[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha / animu / ausneets / bsa / cafechan / leftpol / lewd / sw ]

/k/ - Weapons

Salt raifus and raifu accessories
Email
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


There's no discharge in the war!

File: 57f2f5c5bad1a27⋯.png (423.74 KB, 1279x916, 1279:916, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 613309f3cd8f012⋯.png (116.65 KB, 300x225, 4:3, ClipboardImage.png)

File: cedd15277022dc9⋯.png (1.42 MB, 1200x931, 1200:931, ClipboardImage.png)

7f0489 No.542853

Space Warfare and anti-satellite thread

More and more countries are starting a space program.Recently, space has become something not restricted to the governments of world superpowers, and private corporations and smaller countries have taken on the huge task of putting something into orbit. Thus, Iran has a space program(and has succesfully launched sattelites into orbit on iranian-desgined rockets).

Israel also has a space program.

The only treaty about warfare in space is the Outer Space Act, which essentially says that no nuclear weapons can be deployed permanently in space. Other than that, its fair game.

And all of you fags should know about the air force's secret shuttle, the x-37b. I think it's five times, it might be in the middle of its 5th flight right now, not sure. But the air force wanted its own shuttle to recover satelites. However, i doubt that the air force has put weapons on this thing just yet; They probably have drawn sketches for a payload on this thing of satellite kill vehicles, lots of people think a laser is likely, but every flight they've said they're testing purely scientific things; usually telling us in general whats onboard. (last flight they were testing some sort of heat exchanger and deployed some small satelites)

There's actually a small community of astronomers dedicated to tracking this thing from the ground. Its a shitton easier than most things launched because it's easily recognizable (ppl did this with the shuttle, and the ISS is babys first satelite to track). Everytime it goes up, its exact orbital perameters are posted online on a few forums.

Also, im going to leave this here because i feel nobody here knows about it.

The skylon spaceplane is being designed as a single-stage-to-orbit reusable spaceplane that takes off from a (very long) runway, flys a unique and precise flight pattern, and can achieve orbit. The secret behind this idea is a hybrid rocket engine. Essentially, rather than carrying onboard oxygen for rocket power during atmospheric flight, it will carry a very advanced air intake and precooler, which is supposed to cool incoming air from around 1000 degrees to -10 (in celsius iirc) before it gets into the engine. The cooled air is then compressed with power recovered from the heat exchanger and put into a rather traditional rocket nozzle with the fuel and burned. When the air is too thin to get useful amounts of oxygen from it, the engine switches to onboard oxygen. The plane will also be able to fly at hypersonic, but still suborbital speeds and cruise on semi-ballistic trajectories in the upper atmosphere for long-distance travel. This thing will be able to cruise at mach 5 for 6 hours, long enough to fly 3/4 around the world.

Nothing i've read about space has gotten me more excited than Skylon. Nothing seems more plausible. The only thing that Skylon needs to fly is a proof-of-concept engine. they have made heat exchangers and precoolers for lab testing that work to specs, this needs more r&nd. But it seems like the next big leap in aerospace technology, and the most plausible/closest thing to us.

Space fighters soon. Mark my words. But what would a real-life space fighter like Skylon be equipped with?

ead1eb No.542860

File: 1fb50801d57635f⋯.pdf (2.81 MB, 16 inch.pdf)

File: 3be4d8a811af0b8⋯.jpg (709.07 KB, 2048x1536, 4:3, 2A3_Kondensator.jpg)

File: fec974656be42bc⋯.jpg (2.74 MB, 3072x2304, 4:3, 2B1_oka.jpg)

For anti-satellite work use big guns.


765999 No.542870

>>542860

>ywn have such a drive to build really big guns that after leaving HAARP you become an engineer for hire to international pariahs like South Africa and Iraq before being gunned down by the Mossad in Paris

Why live?


ef6df5 No.542886

File: 62fd7a313d55317⋯.jpg (97.61 KB, 631x509, 631:509, OrbitalGun.jpg)

>>542860

Calm down great leader.


8d8dde No.542897

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

starwars IRL? but we already have a pinkhair infestation

>>542886

nice


7f0489 No.542906

>>542860

>>542870

>>542886

I love that 16 inch gun concept though. I've seen it floated around here a few times, and i think it would make the Iowa both relevant again and fearsome in modern naval combat, given satellites' role in it. But it would be shit in asymmetrical warfare, so it won't happen.

My favorite anti-satellite weapon idea was to use another satelite with a can of black spraypaint to come along and spraypaint the thing black. It does a close flyby and spraypaints half the target satelite. The sun will quickly make the satellite's electronics overheat, and will (relatively) quickly cause it to drop out of orbit. Thus one satellite kill vehicle can make passes on many enemy satellites before de-orbiting.


7f0489 No.542908

>>542897

I meant it more of in the reagan way than the george lucas way.


70a58e No.542911

>>542886

souce?


8d8dde No.543067

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>542911

brigador. one of my favorite pick-up games


52c253 No.544043

File: 2cc1d49a9f16376⋯.png (1.46 MB, 1208x780, 302:195, 2-Rods-from-god.Deal with ….png)

Already winning Wars! Thanks Reagan, DARPA & Secret agencies that shitpost

On both Chan's.

Our tax dollars are finally paying off.

Now let's plant a American FLAG on Psyche

>https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5148821/The-10-000-quadrillion-asteroid-revealed.html&ved=0ahUKEwjYgPz-iOPYAhVO6WMKHas-Ap8QqQIIHigAMAA&usg=AOvVaw0Ds3tkmJMYT6fs5DfpYiJx


fd25d1 No.544068

>>544043

Why have you schizos been acting up so much recently?


e81e16 No.544165

>>542916

These are Raptors.


e02d9b No.545305

File: b19bdd235c58072⋯.jpg (285.46 KB, 612x716, 153:179, b19bdd235c58072cf8bf138d2f….jpg)

>>542853

Please forgive my complete bakaness on the subject, but what could modern man possibly do against a Dinosaur extinction-tier Meteor shoa or a pair of Island three space colonies at L2 declaring independence?

ICBMs and other space weapons are all developed for striking targets on earth and not outer space with the exception of anti-satellite missiles.


22e597 No.545307

>>545305

Depends on how early the satellites realize we have a rock on an impact course. Assuming it's still reasonably far out, we wouldn't need all that much delta-v to shift its course the few degrees necessary for the asteroid to miss us. The actual mission would probably end up being a fuckhueg laser that bombards the rock until its trajectory shifts.


22560d No.545525

File: 0795cb73bc96f1b⋯.jpg (116.88 KB, 800x600, 4:3, 5-ioncannon_800.jpg)

>>545307

So asteroid defense via telescopes and icbms with nuclear bomb pumped lasers? Or satellite mounted ion cannons


3a4e31 No.545528

>>545525

Probably not ICBMS, the last thing you want to do is crack the asteroid. Now instead of one threat you have several dispersed over a larger area that are harder to target and deal with. Only time explosives would be used is planting a shaped charge on the surface whose purpose is to change the asteroid's path and not breaking apart. I don't know what you mean by ion cannon, unless you mean a literal stream of charged particles. Which I guess could be used to change the asteroid's momentum the way a laser would.


1d799d No.545640

>>545528

That's why you make the war heads bomb-pumped lasers, to push the asteroid. Also that is exactly what i meant with an ion cannon


1d799d No.545644

>>545528

The idea would be to redirect an asteroid by shooting it with a barrage of lasers from nuclear pumped lasers, which could be made by retrofitting current nuclear weapons and missiles. Also particle beams are cool.


ab6c5d No.545883

File: 18ae191eb0afa8a⋯.jpg (66.24 KB, 800x400, 2:1, Stonehenge_Cannons[1].jpg)

File: 368b89c6707ead5⋯.jpg (82.87 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Chandelier_Barrel[1].jpg)

>>542860

just how big are we talking here


f35fe8 No.545887

>>545883

first pic reminds me of Front Mission for some reason


05ccab No.545891

>>545883

That's a good question. How big a cannon would you need to put ordinance in space, and would it be accurate enough to fire at a satellite in orbit? You don't need a lot of mass to annihilate a satellite but I can't foresee a tiny projectile flying straight enough to break atmosphere without displacing at least a foot from the target.

If you really, REALLY needed a satellite gone, you'd probably have to fly a shuttle up to it like the OP mentioned. The real pain in the ass is getting and staying up there, and I can't imagine a projectile weapon platform hovering or flying in the stratosphere just to avoid air resistance. It's probably easier and cheaper to kill a satellite by chucking a rock out of a shuttle, but at that point you might as well capture the damn thing.


02aeec No.545893

>>545891

The problem with firing a projectile at a target in orbit is the debris. We're already seeing problems with the sheer amount of clutter in various orbits around Earth, due to the speeds involved in getting a vessel off Earth colliding with anything much larger than a pebble is potentially catastrophic. Given that hitting a satellite with a bullet/shell would create a large and expanding cloud of debris you could be creating a region of Earth Orbit that is completely blocked off from human vehicles (potentially for 40+ years, as orbital perturbation would take longer to affect less massive objects) given the reliance of the modern economy, and military, on electronic communications infrastructure you could be nuking your ability to maintain a state if you hit the wrong satellite at the wrong time.

It may sound ridiculous, but hitting targets in orbit is the form of warfare where you need to be very concerned on the environmental affect of your actions, as our orbits are incredibly valuable chunks of space, if you wanted to be able to fire on satellites without running a few years worth of simulations and impact reports then creating a large MASER and firing that at the satellite should fry its electronics fairly swiftly.


39dee3 No.545894

>>545891

>>545883

Would not a guided missile be way more cost effective at that point?


f35fe8 No.545895

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>545891

see

>>542870

that's not a story, this was real.


8d9829 No.545896

File: b31bb6632589c43⋯.webm (3.43 MB, 640x360, 16:9, Kantai Collection Iowa by….webm)

>>545891

>>545894

If you read the file named "16 inch" in the first reply, you will see a bunch of calculations about using one of the 16 inch cannons of an Iowa class battleship to shoot down a satellite on low earth orbit. The paper is dated 1982, so it's more than a quarter of a century old by now. I'm positively sure we could do even better today, especially if we used combustible light-gas guns.


05ccab No.545900

>>545896

Yeah, but that uses scramjets or rockets and is thus gay and boring. I'm talking ground-level projectiles here, no secondary propulsion or guidance. Anything like that and you might as well nab it out of orbit because of >>545893 . I'm sure you could whip up a small probe that engulfs it in a protective sheath and falls back to Earth, or if you're really feeling spicy, grabs it and shoots out past Earth's gravity well.


2dbfab No.545901

>>545528

>>545893

Pretty much this. Space is a horrible mistress to displease because fucking with her can lead to catastrophic damages. I remember a few years ago the Chinks blew up a defunct low-orbit satellite to test their anti-satellite missiles, and nearly incurred the wrath of half the world's airforces/space research centers because the missile's trajectory was off, launching thousands of fist-sized particles into the earth's orbit moving at thousands of miles per second. If you fuck up orbits in space, you potentially fuck up the orbit of all objects/ability to leave orbit for 10 to 400 years.


81754f No.545922

File: 034b85d7709ed13⋯.jpeg (50.54 KB, 374x347, 374:347, 069A7E38-7F9B-4488-805E-0….jpeg)

>first pic

>USAF

>United States Air Force

>air

>space


b90021 No.546017

Hooktube embed. Click on thumbnail to play.

>>545922

The airforce is in command of all military space operations. This has to do with the way satellites get into orbit. The airforce has to designate a corridor for the rocket to fly through, and ensure the rocket stays on it's path for commercial launchers.

This means they much track the satellite, which works similar to how planes are tracked, using ground radar stations, Doppler effect and transceivers.

Why not use the same infrastructure?

Another point is rather historical: spy satellites used to shit out literal film rolls, deorbit them, and then airforce planes would come along and grab the film out of the air. It's highly intriguing how they did shit before radio transmissions became as advanced as they are today.

So the airforce was responsible for the launch and recovers of data from the satellites. Why not put them in charge of the whole project?


977d2b No.546060

File: ff1a3beae47bb18⋯.jpg (21.03 KB, 350x350, 1:1, shuttle-doorgunner.jpg)

>>545922

>Doesn't know about the space shuttle door Gunner program


248e3b No.546061

>>546060

That’s navy, space (battle) ships should be a navy like in every sci-fi media.


977d2b No.546065

>>546061

>Believing in Chinese pictographic cartoon future fake nonsense.

Wait till we get there my friend, space Marines won't be a thing considering how small and lack of funding they are. Besides, space is much more like fighting in the sky then the sea.


248e3b No.546068

>>546065

>aerial combat

>small aircraft

>sometimes slightly bigger aircraft

>all relatively small

>naval combat

>huge ships

>complemented by smaller ships

>many different sizes from small to huge

>space combat

>huge ships complimented by small ships

>many different sizes

I can’t even think of an anime that is mostly about space combat, I was thinking of stuff like halo, and some ther western media, not niptoons


e1b3e4 No.546072

>>545894

It would. The US had a fighter-launched anti-sat missile back in the 80s. Boring, maybe, but probably more practical than fuckhueg guns, and at that size probably cheaper too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-135_ASAT


977d2b No.546084

>>546068

Sending stuff into space is hard, dangerous and expensive as fuck. We will see long range ship's no bigger than a B52 going around space with lots of space docks.


d86dfe No.546087

>>546084

>not building ships in space

Oh you’re talking about the near future. Objectively the worst future.


40967a No.546112

File: b9d3a3ea74a3f31⋯.jpg (49.79 KB, 400x400, 1:1, H8RLGVg3_400x400.jpg)

>>546068

Spaceships would have crews under a dozen men, not hundreds. And either way it would be a bad move to leave it in hands of navy or air force, its a sufficiently different medium that either branch would fuck it up.


2dbfab No.546129

>>546112

Will never happen. No way either department would give away their money laundering scheme space funding.


02aeec No.546133

File: 7f173084e6cc431⋯.jpg (41.26 KB, 564x980, 141:245, Future space mass saving u….jpg)

>>546087

Until you get asteroid mining and orbital construction up and running it is going to be beyond prohibitively expensive to put anything large enough to be useful in a fight up into orbit, when it takes a few (dozen) million dollars just to get the crew to their vehicle then it's not going to happen. As I said that all changes once you can produce shit in orbit (or once we build the space elevator).

As for what space combat vessels would be like to serve on I imagine they'd be a lot like modern submarines, everything is cramped as hell, crews hotbunking and everything. Every square centimetre of space and gram of mass has to be justified before take off (remember that even once you're out of earths atmosphere and gravity well - mass, inertia, and Delta-V are still your new gods in space travel). Then again that might be an argument for the 1960s version of space uniforms, made as skimpy as possible, to cut down on the weight of the crews uniform :^)

>From the office of Orbital Command

>We are well aware that numerous female crew members aboard our star-fleet have complained about the new uniform regs.

>We understand the discomfort and concern that these regulations might provoke

>However, given the weight saving measures and associated impact on ship performance (in and out of combat) resulting from the use of thermal bandages as standard female officer uniforms supports continued use of these regulations.

>To show female members of the fleet that we are not inflexible or unaware of their concerns however this message authorises a few amendments to the existing uniform regs

>High heeled go-go boots will now be issued upon your next visit to an official store facility, wearing these boots is not optional.

>We thank you for your continued service.


bade70 No.546144

>>546112

Of course it’ll be a new department but once we get to the point of having large fleetsof spaceships and interplanetary/interstellar travel I think water Navies will be obsolete. I would say airforce too but I’m not sure if it would be cheaper/easier to build atmospheric planes and space planes instead of a craft capable of both.

>>546133

>women in the military

>on spaceships

Unless you mean as ‘relief’ workers those two are mutually exclusive


02aeec No.546148

>>546144

Obviously, however take a look at pretty much any 1st world navy or air force these days.


e22cbf No.546154

>>546148

And take a look at almost any first world society. Correlation, or causation?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha / animu / ausneets / bsa / cafechan / leftpol / lewd / sw ]