Technology Stats Help

[Voodoo Nova]

China

Yes concentrated light energy and no matter how fast the satellite is traveling relative to a neutral point, relative to an earth bound system it still travels in a far less angular velocity. A few radians would cover about 5000 miles at 125 mile altitude, laser paints of satellites are common place now. The capability exists and is being used. The only issue is to create sufficient power throughput to send up the GWs of energy required for sending sufficient power to heat up the satellite.

As regards atmospheric conditions, yes it is susceptible, but not enough to attenuate it completely. The air in atmosphere and particulate matter is the main issue. Are there any other atmospheric issues? If you have sufficient power to burn through that attenuation and deliver sufficient power it is possible.

The issue is not tracking, it is only in the achieving the power throughput, which I have RPd as being completed by 2020,

China didn't use a laser to destroy a satellite, they used a "kinetic kill vehicle" according to that source. Laser tracking has been used for decades yes, but it is still not possible to destroy a satellite with a laser as it is today. The YAL-1 has a particular way it has to compensate for atmospheric conditions, and this is only for about 25 miles away while in the air. Think about the compensation needed in order to go through almost (and through) the entire atmosphere.

EDIT: I never said anything about tracking. Satellite tracking is something that can be done by an average joe schmo with enough determination.

Edit 2: Had to lighten the mood up.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[king of cochin]

China didn't use a laser to destroy a satellite, they used a "kinetic kill vehicle" according to that source. Laser tracking has been used for decades yes, but it is still not possible to destroy a satellite with a laser as it is today. The YAL-1 has a particular way it has to compensate for atmospheric conditions, and this is only for about 25 miles away while in the air. Think about the compensation needed in order to go through almost (and through) the entire atmosphere.

EDIT: I never said anything about tracking. Satellite tracking is something that can be done by an average joe schmo with enough determination.

China used a missile this time, but that article says it is already working on a laser weapon. YAL is only a MW class platform, I am talking about a GW, TW or PW platform, the kind used to trigger fusion research. I am not saying it is the best way, but it is doable? If a sufficiently powered laser is sent up, even after the atmospheric burn through, it will be enough to burn the satellite.

The thing is possible, it has been possible for decades, only no one has really tried.

China already blinds optical reconnaissance satellites using lasers, is the next step of jacking up power, so unprobable?

EDIT: Mood is light, my friend It is nice to have a technical discussion,

btw check

Edited October 13, 2009 by king of cochin

[HHAYD]

@HHAYD; They should be manned in order to verify targets, and ensure that mistakes don't happen. The Anti-Aircraft systems you're thinking of using have been around for decades. For the towers, just make it mobile SAM sites. That'll be easier to move around and cheaper on maintenance.

The turrets, slime/fireworks missiles and shells are not designed to be used around friendly aircraft so they are usually used when friendly aircraft aren't nearby. Besides, my IG nation doesn't even have an air force, and that means my CNRP nation won't have an air force. Is there a max limit on how many track-via-missiles can a computer handle without overheating or lagging? What is the possible max radar range?

Edited October 13, 2009 by HHAYD

[Subtleknifewielder]

The turrets, slime/fireworks missiles and shells are not designed to be used around friendly aircraft so they are usually used when friendly aircraft aren't nearby. Besides, my IG nation doesn't even have an air force, and that means my CNRP nation won't have an air force. Is there a max limit on how many track-via-missiles can a computer handle without overheating or lagging? What is the possible max radar range?

Mistakes can still happen even without aircraft of your own--what about aircraft from nations fighting on your behalf?

[Voodoo Nova]

The turrets, slime/fireworks missiles and shells are not designed to be used around friendly aircraft so they are usually used when friendly aircraft aren't nearby. Besides, my IG nation doesn't even have an air force, and that means my CNRP nation won't have an air force. Is there a max limit on how many track-via-missiles can a computer handle without overheating or lagging? What is the possible max radar range?

A reasonable radar range would be 40km per radar system. For the max limit before overheating, current systems don't overheat when they're manually run so I cannot answer that with any logical answer. TVM's main disadvantage is jamming and anti-radiation missiles, so remember that when you field them.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[HHAYD]

A reasonable radar range would be 40km per radar system. For the max limit before overheating, current systems don't overheat when they're manually run so I cannot answer that with any logical answer. TVM's main disadvantage is jamming and anti-radiation missiles, so remember that when you field them.

That's why active radar homing missiles are loaded in the towers' ammo storage in case if the TVM are inefficient. I was thinking that it required computer processing power to calculate the targets' location in the sky and guide the TVM toward them. What do you mean they are manually run? Do the operators actually control the TVM?

Mistakes can still happen even without aircraft of your own--what about aircraft from nations fighting on your behalf?

Then those slime/firework shells wouldn't be fired. If there are enemy bombers nearby, then the friendly aircraft would be warned to stay away from the tower from a certain distance and shoot down any enemy bombers that are too close to the tower. If the tower is not threaten by bombs, then the turrets would be deactivated.

