PDA

View Full Version : It's happening now!



Dead-Eye
11th Aug 2011, 21:02
Pentagon sinks fastest aircraft ever:
https://rt.com/usa/news/darpa-falcon-pentagon-plane/

The US military began work on the Falcon back in 2003 in hopes of creating an aircraft that could be anywhere internationally within an hour. Of course, why the military would need to be anywhere, in the sky, that quickly, could be considered catastrophic for all of mankind, but a completed Falcon free of glitches and bugs won’t be ready any time soon.

Gaughranorama
11th Aug 2011, 21:15
$300m spent so they can bomb anywhere on the planet within an hour. You can imaging the *****ing the US government would do if any other country event mentioned the idea...

Romeo
11th Aug 2011, 21:23
DARPA... More like DERP-A. lol

TrickyVein
11th Aug 2011, 21:29
*MACH...20?*

USA USA USA

KingNL
11th Aug 2011, 22:44
They are broke but still they spend money on stupid stuff like this....oh wait it's for "freedom"

AlexOfSpades
11th Aug 2011, 23:35
$300m spent so they can bomb anywhere on the planet within an hour. You can imaging the *****ing the US government would do if any other country event mentioned the idea...

Heheh, you're right...


OHWAIT they can already do that! Nevermind.

I love this people that blame americans for everything ("oh i'm sure they're creating this to kill all of us!")... while sitting on Boeing's and flying all across the world.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 00:04
Heheh, you're right...


OHWAIT they can already do that! Nevermind.

I love this people that blame americans for everything ("oh i'm sure they're creating this to kill all of us!")... while sitting on Boeing's and flying all across the world.
Boeing = Very slow in comparison.

But yes, you are right. I fail to see the purpose of making a full-size bomber capable of this, when an ICBM does the job far better already.

sonicsidewinder
12th Aug 2011, 00:29
$300 million.

lol

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 00:50
its the same with nukes though, its perfectly ok for the US to stockpile hundreds of thousands of nukes, chem and bio weaponry, (all of which have been refined over half a century to achieve maximum potential and kill-rate) but woe betide anyone who wants to START a program.

and yes, at some point they will be responsible for killing us all, look how productive the war on terror has been. the rate of terrorist incidents has gone UP since they ignited that powder keg.

thanks guys, good job. is DOMINATE:thumb:

[FGS]Shadowrunner
12th Aug 2011, 01:01
This is so dumb. This is more dumb than the re-usable space shuttle which was only partially re-usable. This is more dumb than the $9 billion spent on developing space pens, while the Russians used pencils.

That is a flying fuel tank. It's going to be able to drop very little ordnance at all. By the time they get it working and operational, I am sure it will be totally obselete.

What is really dumb about this, if the technology is leaked, China will build hundreds, while the US would be lucky to have even one squadron.

NKD
12th Aug 2011, 01:06
I don't think you guys understand how little 300 million is in government spending in the US. Saying this is a waste of money is like scolding someone for not picking up the penny they just dropped. Actually, for the average American, a penny is worth more than 300 million is to the US Govt.


Shadowrunner;1647175']This is more dumb than the $9 billion spent on developing space pens, while the Russians used pencils.

You realize that's a myth right?

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 01:07
lol yeah the space pen , that was sheer brilliance .
:mad2:

yeah lets not be peaceful and explore the universe together in harmony, lets spend trillions ensuring we can annihilate each other completely.

how incredibly intelligent.

sometimes I really do wish a comet would reset this pathetic society we have created. we dont deserve this planet.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 01:45
Alright, just a few things:

You can all quit bemoaning the devellopment of the space pen. That never happened. As NKD mentioned, it was nothing more than a joke fabricated by someone.

Saying you arn't going to fabricate weapons will not end conflict. It will simply ensure someone else DOES and proceeds to wipe you off the planet when you inevitably do come in to conflict.

Wishing a comet upon the planet wouldn't "reset" our society. It would end it. As well as all life. And then ensure the planet remained unsuitable for life lest any rNA survive the purge. That's a pretty stupid thing to wish on anyone or anything.

Lastly, has anyone figured out this plane's purpose? It seems less useful than ICBMs or the B2 Spirit Bomber at both delivery and cost.

