DailyDirt: More Advanced Weapons

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Technology has oftentimes advanced the weapons of war — creating new ways to destroy things on increasingly larger scales. But as our ability to destroy has become ridiculously big, it’s time to start looking for more efficient methods. Here are just a few military projects that are looking to improve targeted destruction.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post.

Filed Under: , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DailyDirt: More Advanced Weapons”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
out_of_the_blue says:

What an odd mixed -- and sanitized -- phrase.

“creating new ways to destroy things” — First there’s the oxymoron: “creating ways to destroy” — but it’s only “to destroy things”, no hints of killing creatures let alone murder.

“Would you like to play a game of thermonuclear war?” — NO. I put all such macabre “amusements” behind me by age 25, and turned to creating and building, however feebly.

Paul Keating (profile) says:

If only

“? Pick your ammunition, any ammunition you want… for an automatic gun that can shoot hundreds of rounds per minute. The US Army hasn’t perfected such a weapon just yet, but it’s looking for proposals that could make more versatile guns possible. [url]”

IF ONLY, they would try the same with charges and cables for phones and laptops, etc.

Anonymous Coward says:

You do realize that most major militaries have anti-ship missiles, right? It’s basically an upsized scud, which can be intercepted. Maybe we won’t have a 100% hit rate in interception, but if you can’t avoid the missile, I guarantee that more than one missile will be used in interception. Like any other attempt to penetrate a heavily layered defensive network, it requires saturation.

Mostly, I’m curious how they intend to handle targeting. The only viable option that could possibly provide detailed enough data to hit a moving target with a ballistic weapon would be a persistent satellite connection. You can’t exactly get an airplane close enough to ‘laze’ the target after all, and if you can, the carrier is totally screwed to begin with.

If they attempt to use a sonar network, there’s quite a few possible counter-measures there, making the missile an expensive long range waste that could only potentially get a lucky hit in.

On board radar guidance? Chaff can screw that completely. IR? Flares. Also, I’m not sure if a Carrier has a good enough IR signature to confidently launch a missile and hope you hit it instead of a another ship. Visual guidance? Useless on a cloudy day, as now it can’t target until it’s too low to make the necessary course corrections.

No, I’m extremely curious as to what they’re using for guidance if they expect it to actually be useful.

Add Your Comment

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

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...