants to make 'casino' - show us money. Ukraine is well aware of how Capitalism works. They had no intentions of floating it, and the cash was a nice influx to the 'uncles' in the industry. Like we dont sell our planes and ships to our enemies.... in operational status.... all the time. | ||
| Two_seasons |
from michellemalkin.com US Department of State quote... As China’s first aircraft carrier takes to the open seas today for its inaugural sea trials, the U.S. government directed a pointed question at the Chinese military: Why would you need a warship like that? “We would welcome any kind of explanation that China would like to give for needing this kind of equipment,” U.S. State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters today. “We have had concerns for some time and we’ve been quite open with them with regard to the lack of transparency from China regarding its power projection and its lack of access and denial of capabilities.” Are you kidding me? Or, perhaps, this is more to the point... Were Beijing to have a sense of humor I’d expect an answer to that question along the line of, “We needed a ship of such massive capacity with which to deliver all the money you’re borrowing,” but since the snark option is off the table, China says the ship is “for the purposes of technological research, experiments and training.” | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Good one there, Two | ||
| Trojan |
China could have waited just a couple of years and bought one of the new high tech UK carriers that we have beeing built right now. Unfortunately the previous government forgot to cost things like aeroplanes and crew, and the current government scrapped the Harrier (AV8B) programme, so when we eventually get these things into service we won't have any aircraft capable of using them. The current plan is probably to sell one off straight away (probably to an unstable middle eastern governemnt) and ask the French to crew the other for us (seriously!!). Nice to see our leaders have defence planning as a priority these days  | ||
| Cityxslicker |
they want a pilotless air force and naval air component. because putting a pilot in harms way is dangerous. .... and because a pilot is more of a thinking weapon than the plane- and that is very dangerous. | ||
| Court |
I noted that no one . . .. .given the TITLE of the thread . . ever posted any photos of, nor information about, the Chinese AirCraft Carrier.     
NOTE: I know nothing about these. But if any of it's true . . . it's both very cool and very scary. | ||
| Trojan |
That's not a carrier, it's a small country! There can't be many places where that could even dock! | ||
| Court |
I suspect the word "nimble" will be notably absent in the marketing literature . . . . | ||
| Swampy |
A FEW FACTS: THE CHINESE HAVE COMPLETED THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DAM ( THREE GORGES ), THE WORLD'S LONGEST OVER-WATER BRIDGE ( 65 TIMES AS MUCH STEEL AS IN THE EIFFEL TOWER ). CONSTRUCTED A 15.000 ' HIGH RAILROAD INTO TIBET (ALL CONSIDERED MAJOR ENGINEERING FEATS). I have been told that Scrap Metal Frenzy of last year was to send to China to build the dam. That would be a cool business to get into, using other people's scrap to build things.... | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Anybody remember "Captain Scarlet"? That thing looks like the "Cloudbase". | ||
| Britchri10 |
SIG | ||
| Slaughter |
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/10/china- aircraft-carrier-launch | ||
| Hootowl |
They're going to be in for a rude awakening when they hit their first big wave and the massive flat spot between the two hulls does a belly flop. If you don't think this is possible, I have seen green water rolling down the flight deck of an aircraft carrier. That means the tip of the flight deck went under water. They're going to break something when that happens. Don't think so? We hit a wave so hard it moved the port CIWS mount and buckled the 01 level from frames 34-64. The ocean is stronger that any ship we can build. That thing looks like a bunch of cracked welds waiting to happen. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
The bulky catamaran styling makes it look like it can transform into...  | ||
| Swordsman |
YES!!!  The SDF Yi! ~SM | ||
| Hootowl |
And I have to ask...will it be coal fired? They've shut down their high speed trains due to accidents caused by poor workmanship. Wonder what a floating Chinese nuclear reactor would look like? If those things aren't going to be nuclear, they're going to be worthless. Getting those things deployed for any length of time would require constant refueling. Also, China will have to build and deploy (around the world) fleets of oilers and other supply vessels to keep their carriers from being floating doorstops. If they commit to deploying a carrier, there's more to it than building one ship. The US military is effective in great part because of its supply chain. China will have to do the same in order to do global force projection. Any bets on when their first at sea nuclear accident will take place? | ||
| Blake |
>>> THE CHINESE HAVE COMPLETED THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DAM ( THREE GORGES ), THE WORLD'S LONGEST OVER-WATER BRIDGE ( 65 TIMES AS MUCH STEEL AS IN THE EIFFEL TOWER ). The author of that might want to look into who was responsible for the engineering and project management on those projects. Kinda like attributing the Panama Canal to the Panamanian gov't of the day. Not quite the same, but you get the point. | ||
| Strokizator |
AND OF COURSE THE LAUNCHING AND LANDING CAPABILITIES FROM THE UTILIZATION OF TWIN FLIGHT DECKS AT ONCE All of our angled flight deck carriers can perform simultaneous launch and retrieve. The US began retrofitting Essex class (WWII) carriers in the 50's. So much for "ancient Chinese" bullsh!t. CHINA'S NEW A/C CARRIER COULD BE TWICE AS FAST AS ANYTHING WE HAVE Seriously? Since ours can travel "in excess of 30 knots" this clown wants me to believe the Chinese can go over 70 mph? That ain't gonna happen. | ||
| Court |
I'll bet there were LOTS of USA Engineers involved. Kinda cool how Obama appointed General Electric CEO Jeffrey R. Immelt, who is super-close to President Obama. The president named Immelt chairman of his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. Before that, Immelt was on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Now Immelt is heading to China to help the Chinese, and provide engineering support, to help the Chinese compete again Boeing on a contract. This guy is hilarious. | ||
| Court |
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/2011/01/17/new -york-times-g-e-to-share-boeing-787-tech-with-chin ese/ http://patriotupdate.com/10110/wh-advisor-on-jobs- moving-ge-x-ray-business-to-china | ||
| Hootowl |
Did sea trials on one. I won't say at what speed the navigation feed got blanked out, but it was well in excess of 30 knots, and there were armed Marines stationed anywhere you could see outside to keep us squids from seeing how fast we were going. We had Marines on board because this was back in the day when I could neither confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons aboard any US Navy surface vessel. So yeah, twice as fast? BS. | ||
| Slaughter |
Ummm... let's see... China's photoshop vessels can be deployed by the MILLIONS around the world. Eleventy BILLION carriers in fact! They have one used former Russky carrier and we're all-a-twitter. get a grip. | ||
| Boogiman1981 |
fyi 30kts = 35mph and if you look at Janes our boats are mostly listed as 30kts+ well i can tell you that the nuke carriers and even the old steamers would do a whole lot better than 30kts |