1134
12th Aug 2011, 01:49
I would guess it's a plane for rapidly deploying robot hair to people in need.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 01:57
Wishing a comet upon the planet wouldn't "reset" our society. It would end it. As well as all life. And then ensure the planet remained unsuitable for life lest any rNA survive the purge. That's a pretty stupid thing to wish on anyone or anything.



yeah this is true because after the dinosaurs were wiped out by a comet, nothing ever lived on earth ever again.

wow.

dannybates
12th Aug 2011, 01:57
Apparently they lost the HTV-2 (Project Falcon)

http://storyful.com/stories/1000006360

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 01:58
I would guess it's a plane for rapidly deploying robot hair to people in need.

lol, you and your robot hair !

cartridge
12th Aug 2011, 02:33
They cut our space program, but find money to develop more weapons of war?















It's not the end, but I can see it from here...

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 02:41
Its a bomber. Theres a reason its unmanned. It detonates.
Lets think about it. Its controllable. its easily big enough to put a tactical nuke in.
standard ICBM's only detonate on the surface along a straight path, this thing could be controlled to a fine degree, like the old 'smart' weaponry.

either way, applause must be given to the geniuses that designed this rather than feeding the starving nations.

Idiots.
I hate humans, we are the worst things to walk the planet.

thanos
12th Aug 2011, 02:48
Gentlemen,welcome to the US of A where kids starve and billlons of dollars go to waste on pointless weapons no one will ever use. Wanna know something really supriseing ? until somewhere around the 70`s to 80`s. the minute men, the people responsable for fireing the wmd's or the nukes had no encrpytion codes.Which means anyone of them could have faked a launch code and started WW3,and to think our government is so smart.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 02:53
and to think our government is so smart.

no-ones ever accused them of that.
thats outrageous , how dare you!


:)

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 03:08
yeah this is true because after the dinosaurs were wiped out by a comet, nothing ever lived on earth ever again.

wow.
Alrighty, quite a few problems with that:


Dinosaurs suffered an asteroid. A comet packs even more killing potential.

You want to eradicate human society. That involves not only killing every single human, but any culture as well, so that means infrastructure as well.

Dinosaurs were more or less exposed to most of the event. Humans have enough technology to at least try and save as many as possible by heading underground, and avoid ground zero.

Dinosaurs were more or less concentrated to a smaller area. Humans span virtually every square inch of the planet. You're comparing a continent-killer to a literal world-killer.

Not to mention, it's still just a stupid thing to say. That's like saying I've had a bad experience with some dentists, thus, all dentists deserve to die and their entire trade forgotten.

iloveyouXWORLD
12th Aug 2011, 03:14
its the same with nukes though, its perfectly ok for the US to stockpile hundreds of thousands of nukes, chem and bio weaponry, (all of which have been refined over half a century to achieve maximum potential and kill-rate) but woe betide anyone who wants to START a program.

and yes, at some point they will be responsible for killing us all, look how productive the war on terror has been. the rate of terrorist incidents has gone UP since they ignited that powder keg.

thanks guys, good job. is DOMINATE:thumb:

someone has to dominate. rule the world with fear. alot of people are crazy, give em a chance they will take everything you got. as long as america is never forced to use their weapons of mass destruction, all is good. (by forced i mean the country is invaded and on its last legs)

thanos
12th Aug 2011, 03:16
Romeo read a series called : Meg . by an author called Steve Alten.That will giveing you an interesting outlook on dinosaurs,even if it is a fictional out look.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 03:23
Alrighty, quite a few problems with that:


Dinosaurs suffered an asteroid. A comet packs even more killing potential.

You want to eradicate human society. That involves not only killing every single human, but any culture as well, so that means infrastructure as well.

Dinosaurs were more or less exposed to most of the event. Humans have enough technology to at least try and save as many as possible by heading underground, and avoid ground zero.

Dinosaurs were more or less concentrated to a smaller area. Humans span virtually every square inch of the planet. You're comparing a continent-killer to a literal world-killer.

Not to mention, it's still just a stupid thing to say. That's like saying I've had a bad experience with some dentists, thus, all dentists deserve to die and their entire trade forgotten.

yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.

thanos
12th Aug 2011, 03:26
We've been doomed since day one,and its our unwillingness to get up and fix the problem that is to blame.Besides I care more about a game then some of these so called humans.Life is sad like that.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 03:26
someone has to dominate. rule the world with fear. alot of people are crazy, give em a chance they will take everything you got. as long as america is never forced to use their weapons of mass destruction, all is good. (by forced i mean the country is invaded and on its last legs)

America doesn't need to be forced.

