Started By
Message

re: Russia developing bomber capable of launching nuclear attack from outer space

Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:13 pm to
Posted by therick711
South
Member since Jan 2008
26097 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:13 pm to
quote:

What pray tell do we have "established in space, and as protection vs space based craft"?


This is where I wish I knew what the X-37B did.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:14 pm to
quote:

I didnt say that. We, as in all us stupid civilian dumbasses on tigerdroppings or any other media outlet, should not care what any country announced.


Well if you'll read the second link in my OP, you'll see our POTUS does not care either. Russia is developing new weapon systems, both conventional and nuclear, right and left while we're cutting back our military and now will be cutting back our nuclear deterrent as well. That's the problem.
Posted by Tigeralum2008
Yankees Fan
Member since Apr 2012
17611 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:19 pm to
You think the technology being developed in the X-37 is only going to be used for recon?



Also, meet the X-51A... A hypersonic aircraft currently in use by the "US of motherfrickin A"






FYI, the USA also has countermeasures against hypersonic aircraft in ABM lasers as well as neutron beam guns
This post was edited on 7/13/16 at 1:21 pm
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:20 pm to
quote:

s is where I wish I knew what the X-37B did.


Well, look at it's size and that will give some clues....





I'd say just from a size standpoint it's very limited as to what payload it can carry into space. I guess it could carry perhaps one or two interceptors that can target orbital targets but that's about it.
Posted by Tigers_Saints
Member since Jun 2016
949 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:22 pm to
quote:

USA spent millions of dollars inventing a pen that can write in zero gravity.....Russians used a pencil


This is false yet constantly said. Soviets bought the same pens:

quote:

According to an Associated Press report from February 1968, NASA ordered 400 of Fisher's antigravity ballpoint pens for the Apollo program. A year later, the Soviet Union ordered 100 pens and 1,000 ink cartridges to use on their Soyuz space missions, said the United Press International. The AP later noted that both NASA and the Soviet space agency received the same 40 percent discount for buying their pens in bulk. They both paid $2.39 per pen instead of $3.98.


quote:

Both U.S. astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts initially used pencils on space flights, but those writing instruments were not ideal: pencil tips can flake and break off, and having such objects floating around space capsules in near-zero gravity posed a potential harm to astronauts and equipment. (As well, after the fatal Apollo 1 fire in 1967, NASA was anxious to avoid having astronauts carry flammable objects such as pencils onboard with them.)


quote:

The "space pen" that has since become famous through its use by astronauts was developed independently by Paul C. Fisher of the Fisher Pen Co., who spent his own money on the project and, once he perfected his AG-7 "Anti-Gravity" Space Pen, offered it to NASA. After that agency tested and approved the pen's suitability for use in space flights, they purchased a number of the instruments from Fisher for a modest price.


quote:

They passed all the tests and have been used ever since on all manned space flights, American and Russian. All research and development costs were paid by Paul Fisher. No development costs have ever been charged to the government. Because of the fire in Apollo 1, in which three Astronauts died, NASA required a writing instrument that would not burn in a 100% oxygen atmosphere.


quote:

In December 1967 he sold 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each.


LINK
This post was edited on 7/13/16 at 1:32 pm
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
84402 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:22 pm to
quote:

The US has war capabilities that we don't even know about, and we aren't announcing them to the world for intimidation purposes.


Yeah, but where is the fun in that?
Posted by Spock's Eyebrow
Member since May 2012
12300 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:24 pm to
Posted by Tigeralum2008
Yankees Fan
Member since Apr 2012
17611 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:26 pm to
quote:

Yeah, but where is the fun in that?


Right! It's so much more entertaining to accuse our military of throwing away our technological advantage in favor of wearing our favorite Jimmy Choos in combat
Posted by therick711
South
Member since Jan 2008
26097 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:27 pm to
You're thinking too conventional. I think most people guess that it is EMP related. That being said, that's why I wish I knew what it was.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:28 pm to
quote:






(kinda want this hat BTW)
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:31 pm to
quote:

You're thinking too conventional. I think most people guess that it is EMP related. That being said, that's why I wish I knew what it was.


And EMP is possible I guess. However, I wonder how big of an EMP device would be required to be an effective weapon? Is this thing capable of carrying a device of sufficient power to black out a sizable portion of Russia? I ask, be cause I honestly don't know.
Posted by CarRamrod
Spurbury, VT
Member since Dec 2006
58279 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

bomber
quote:

outer space




quote:

outer space
quote:

jet



First is it a bomber or a space ship? 2nd is it Jet propulsion? Because idk if the Russians know this but you need air for a jet to work and there aint no air in outerspace.
This post was edited on 7/13/16 at 1:37 pm
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
138056 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

Meanwhile in the UK


Fixed.


Those are British soldiers.
Posted by whodatfan
Member since Mar 2008
21935 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:38 pm to
quote:

“You can’t ignore the fact that Russia has great ability to mass conventional munitions and fire them over great range. We have to be able to fight through those salvos,” said Mr. Work, of the Pentagon. “And the railgun potentially will give us the means to do that.”

Russian officials, meanwhile, including Alexander Grushko, Moscow’s envoy to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, have said technological advances by the U.S., including missile defense, could undermine the strategic stability currently guaranteed by the relative balance between the Russian and U.S. nuclear arsenal.





Yeah. Ok. Russia wont play by any rules, but cries about US military advancements? Color me shocked.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:41 pm to
quote:

Also, meet the X-51A... A hypersonic aircraft currently in use by the "US of motherfrickin A"


Scramjet technology is cool to be sure. I'm just wondering how, from a nuclear deterrent standpoint, it has much use. If you're wanting to deliver a nuclear warhead how does putting it on this give any advantage over an ICBM? According to your illustration this "Waverider" takes an hour to get from NYC to London. We can already hit Moscow within 30 minutes from US based ICBMs carrying multiple warheads. I doubt this thing could mount more than a single warhead.
Posted by NOFOX
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2014
10115 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:43 pm to
quote:

A trial model of Russia's nuclear-capable outer space strategic bomber will be developed by 2020, according to its developer.


If we are going by press releases, by 2020 we will have XS-1 operational where one vehicle could launch 100 small satellites in 10 days for as little as $50m. That would make a Brilliant Pebbles-like microsatelite interceptor system economically feasible and quickly deployed.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71966 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:47 pm to
quote:

First is it a bomber or a space ship?


From the article it's a bomber capable of entering outer space, delivering a nuclear payload anywhere on the planet, then returning home.

quote:

2nd is it Jet propulsion? Because idk if the Russians know this but you need air for a jet to work and there aint no air in outerspace.


Just a guess here but I image it uses jet propulsion while in earth's atmosphere then uses rocket boosters to gain orbit. Then when it returns to earth's atmosphere it reverts back to jet power to RTB.
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
53509 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 1:49 pm to
Sounds retarded. But hey, if the Russians want to go broke with these stupid projects, then all the better for us.
Posted by LSURussian
Member since Feb 2005
133508 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 2:08 pm to
What's the advantage of this proposed bomber over having ICBMs with MIRVs?
Posted by RecordSetter
Member since Mar 2016
330 posts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 2:10 pm to
4303 Pacific Hwy
San Diego, CA 92110
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram