- Status
[citation][nom]h83r[/nom]I love Mythbusters as much as anyone else, but their tests can hardly be considered scientific experiments. It's 5 people that are not scientists (they are engineers) trying to prove and disprove scientific theories. It's hit and miss.[/citation]
Not to get into a Science verse Engineer fight, but they are not even engineers. They come up with "cool" ideas with no real research into something and strap explosives to it. They are little better than backyard rednecks saying "Hyuck, wonder what happens when I strap this to that and blow it up."
I laughed when I read
Not to get into a Science verse Engineer fight, but they are not even engineers. They come up with "cool" ideas with no real research into something and strap explosives to it. They are little better than backyard rednecks saying "Hyuck, wonder what happens when I strap this to that and blow it up."
I laughed when I read
since supercapacitors are anything that can hold a relatively large charge (aka, capacitance). The added protection will come from the magnetic field reinforcing the metal armor. The field will strengthen the electromagnetic bonds of the metal atoms making it harder to deform (ie harder to penetrate). The field itself will do little or nothing directly to the actual projectile. It's a novel idea if they can maintain the field through an entire or peak of an impact.
Tomtompiper
Distinguished
- Jan 20, 2010
- 101
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]nekatreven[/nom]two words (or three depending on how you look at it) :non-ferrous bullets[/citation]
Eight words, try reading other posts before you post nonsense.
Any conductive material will be affected. Non conductive material like plastic and ceramic will not have enough delta v to do damage.
Eight words, try reading other posts before you post nonsense.
Any conductive material will be affected. Non conductive material like plastic and ceramic will not have enough delta v to do damage.
it's relatively easy to make a bank of capacitors that would consecutively dump charge into the Armour , would be like flipping the on/off switch inhumanly fast, of course when all your capacitors are spent then your done for... thats where you got an operator, with his hands on the button, he can see visibly where his shield gauge is at and how much time left his got on his button as well as recharge status, bear in mind he would probably only need the shields armed for 1 or 2 seconds at a time (if it took any longer the tank driver could well steer out the way) and no one is silly enough to be pressing this button to deflect bullets.... tanks are bullet proof to a large extent....
Not only is this news 8 years old (The technology was being tested in 2002) The article itself doesn't give that much detail about what they are hoping to stop. It's mostly RPG.
Here is a better article with more details.
http
/www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7487740/Star-Trek-style-force-field-armour-being-developed-by-military-scientists.html
Here is a better article with more details.
http
/www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7487740/Star-Trek-style-force-field-armour-being-developed-by-military-scientists.html[citation][nom]warezme[/nom]1) as a Trekkie everyone knows Voyager was an advanced vessel with the all encompasing force shield. 2) However, the original Enterprise NCC-1701 used a very similar form of shielding as is being developed by the British. It was a capacitive charging of the bulk plates. This makes me wonder if this is where they got the idea.[/citation]
I hate to reveal my Trekkieness, but the NCC-1701 was James T. Kirk's ship. Constitution-Class Heavy Cruiser with the more advanced "bubble" shields. You are thinking of the NX-01, which was the warp 5 prototype starship commanded by Jonathan Archer. That ship didn't have shields (or even phasers, initally). Rather it had hull plating which could be charged (they called it "polarizing") to mitigate the damage of energy and projectile weapons.
I did some research on this very concept back in the 80's. Basically, it will do nothing against optical weaponry (lasers); be minimally effective against projectile weapons; be moderately effective against explosive weaponry (shells, grenades, and missiles), and would be extremely effective against particle weaponry... which we don't have yet. I don't claim to be anywhere near as knowledgable as the experts they have working on this now, but I did receive an award from the Department of Energy for my research.
I hate to reveal my Trekkieness, but the NCC-1701 was James T. Kirk's ship. Constitution-Class Heavy Cruiser with the more advanced "bubble" shields. You are thinking of the NX-01, which was the warp 5 prototype starship commanded by Jonathan Archer. That ship didn't have shields (or even phasers, initally). Rather it had hull plating which could be charged (they called it "polarizing") to mitigate the damage of energy and projectile weapons.
I did some research on this very concept back in the 80's. Basically, it will do nothing against optical weaponry (lasers); be minimally effective against projectile weapons; be moderately effective against explosive weaponry (shells, grenades, and missiles), and would be extremely effective against particle weaponry... which we don't have yet. I don't claim to be anywhere near as knowledgable as the experts they have working on this now, but I did receive an award from the Department of Energy for my research.
Star Trek used to be science fiction, but as technology advances, we start to see that we are getting close to it. Look at the Airbus A380, it's huge, one day, it might be as big as the enterprise. Virgin Galactic is developing spaceships on its on. The force field, it might be incorporated to our new spaceships for protection of debris.
Alas, my lifetime might be too short to see all these happens...
Alas, my lifetime might be too short to see all these happens...
I think the only way this could work for dealing with incoming rounds from vehicular based munitions is to have a full spectrum sensor array, 360 degrees, which could detect the moment the munitions were launched, identify the distance from flashpoint, then calculate the charge level based on munitions flash size and the moment the munitions would hit the target, i.e. the vehicle with the new armour. This would require serious computational power within the vehicle.
The idea of Polarizing Hull Plating in ENTERPRISE came from the 20th century discoveries in the real world of ceramics which become harder when an electrical current passes through them.
So it is not too far fetched to use a similar technique for defense..
So it is not too far fetched to use a similar technique for defense..
toastninja17
Distinguished
- Aug 15, 2009
- 225
- 0
- 18,830
Mix it up with a bit of this technology:
http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_active_protection_system
and give it a couple of decades of R&D and we might actually have something looking and feeling like Star Trek force fields! I never thought the day might actually come! (and I should be ashamed of my wavering geekiness)
http
/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy_active_protection_systemand give it a couple of decades of R&D and we might actually have something looking and feeling like Star Trek force fields! I never thought the day might actually come! (and I should be ashamed of my wavering geekiness)
If it takes suprisingly little power and recharges quickly why not setup 2 fields and alternate between them. Then you always have a shield up. I doubt it would be strong enough to stop armor piercing ordance by itself so you are still back to heavy armor.
- Status
Facebook
Twitter