*points at Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Agent Orange, cluster bombs and Depleted Uranium.

They'll just do it because they can.

anyway, back on topic ,

what do you think they'll do now that it failed?
or is that a cover story?
what was its real purpose?

Any thoughts?

iloveyouXWORLD
12th Aug 2011, 04:10
yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.

ha ha, you sounded a bit like me then. yet here i am, still not doing anything about it. well i have always given to charity ect but its usually only been very small payments. not good enough really, but at least its something.


America doesn't need to be forced.

*points at Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Agent Orange, cluster bombs and Depleted Uranium.

They'll just do it because they can.

you have a point there. i hope they have changed.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 04:19
you have a point there. i hope they have changed.

I'm sure elements have, the kids of today have a much better outlook for the world. Our hope willl have to be with them.
Things will get much better when the 'old guard' has passed, ie the ones that furthered the cold war, we just have to make it there.

Back on topic.

MaxxQ1
12th Aug 2011, 05:26
Alrighty, quite a few problems with that:


Dinosaurs suffered an asteroid. A comet packs even more killing potential.

You want to eradicate human society. That involves not only killing every single human, but any culture as well, so that means infrastructure as well.

Dinosaurs were more or less exposed to most of the event. Humans have enough technology to at least try and save as many as possible by heading underground, and avoid ground zero.

Dinosaurs were more or less concentrated to a smaller area. Humans span virtually every square inch of the planet. You're comparing a continent-killer to a literal world-killer.

Not to mention, it's still just a stupid thing to say. That's like saying I've had a bad experience with some dentists, thus, all dentists deserve to die and their entire trade forgotten.

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2359/motivator715021er7a.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/motivator715021er7a.jpg/)

Also, to whoever it was that asked about what good is this mach 20 bomber for...

As a US Air Force veteran, I would say that first and foremost it's a way to keep our folks out of harm's way. Remotely piloted, or even autonomously guided through GPS means no aircrew to worry about. Maintenance could theoretically be cheaper/easier, since there's no worry about the crew cabin/LOX (liquid oxygen) tanks to provide air for the pilot(s), ejection seat(s) (or, in the case of the F-111, the entire cockpit ejects).

Also, with no one onboard, the vehicle can maneuver more aggressively, at higher G-loads than it would if it was manned. The current limit on G-loads on military aircraft is 9 G's in the F-16, and that's mainly because it uses a fly-by-wire sidestick, instead of the normal stick between the legs (hush, Pinky), and a seat angled back at about 30-35 degrees (most fighter aircraft seats are at 60 degrees). Better manueverability means better chances at avoiding SAMs or AAMs targeted at it. It was touched on earlier about ICBM REVs (re-entry vehicles - the warhead(s)) coming down in a straight line... that's not quite true. There's is *some* ability to alter the trajectory, but not much to really speak of. Having a delivery vehicle that can maneuver is a huge advantage.

Lastly, and what I see as the biggest advantage to this program, is the fact that down the line, the technology used to implement it will become commonplace and available for commercial flight, whether for cargo, passengers or both. It'll be no different than what happened with the airplane after WWI and WWII - all the tech developed for military use ended up being used for civilian flight - not including weaponry/armaments/delivery systems, of course.


yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.

So, do something about it. There's nothing stopping you from actually getting your hands dirty and getting up off your ass and changing things. It may seem like an impossible task, but it only takes a pebble to start an avalanche.

I have a low opinion of humans as well, but I also think that given time, we, as the human race, will finally wake up and smell the coffee (gag!), and straighten ourselves up. I liken the human race currently as a bunch of 6 or 7 years olds arguing on the playground. Eventually, they get older, smarter, and more mature, and for the most part, settle down. We'll do that eventually.

But not in my lifetime or yours.

jtr7
12th Aug 2011, 06:25
Man, in the late 1980's I read a science mag article about development of a Mach 25 passenger jet. This was because the global business world wasn't yet adapting to the future reality of cheap and tiny cellphones, a lot more communication satellites, a globally-unified Internet, web-conferencing, Power Point sales pitches with translators translating between countries, and other technological means for near-instant business or political projects/programs/talks/proposals between countries. The need for flying fast from country to country overseas, especially across the Pacific, for proposal meetings and mergers, etc., was mostly eliminated. The retirement of the Concord fleet comes to mind, though I think there were other factors. I've since read of various returns to the idea of the commercial super-sonic passenger planes, but not with 20+ Mach in mind, and without myself even tracking progress, so yeah, I wonder what's driving this decision this time.