[Voodoo Nova]

That's why active radar homing missiles are loaded in the towers' ammo storage in case if the TVM are inefficient. I was thinking that it required computer processing power to calculate the targets' location in the sky and guide the TVM toward them. What do you mean they are manually run? Do the operators actually control the TVM?

Then those slime/firework shells wouldn't be fired. If there are enemy bombers nearby, then the friendly aircraft would be warned to stay away from the tower from a certain distance and shoot down any enemy bombers that are too close to the tower. If the tower is not threaten by bombs, then the turrets would be deactivated.

Operators control the TVM system, yes. Most vehicle SAM systems (like the MIM-104 Patriot) use the TVM guidance system, and each carry ~4-8 missiles depending on the vehicles construction. That's why I said you are better off using mobile systems with TVM earlier. Not only are they mobile, but they each correspond to radar systems such as the Sentinal and interlink with each other in order to provide the best coverage on the battle field. Operators are key for SAM systems for target verification (meaning having the ability to avoid friendly fire by using human eyes and ears alongside computer systems) as well, so that will aid you on the battlefield should you have allies fighting alongside you.

Edited October 14, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[Executive Minister]

Project Outline

Project Results

This was that supersonic CAS I mentionned previously that was a heavily modified SR-71/YF-12 with the firepower of an A-10.

Not sure if I'll implement the primitive stealth characteristics of the YF-12's chassis... but I'm leaving the option open.

[King Kevz]

Voodoo not sure if your expertise would help much about this situation. I was thinking og building/rping a large space station in orbit with the ability to release drop pods from orbit onto the land below. The pods could contain at most three or four infantry soldiers with basic weapons such as assualt rifles and grenades.

I was thinking the pods would have shielding like that found on space shuttles which would allow them to go through re entry and then pop parachutes to slow their descent. I was hoping for you opinion on both the size and ability of the space station as well as on the pods themselves?

[Sargun II]

I think that any modern nation wanting to build those better have enough money to build their own goddamned Atlantis.

[JerreyRough]

Voodoo not sure if your expertise would help much about this situation. I was thinking og building/rping a large space station in orbit with the ability to release drop pods from orbit onto the land below. The pods could contain at most three or four infantry soldiers with basic weapons such as assualt rifles and grenades.

I was thinking the pods would have shielding like that found on space shuttles which would allow them to go through re entry and then pop parachutes to slow their descent. I was hoping for you opinion on both the size and ability of the space station as well as on the pods themselves?

I may not know so much of this issue, but the whole drop pod's idea is not worth the funding at all IMO; it should be POSSIBLE though. Testing it would more than likely find other problems, not to mention overcoming many difficulties that would arise from it. Remember to RP having to replace the marines often; even with good exercising machines, on the landing they'll still have some issues walking, not to mention hostile forces coming your way to intercept. Which reminds me: wouldn't either an SDI or anti-aircraft system target and destroy it? Radar would find the object pretty fast going through the atmosphere. If the country did not have those defenses, then it would be cheaper to send in aircraft and airdrop them.

I'd say that it costs enough that it would be easier and more cost-efficient to just send small groups of marines secretly throughout the world in small 'bases' (that are really some run-down building, or even a normal house). Or to develop that go-anywhere-in-2-to-3-hours jet the USA military was R&D'ing (...that also could carry two dozen men). 'Course, that's something a country with less stats would do to get agents around the world (ahem: me).

It all comes down to the economics...

Edit: I'm a fan of these as well remember, given away by my avatar.

Edited October 26, 2009 by JerreyRough

[Voodoo Nova]

Voodoo not sure if your expertise would help much about this situation. I was thinking og building/rping a large space station in orbit with the ability to release drop pods from orbit onto the land below. The pods could contain at most three or four infantry soldiers with basic weapons such as assualt rifles and grenades.

I was thinking the pods would have shielding like that found on space shuttles which would allow them to go through re entry and then pop parachutes to slow their descent. I was hoping for you opinion on both the size and ability of the space station as well as on the pods themselves?

My opinion is that it cannot and should not be done in CNRP. Here are the main issues with this sort of project:

1. There is no way to prevent the plagues that astronauts currently have while spending extended time in space . This includes things like bone and muscle degeneration, immunodeficiency, and depression.

2. The costs would astronomical for a single nation, and would take at least 40 years (So 120 months or 40 months to build completely) to build and put this together by yourself (It's taken 16 nations 13 years to build the ISS (which started in 1998, so they have 2 more years to go)). This is assuming any nation in CNRP has the ability to do this.

3. The technology is not out there to prevent the bone/muscles degeneration, depression, etc. There is also no current technology able to speed up production on this sort of thing. The training for all the soldiers to be able to be space capable is also not going to be feasible for your nation. The current cost, over 30 years of working on the ISS, is 157 billion USD. Imagine the costs of building something of that nature and to make it reusable.

