What will be the most important invention in the military of the next century!

[kmguru]

First, the reason I had to do the disclaimer is that news boards and open forums are monitored by you know who. I did not want to do something stupid.

Now, the energy storage is simple capacitors. That is an open knowledge. What I can not tell you is how the energy is controlled. It is easy to do if you know what you are doing. They have been testing this for the last six years.

Though effectiveness drops for large mass, tiny items on a ionized stream can have all the punch needed. That is not a problem.

Exotic material? not really. Though I am not privy to that information, I can speculate certain carbide alloys, and certain heavy metals and plain mercury atoms would do the job.

 

[wet1]

I think prehaps another line of question might be a better course. I had heard the possibility of some new method to use nonleathal capture. like a sticky mass to restrain through gluing the victum/target to itself. Any thougts? Ideas?

 

[kmguru]

They already have the glue stuff. The better and cheaper method will be electronic method, since it is not consumable. The glue, spider web, rubber bullets, water, gas and so on. I think we are close to coming up a gadget that loosens up your bowel. It will stink a lot but be very effective. Another one is to cause a stomach pain that does not do any physiological damage, and so on.

What is your preference for mob control? Then I can work on the technology side.

 

[wet1]

Mob control

I have been on the front lines of mob control. You know, one of the idiots holding the rifle. One of the reserve weapons was the helicopter with CS powder in drums. Downwash of the rotor would spread the powder rather effectively over a larger area. This is public knowledge as it has been used a few times in the past.

So, what about a dispersal weapon, used from the individual's perspective, for the mass. Instead of the helicopter. Rubber bullets are effective for one to one but a mob is slightly more than a one to one targets. Water cannons are effective until the source is depleted which comes rather quickly. What is needed is a wide area, nonlethal, incapacitating device. One that is renewing and reusable and preferabally cheap to use.

 

[kmguru]

That is why, the best is electronic means that is yet to be designed. Other means are mercaptans (stink bombs). I do not think there is any chemical that can incapacitate for a short period with no long term effect and work on a parts per billion basis.

Another one is to use a virus whose life span is only 1 hour and can not reproduce. But it is too risky. Ah!, we could use such a virus on a battle field. I have not thought about mob control too much, because it is rare in US. Given time, I could come up with an elegant means that is highly ethical (like putting someone to sleep - not dead).

 

[Shadow]

kmguru,

OK, here's the basics, after reading these plans, I had a chance to acquire a couple of used power supplies from a professional photography company. With the schematics from them, I was able to alter the laser plans (they originally called for 2 flashtubes placed on either side of a ruby crystal and wrapped in tinfoil).
The power supply I have will fire 4 channels at 1500 w/s each and recharge in 6 seconds. I got a glass tube (approx 2" I.D., and 2 feet long) mirrored on the inside. My plan was to insert 4 12" long flashtubes equidistant and a ruby crystal in the center, with a small fan for cooling. I was thinking of using lenses to get focal lengths of around 30 to 100 feet (experimentation required).


Also, about mob control, I believe I read something about an acoustical device using extremely low frequencies to cause bowel pain or disorientate, not sure which.


Shadow

 

[wet1]

This from the BBC today:

Tranquilliser guns will be issued to police in a bid to cut fatal shootings by armed officers, it has been reported.
Home Secretary David Blunkett is to bring forward plans to issue dart guns to officers to give them a "third way" between using guns and batons, according to The Observer.

The move follows the death of schizophrenic Andrew Kernan, who was shot dead by police marksmen in Liverpool last Thursday as he waved a samurai sword.


It seems we are not the only ones concerned with the immobiliztion and capture without harm. Rather it seems we may well be slightly ahead of our time.

 

[kmguru]

I can design and prototype a gadget in 6 months that will immobilize a suspect in less than 5 seconds. The battery pack can be worn on the belt and the device on the wrist that will be no more than a hotel soap.

 

[wet1]

And would this be a transmitting type of effect? Or more like a stun gun where wires are required to connect to the target? Or more like the Taser where it requires you touch the target?

 

[kmguru]

You guessed it, it is a stun gun, where the two wires are replaced by two laser beams that conduct electricity by ionizing the air. Somebody already has a patent on it. Except the laser beam, everything is exactly like a stun gun. The distance depends on the energy lvel of the laser and the applied voltage. How neat....

 

[wet1]

Chagur wrote
Re. the Kursk: It was the supercavitating torpedo that made a mess of the pride of Russian's submarine fleet (brand spanking new), two of them actually, and why they are going to recover the Kursk. They don't want to take a chance on us trying to do again what we tried to do about twenty or so years ago.

I realize that this a little out of order to go back some ways to an earlier part of this thread but I ran into this and thought I would share it.

To get the whole info on this refer to this link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/europe/2001/russian_sub/raise_1.stm

Any further speculations?

 

[kmguru]

If the idea was to keep the SC torpedos secret, then that may be the case. But their demise could not be due to them. Any SC device does not need to start out at a constant velocity. A torpedo can speed up to sc level. But a bullet has to travel because there is no mechanism to accelarate it.

The technology is basic Fluid dynamics studied in any engineering college in the world.

 

[Chagur]

I think someone is confused ...

kmguru.

If the idea was to keep the SC torpedos secret, then that may be the case.

Remember, the Kurst also carried ballistic missles (ten I believe) and the most current guidance technology.

But their demise could not be due to them.

Apparently you aren't current. Check the Moscow Times: A second note has been found referring to the topedo problem.

Any SC device does not need to start out at a constant velocity.

No one said that it did, certainly not I (reread my original post).

A torpedo can speed up to sc level.