Dead-Eye
12th Aug 2011, 06:27
Shadowrunner;1647175'] This is more dumb than the $9 billion spent on developing space pens, while the Russians used pencils.
Pencil is not legal on court documents. This is very important to masonic law.




Lastly, has anyone figured out this plane's purpose? It seems less useful than ICBMs or the B2 Spirit Bomber at both delivery and cost.
You can send a Seal Team to any part of the world in less then an hour. It really is Team America World Police.

Edit: ...and we can be assured that in the future, those seal teams will be augmented too!

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 07:28
yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.
Kid? That's adorable. You really have no idea how old I am, nor do you know anything about. But you know, A+ for effort.

Well, let's see... Those millions dying from curable diseases? Guess which mod was in the hospital last month because they almost died from their disease? Who also gives 10% of their salary to Red Cross every month to help the same starving nations? I'll give you a hint: It's the same mod that thinks you're an absolute moron.

And if you honestly think anyone cares more about a video game than their fellow humans, you're stupid. These people are here to discuss something. If you'd like to discuss saving the world and condemn video games, why don't you go find a forum for that and piss off? ;)

Pencil is not legal on court documents. This is very important to masonic law.


You can send a Seal Team to any part of the world in less then an hour. It really is Team America World Police.

Edit: ...and we can be assured that in the future, those seal teams will be augmented too!
Actually... That does make sense. As a transport device, it has potential. I still stand by my assessment that long range missiles are superior for ordinence delivery (Smaller, nimbler target) and the B2 is superior for sheer mass of delivery.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 07:40
Kid? That's adorable. You really have no idea how old I am, nor do you know anything about. But you know, A+ for effort.

Well, let's see... Those millions dying from curable diseases? Guess which mod was in the hospital last month because they almost died from their disease? Who also gives 10% of their salary to Red Cross every month to help the same starving nations? I'll give you a hint: It's the same mod that thinks you're an absolute moron.


me, me, me. I, I, I.

Hospital huh? did your self righteousness gland flare up again?

There's a cream for that.

btw, the red cross was infiltrated by nazi's, and was used as a front for all sorts of terrible purposes.
Everybody google: red cross nazi gold.
choose a different charity. Unless, of course, you already knew this....


Quick! I told the truth! give me another infraction while no-ones looking!

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 08:03
me, me, me. I, I, I.

Hospital huh? did your self righteousness gland flare up again?

There's a cream for that.

btw, the red cross was infiltrated by nazi's, and was used as a front for all sorts of terrible purposes.
Everybody google: red cross nazi gold.
choose a different charity. Unless, of course, you already knew this....


Quick! I told the truth! give me another infraction while no-ones looking!
No, no... That would be Diabetes. And because the testing is so expensive, I frequently find myself simply guessing at my bloodsugars. My lady found me on the floor, and couldn't wake me up. So, you know, there's that.

And yes, the Red Cross is Nazi-run. You can tell by the refugee aid and global response work they do. Evil bastards.

Lastly, I have yet to give you an infraction, despite how severely you deserve one, which anyone can verify by simply looking at your profile, you tool. Keep up the behavior though. You wont get an infraction, you'll just get turfed for good. I'd suggest playing nice.

ApertureRat
12th Aug 2011, 08:07
so, you're not even gonna look?

there it is folks, modern day research at its finest.

also, couldnt you get one of those self testers for diabetes? theyre like 50 bucks over here...

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 08:16
so, you're not even gonna look?

there it is folks, modern day research at its finest.

also, couldnt you get one of those self testers for diabetes? theyre like 50 bucks over here...
The testers can routinely be had for free when you buy the test strips that go in to them. Problem being, those test strips are over a dollar per strip. You're supposed to do it six times a day, and they have a habit of misreading. Then the small needle one uses to break the skin is about half a buck each time (The metal mushrooms at the tip after using). Insulin is about forty dollars a bottle, which lasts about ten days. Then there's the needles. And finally, in order to keep a license (Which is a requirement of my job, which I need to pay for the insulin to keep me alive) I have to get my Diabetes checked out by a professional every three months, which is another $250 every time. There you go, modern day research at it's finest.

And of course not, why would I? You've already drawn your conclusions about me, so I think it only fair to assume you're a crazy person who also happens to be thoroughly ignorent as a cherry on top. What inspiration have I to research something you post?