At this time, no nation can do this in any reasonable amount of time for it to be effective. The costs and issues alone is a deterrence, let alone the amount of time it would take. Sorry Kevz, but it just isn't going to happen.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[Il Terra Di Agea]

My opinion is that it cannot and should not be done in CNRP. Here are the main issues with this sort of project:

1. There is no way to prevent the plagues that astronauts currently have while spending extended time in space . This includes things like bone and muscle degeneration, immunodeficiency, and depression.

2. The costs would astronomical for a single nation, and would take at least 40 years (So 120 months or 40 months to build completely) to build and put this together by yourself (It's taken 16 nations 13 years to build the ISS (which started in 1998, so they have 2 more years to go)). This is assuming any nation in CNRP has the ability to do this.

3. The technology is not out there to prevent the bone/muscles degeneration, depression, etc. There is also no current technology able to speed up production on this sort of thing. The training for all the soldiers to be able to be space capable is also not going to be feasible for your nation. The current cost, over 30 years of working on the ISS, is 157 billion USD. Imagine the costs of building something of that nature and to make it reusable.

At this time, no nation can do this in any reasonable amount of time for it to be effective. The costs and issues alone is a deterrence, let alone the amount of time it would take. Sorry Kevz, but it just isn't going to happen.

Alright, you focus a lot on the gravity issue, and that isn't entirely as bad as you seem to think. A lot of people are working on centrifuge systems to generate artificial gravity with good results. I'm in agreement that using it like a military base, or making one big enough to fit more than fifteen to twenty people would be completely unfeasible to everyone in CNRP, and that even that would take ages to build, but there is still possibility to make more prolonged mission based space stations while avoiding the gravity problems.

[Uberstein]

You're seriously going to take a tiny pod, put a person inside it, and slap a parachute on and call it good?

We don't even put people in tanks we airdrop with multiple massive parachutes, we para drop the crews separately. Those people in those pods are going to end up with bones made of jello when they impact.

[King Kevz]

Ah ok I wasn't sure on how it would work. Also as you say the disadvantages outweigh the advantages of the system. Shame really, also Uberstein i was thinking along the lines of a parachute system they used for astronauts returning from space.

[HHAYD]

So, how is your CNRP nation is going to scrap up enough money to build and maintain such outer space station and launch pods?

Also, I can think of two problems during reentry:

1. If those soldiers are not replaced frequently, even when there are decent exercising machines, they will suffer from weaken muscles and bones. They are more likely to suffer from injures caused by landing.

2. If your enemy has AA defenses, then those pods are going to flare up in their radar easily. Then your soldiers will be either shot out of the sky or captured by enemy soldiers waiting for the pod to land.

[Subtleknifewielder]

So, how is your CNRP nation is going to scrap up enough money to build and maintain such outer space station and launch pods?

Also, I can think of two problems during reentry:

1. If those soldiers are not replaced frequently, even when there are decent exercising machines, they will suffer from weaken muscles and bones. They are more likely to suffer from injures caused by landing.

2. If your enemy has AA defenses, then those pods are going to flare up in their radar easily. Then your soldiers will be either shot out of the sky or captured by enemy soldiers waiting for the pod to land.

1. True, but undoubtedly they would be swapped out every few months at the very outside.

2. These pods, until their parachutes opened, would be more difficult to hit than an ICBM.

In any case, Kevz has scrapped the idea already...

[Uberstein]

Ah ok I wasn't sure on how it would work. Also as you say the disadvantages outweigh the advantages of the system. Shame really, also Uberstein i was thinking along the lines of a parachute system they used for astronauts returning from space.

So you're going to be screaming through the air like a bat out of hell, a stream of fire behind you, visible to the naked eye no matter what time of day, and pray they don't hit your hundreds of little heat signatures with missiles?

That's stealthy.

[Markus Wilding]

Two small questions:

Right now I'm developing the building of a new naval ship, and progress stands at %0.04. How long should I set my timescale to get it done in a realistic amount of time?

And 2: What would the ranges probably be (in yards) for the Sul-35 assault rifle I'm developing?

Sul-35: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=72232

[Voodoo Nova]

Two small questions:

Right now I'm developing the building of a new naval ship, and progress stands at %0.04. How long should I set my timescale to get it done in a realistic amount of time?

And 2: What would the ranges probably be (in yards) for the Sul-35 assault rifle I'm developing?

Sul-35: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=72232

What type of ship is it?

For the Sul-35, and basing it off of what the image is, 300m effective; 650m max.

[Markus Wilding]

Landing ship.

[Voodoo Nova]

Landing ship.

About a six to eight months of RP time, so about 3-6 weeks of RL time.

Edited October 27, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[Executive Minister]

Updated the XA-1 Krieg fast close air support craft.

EDIT: Same linky as above

Edited November 3, 2009 by Executive Minister

[Subtleknifewielder]

Updated the XA-1 Krieg fast close air support craft.

EDIT: Same linky as above

Where?

[Executive Minister]

Where?

Post # 83

EDIT: What, nothing more to add to the 'Krieg'? Or is it just that good?

_{(yes, i know Voodoo, you don't have time right now)}

Edited November 4, 2009 by Executive Minister