And that is why they suspect the propellant was what caused the first explosion. The torpedo is believed to use a liquid propellant to get it out to arming/acquiring/supercavitation distance, contrary to previous battery/electric motor propulsion.

But a bullet has to travel because there is no mechanism to accelerate it.

Steel, I believe, spike would be a more appropriate description of what the SPETzNAZ underwater rifle and pistol use.

The technology is basic Fluid dynamics studied in any engineering college in the world.

If the concept is so basic, why is it that no one else developed it in the thirty or so years that the Russians have been using it for weapons development? It was in the early '70's, I believe, that the SPETzNAZ weapons were developed, the '80's when the torpedo was developed, and not until '95 that word got out that Russia had such weapons (check Jane's). Oh, and don't forget: We lost the USS Scorpion (SSN-589), 21 May, 1968, about 400 miles off the Azores due to a similar accident (torpedo believed to have 'run hot' while returning from the Mediteranian).

thecurly1,

Sorry if I confused you by referring to that arrested ex-Naval Intelligence Officer as Parker.
"Convicted US spy Edmond Pope left Russia on December 14, 2000, hours after President Vladimir Putin granted him a pardon from a 20-year jail sentence, citing his poor health."

 

[thecurly1]

I unscribed to my own post on accident!

Sorry I missed all the great and broad replies. Anyways, if SC technology is as revolutionary as it sounds than this will be the most important invention of the next century. This is the most replies if've ever had to a post. I'm so happy.

About the Kursk, to set off another conspiracy theory I'll present my own: the Kursk was a Russian oscar-class submarine. Able to carry nuclear SLBMs to attack America. It was also equipt to destroy enemie hunter-killer subs. These submarines are juniors of the Russian Typhoon class SSBNs. The Typhoon class is such as this (From SSN, by Tom Clancy): The Typhoon is constructed of titanium with a double hull, making it extreamly hard to kill. Do you buy that a single torpedo exploding in the front of the ship sunk it? I don't. The torpedo's would have been isolated enought that if one went off, it wouldn't set off the other ones. I think the Russians were either testing a Supercavitation weapon, or there was an accidental firing of an SC torpedo.

Other Russian subs have sunk in the past, why are they rasing this one, near Russian without the cold war. There's something on that ship, or something that happened that they don't wan't anyone to know about. Why didn't the Russian Navy want help, especially from America, to resuce the Kursk sailors? Too fishy, no pun intended.

P.S. To lazy to check spelling.

 

[kmguru]

If the concept is so basic, why is it that no one else developed it in the thirty or so years that the Russians have been using it for weapons development?

I do not know whether US has such weapons in the last 30 years. But I can tell you that just because the concept follows a basic theory does not mean that anyone will commercialize it unless of course your opponent does.

For example, rotary engines (Mazda) pack a lot of HP in a very small package. The product has been around for a long time. Have you seen a weed whacker or portable power generator on that technology? I just read in PS that someone is developing a tiny rotary engine that will generate 40 watts for small tool use.

My engineering class project in 1968 was to design a propellerless submarine which worked just fine. Except US navy, I do not know anybody has one. On top of that it is not public knowledge.

Even though multi frequency sensor array was developed many years ago, US just recently started using for target aquisition.

So you see, just because a theory is in the books does not mean anything....

 

[thecurly1]

I would assume and hope that the US has SC weapons.

In my confidence in the US Navy, I assume that we are close to the Russians, if not more advanced in Naval technology. I'm sure that the Russians, didn't want any one to know that they've accomplished supercavitation, and utilized it in weapons. I think that the Navy has SC weapons, but there hasn't been a leak to the public.

Maybe when the Robert Hansen case is finished we'll know if the navy was affected and if so, it may give the public a general idea of the areas that had been compromised.

 

[kmguru]

Unless our military wants you to know, you will not find out. The fact that certain special type weapons and resources have not been public (Janes or anywhere) says a lot about the information. It does not mean that the Military keeps a secret. What it means is that unless someone in the authority tells a newspaper or magazine, it is not published - and nobody would believe it anyway.

For example, I heard a lot of opposition to SDI (another thread). About 6 years ago someone was working (can not detail) on high energy weapons. At that rate I could have had one. I think we do but not admitting openly because it may violate SALT II or something.

 

[Chagur]

Come off of it!

kmguru,

My engineering class project in 1968 was to design a propellerless submarine which worked just fine. Except US navy, I do not know anybody has one. On top of that it is not public knowledge.

Sure, like the carburators that were supposed to give you fifty miles to the gallon. 'Worked just fine'? Must have been noisy as all hell. Neither the US or the Russian subs have used anything but propellers.

For example, rotary engines (Mazda) pack a lot of HP in a very small package. The product has been around for a long time.

Yeah, like since the '60's when NSU developed it but couldn't solve the seal problem. Took the Japanese to do it.


thecurly1,

In my confidence in the US Navy, I assume that we are close to the Russians, if not more advanced in Naval technology.

Sure, kid. Just like we thought we were in air-to-air missle technology until the wall came down and ... wonder of wonders ... the Russians had vector thrust AAM's that could be fired backwards, even when flying supersonic! Bit of a surprise that was, let me tell you.

 

[thecurly1]

Its hard to judge either way

With secrecy between both countries, and scare information that's been leaked to the public it's difficult to estimate our technological closeness to Russia. Then again they still don't have any stealth aircraft that we know of, and they have one antiquated aircraft carrier. I hope that we are ahead of the Russians, but either way its hard to speculate.

 

[kmguru]

Hi Chagur:

You mean you did not buy the car with the carburator that my alma mater designed and Honda perfected (that gives 80 miles to the gallon)?

As I said, somethings are not public knowledge. That is why they call it , guess what? SECRET