Partydrank
12th Aug 2011, 08:24
Your a [mean person] Aperture Rat, get outta here

p0rtalm0use
12th Aug 2011, 08:31
yeah Aperture we all hate you, because we are tolerant and level headed and stuff, you wouldnt want to have to make another profile would you? because it takes at least 2 mins...


<_< >_> <_< 0.0

u win. I'll just play along, not say anything too unconventional, and blend into the crowd. I'll be nice.

Solid_1723
12th Aug 2011, 08:37
btw, the red cross was infiltrated by nazi's, and was used as a front for all sorts of terrible purposes.
Everybody google: red cross nazi gold.
choose a different charity. Unless, of course, you already knew this....




Why would you be worried about giving money to nazis though?
After your comments about sterilizing and shooting people in the martial law thread I would think you share a lot of common ground!

p0rtalm0use
12th Aug 2011, 08:45
^ We, I mean I, agree with the above! get outta here Aperture , go work for NASA or something.

Fine I'll leave, it was fun while it lasted. cya Romeo. I got to 50 posts without getting banned, thats pretty good right?


Now, I wonder if theres a CoD forum I can...join.
everyone enjoy DXHR, you've got a good community here, and you're in for some laughs ahead.
*BOWS . peace all.

hey Romeo, go ahead and delete my accounts. but do me one favour, enjoy it.:D:flowers:

imported_the_guy
12th Aug 2011, 09:16
Freedom = Bombs.

iloveyouXWORLD
12th Aug 2011, 15:00
Well, let's see... Those millions dying from curable diseases? Guess which mod was in the hospital last month because they almost died from their disease? Who also gives 10% of their salary to Red Cross every month to help the same starving nations? I'll give you a hint: It's the same mod that thinks you're an absolute .


you have gained my respect. glad you didnt die bro :) 10% & a nasty desease, i think i need to up my game.
EDIT: you sure have a thing for locking down innocent folks threads though. what was wrong with the thread just then asking for a demo?

Dead-Eye
12th Aug 2011, 15:41
I'm not worried. When Ron Paul is elected president in 2012, and puts an end to the secret Mayan warmachine; it will become legal to own your own jet fighters for self defense! I'll buy a replica P-40N to shoot these things down when the Mj12 seals come to assassinate me, you know for having an independent opinion! :lol:

Just like I did the other day, in that game, and made a video about it:
0WzoDf7EgZ4




Was that all an excuse to post this video I made? No, that's a conspiracy theory... :lmao:

iloveyouXWORLD
12th Aug 2011, 15:46
I'm not worried. When Ron Paul is elected president in 2012, and puts an end to the secret Mayan warmachine; it will becomes legal to own you're own jet fighters for self defense! I'll buy a replica P-40N to shoot these things down when the Mj12 seals come to assassinate me, you know for having an independent opinion! :lol:

Just like I did the other day, in that game, and made a video about it:
0WzoDf7EgZ4




Was that all an excuse to post this video I made? No, that's a conspiracy theory... :lmao:

ha ha ha dead-eye you make me smile. :)

KingNL
12th Aug 2011, 16:01
Why are you all against this?
Do you hate freedom?

Dead-Eye
12th Aug 2011, 16:21
ha ha ha dead-eye you make me smile. :)

It's good to laugh!


Why are you all against this?
It probably has something to do with the questionably of government's authority. They say they have a right to do things for Freedom, Justice, Democracy and the American way. But who really believes that?



Do you hate freedom?
Freedom Bombs! They are bombs that will set you free!!! :lmao:

What, don't you get "their" satanic jokes? :D

TrickyVein
12th Aug 2011, 16:28
Oh my, reading over this thread has just made my day.

Really, anything else is just downhill from here. My entertainment has peaked for the morning.

*sigh*

Dr_Bob
12th Aug 2011, 17:56
yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.

Go seek help.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 18:13
you have gained my respect. glad you didnt die bro :) 10% & a nasty desease, i think i need to up my game.
EDIT: you sure have a thing for locking down innocent folks threads though. what was wrong with the thread just then asking for a demo?
I have a nasty habit of almost dying, and then disappointing those who stand to inherit the insurence money. lol

As for it, I have to lockdown leak discussion, which is what it was. My opinion on it is irrelevent.

Go seek help.
LOL

Hey, it's advice from a Dr, no less... :)

Trainwreck
12th Aug 2011, 18:47
In this thread: complete idiots who misunderstand the point of national defense, and who are ignorant of even the most basic workings of economics. I especially love this post:


ts the same with nukes though, its perfectly ok for the US to stockpile hundreds of thousands of nukes, chem and bio weaponry, (all of which have been refined over half a century to achieve maximum potential and kill-rate) but woe betide anyone who wants to START a program.

Yes, it is acceptable for the U.S. and its Western allies to stockpile nukes, and no, it is NOT ok for tyrannical regimes like Iran, Iraq, or North Korea to do the same. Are you really so daft? The U.S. does not care if Britain, France, Japan, South Korea, Australia or another stable, free democracy is powerful; in fact, we want them to be.


*points at Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Agent Orange, cluster bombs and Depleted Uranium.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed in order to end a very costly war. If we hadn't done it, the only alternative was invasion, which would have cost millions more in Japanese lives, American lives, and Russian lives. With the added bonus that Japan would've been split into two states, much like Germany. Agent Orange was a grave mistake, and unfortunate; but our intentions in Vietnam were noble. Depleted Uranium is a great way to pierce armor. Not really against using it.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 19:36
Yes, not to sure why depleted uranium is such a big deal for some people. Oooohhh!! The US has heavy bullets! Be afraid!

And while I may not have agraid with the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, I am also no against the mass quantities of stockpiled weapons these days, especially many of the bombs the US is carrying. Because for those paying attention, much of the bombs the US has rolled out lately, it's not "we can bomb bigger things" it's "we can bomb more specific things, with destroying unintential targets". Hell, between the accuracy and payloads, the US can blow up a building across the street from you without taking down your building. I find that nice, if my very old neighbors just happen to be threats to the world. =/

Solid_1723
12th Aug 2011, 19:50
Yes, it is acceptable for the U.S. and its Western allies to stockpile nukes, and no, it is NOT ok for tyrannical regimes like Iran, Iraq, or North Korea to do the same. Are you really so daft? The U.S. does not care if Britain, France, Japan, South Korea, Australia or another stable, free democracy is powerful; in fact, we want them to be.



Agreed, I'd much prefer if no country had them, but this is simply not the case. So I'm Ok with stable countries having them as a deterrence to the rogue states you just mentioned.

Though stockpiling them en masse with the capability to destroy the earth many times over is somehow a relic of the cold war.

Itkovian
12th Aug 2011, 19:54
Yes, not to sure why depleted uranium is such a big deal for some people. Oooohhh!! The US has heavy bullets! Be afraid!



It's not because of its mass that there is trouble with it, it is because of the environmental (or at least the local) impact vaporized DU has. Basically you'll find DU dust around victims of DU shells, which is very toxic, so it really should be something to be used only when strictly necessary.

Furthermore, I think it's a bad idea to use it in countries where we're hoping to win hearts and minds, especially when there are alternative (for example, germany has extremely effective KE tank ammo that uses a new type of Tungsten that has similar adiabatic shearing properties as DU ammo does).

Not that DU rounds are used now anyway. Even the A-10s have long switched to purely High Explosive Incendiary ammo loads, instead of the usual Combat Mix (a mix of DU and HEI shells).

Itkovian

KingNL
12th Aug 2011, 20:38
Yes, not to sure why depleted uranium is such a big deal for some people. Oooohhh!! The US has heavy bullets! Be afraid!

And while I may not have agraid with the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, I am also no against the mass quantities of stockpiled weapons these days, especially many of the bombs the US is carrying. Because for those paying attention, much of the bombs the US has rolled out lately, it's not "we can bomb bigger things" it's "we can bomb more specific things, with destroying unintential targets". Hell, between the accuracy and payloads, the US can blow up a building across the street from you without taking down your building. I find that nice, if my very old neighbors just happen to be threats to the world. =/

I bet you are a supporter of the patriot act.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 20:40
It's not because of its mass that there is trouble with it, it is because of the environmental (or at least the local) impact vaporized DU has. Basically you'll find DU dust around victims of DU shells, which is very toxic, so it really should be something to be used only when strictly necessary.

Furthermore, I think it's a bad idea to use it in countries where we're hoping to win hearts and minds, especially when there are alternative (for example, germany has extremely effective KE tank ammo that uses a new type of Tungsten that has similar adiabatic shearing properties as DU ammo does).

Not that DU rounds are used now anyway. Even the A-10s have long switched to purely High Explosive Incendiary ammo loads, instead of the usual Combat Mix (a mix of DU and HEI shells).

Itkovian
Depleted uranium is used in an anti-material role, not an anti-infantry one. It's actually too much bullet for a fleshy target. Besides, I don't think any infantry on the recieving end would need to worry about the toxicity of the round...

Frankly, I understand people's skepticism and reluctance to use radioactive materials, but I'd much rather something useless be used as a bullet than going through the expense of creating tungsten carbide (Which is an extremely expensive procedure, if you've ever had to go through carbide bits).

iloveyouXWORLD
12th Aug 2011, 23:03
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed in order to end a very costly war. If we hadn't done it, the only alternative was invasion, which would have cost millions more in Japanese lives, American lives, and Russian lives. With the added bonus that Japan would've been split into two states, much like Germany. Agent Orange was a grave mistake, and unfortunate; but our intentions in Vietnam were noble. Depleted Uranium is a great way to pierce armor. Not really against using it.

couldnt they have nuked a battlefield though? i dont know anything but civilians. or just drop a warning nuke in a rural area nearby. after they saw the power of the bomb im sure they would have gave up. oh well its too late now.

Romeo
12th Aug 2011, 23:09
couldnt they have nuked a battlefield though? i dont know anything but civilians. or just drop a warning nuke in a rural area nearby. after they saw the power of the bomb im sure they would have gave up. oh well its too late now.
Precisely my point about why I considered them a bad decision at the time. Nagasaki had absolutely no military structures to speak of, and Hiroshima wasn't exactly a military base. Picking them as targets was not an intelligent decision at all. It would've made more sense to either bombard a military location (Demonstration of ability) or to bombard somewhere less populated (Demonstration of power). Both would've served as impressive intimidation tactics, while minimizing civilian casualities.

thanos
13th Aug 2011, 00:22
Terror effect, by bombing those locations,and the side effects of the bombs themselves,they caused a terror effect,after seeing just what the bombs could do both sides were very willing to sign a ceasefire.

Romeo
13th Aug 2011, 01:02
Terror effect, by bombing those locations,and the side effects of the bombs themselves,they caused a terror effect,after seeing just what the bombs could do both sides were very willing to sign a ceasefire.
The side-effects weren't really known at the time, all both sides new was: Nuclear bomb = Big explosion. Besides, the psychological effect would've still played out without killing thousands upon thousands. Because it doesn't take a genius to figure out than when a country can fire something with the destructive force to not only damage a city, but to quite literally eradicate it entirely, it's typically a good idea to back down.

jtr7
13th Aug 2011, 01:14
There are still the MOABs, the shock and awe without irradiating the place. Is the plane designed for carrying such a payload?

Romeo
13th Aug 2011, 01:23
Again, raw damage potential is no longer the objective with modern bombs. Accuracy and control are. The US does want to take out an entire city for one target, they'd rather just get the one target and engage it specifically.

TrickyVein
13th Aug 2011, 01:25
And yet, even if different targets were picked, that is no guarantee that the Japanese would have surrendered more readily. It is amazing to me that even after the end of the war, there were still so many individuals who continued to hold out (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout#Japanese_Army_stragglers_after_the_end_of_World_War_II). Bushido code, and all of that.

jtr7
13th Aug 2011, 02:30
Again, raw damage potential is no longer the objective with modern bombs. Accuracy and control are. The US does want to take out an entire city for one target, they'd rather just get the one target and engage it specifically.

The MOABs were initially used to shake people up more than physically destroy targets, though they were used for that, as well, and it's the shock and awe effect I mentioned them for.

Asterisk
13th Aug 2011, 04:01
Only reason the US holds onto it's nukes is for mutually assured destruction. They're just leftovers from the arms race.

thanos
13th Aug 2011, 04:06
Its more of i have a gun to your head while you have a gun to my head kind of thing,kinda of like that one bit from the third pirates of the carriben movie, Barbosa,Jack,and William I believe,all holding their flintlocks on each other.I can't shoot you without you shooting me. But its the same point,nothing more than a club we hold over each others head,a useless item unles you believe sci-fi movies such as the core and armagedden really will happen and thus require use of said WMD's .Also I have seen the grey one,he has much power.

Romeo
13th Aug 2011, 07:22
Only reason the US holds onto it's nukes is for mutually assured destruction. They're just leftovers from the arms race.
God I hate it, but I also completely understand that ideology...

Its more of i have a gun to your head while you have a gun to my head kind of thing,kinda of like that one bit from the third pirates of the carriben movie, Barbosa,Jack,and William I believe,all holding their flintlocks on each other.I can't shoot you without you shooting me. But its the same point,nothing more than a club we hold over each others head,a useless item unles you believe sci-fi movies such as the core and armagedden really will happen and thus require use of said WMD's .Also I have seen the grey one,he has much power.
In modern use, that's all they are. Heck, even in the heyday of the cold war, that's all they were. The "useful" bombs these days are the ones that can find you in a populated city, penetrate your bunker and annihilate everyone inside without disturbing the hot dog stand across the street. Heck, to me I find that even more intimidating than the existing MOABs, Conventional Explosives and Incendiaries, because while the US may suffer hesitation using them (Is it worth destroying a city just to take out your little cell?), there's absolutely no consequences to weigh, and thus no hesitation, in firing a smart bomb at you.

IwantedOrange
13th Aug 2011, 13:21
lol yeah the space pen , that was sheer brilliance .
:mad2:

yeah lets not be peaceful and explore the universe together in harmony, lets spend trillions ensuring we can annihilate each other completely.

how incredibly intelligent.

sometimes I really do wish a comet would reset this pathetic society we have created. we dont deserve this planet.

Don't be angry about that, but know, that the more such things are happening, the closer the judgement of god comes.
And he himself said, that the humanity won't be prepared for his return, because they are turned away from his word.

"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power.
(2. Timothy 3,1-5))

Are you recognizing, of which time he is talking about?

Lady_Of_The_Vine
13th Aug 2011, 13:42
^
You're wasting your time replying, he's abandonware... along with his 'other' new account.

Solid_1723
13th Aug 2011, 14:46
^
You're wasting your time replying, he's abandonware... along with his 'other' new account.

According to the previous page of the thread, only his new account is abandonware though.
Is it a glitch in the matrix?

Trainwreck
13th Aug 2011, 17:09
couldnt they have nuked a battlefield though? i dont know anything but civilians. or just drop a warning nuke in a rural area nearby. after they saw the power of the bomb im sure they would have gave up. oh well its too late now.

There were no battlefields to bomb, though. And if you create one, it would be in a city anyway. Furthermore, you would be killing thousands of your own troops for no good reason. A conventional invasion would've depended largely on aerial bombardment, which would have included lots of railways used for military transport. That alone would have caused a horrible famine which would have led to millions of Japanese deaths alone (and recall, the bombs only killed thousands, not millions).

Nuclear weapons effectively prevented World War III from ever occurring. They've been a real boon to humanity, in all honesty.

Romeo
13th Aug 2011, 18:04
There were no battlefields to bomb, though. And if you create one, it would be in a city anyway. Furthermore, you would be killing thousands of your own troops for no good reason. A conventional invasion would've depended largely on aerial bombardment, which would have included lots of railways used for military transport. That alone would have caused a horrible famine which would have led to millions of Japanese deaths alone (and recall, the bombs only killed thousands, not millions).

Nuclear weapons effectively prevented World War III from ever occurring. They've been a real boon to humanity, in all honesty.
There were still military complexes to bomb (Consider the battle that led to those events, for example: Pearl Harbour), or less civilized areas resulting in less civilian casualities.

Asterisk
13th Aug 2011, 18:12
Rest assured that if we get nuked, most things are going down with us. ;)

Reven
13th Aug 2011, 20:51
Then maybe we should take shelter in massive underground structures...something like a vault.

NKD
13th Aug 2011, 20:54
Then maybe we should take shelter in massive underground structures...something like a vault.

Or a fortress comprised of ASCII dwarves.

Joseph Manderley's Corpse
13th Aug 2011, 21:54
ron paul 2012

thanos
13th Aug 2011, 23:51
The sad thing is, you wouldn't even have to hit anything with a nuke, airburst the thing and the EMP will do all the work for you,and since a lot of people have little to no clue how to hunt ,much less dress or skin a deer. A good fraction of the population would starve,no money because the EMP rendered atms useless and wiped out bank records to pay for food,and no clue how to forage.Cars would be useless unless you knew which parts to replace. an airburst nuke, wouldnt even have to be a big one,a small one would do the job, would cause chaos and panic in any heavyly populated city.

iloveyouXWORLD
13th Aug 2011, 23:58
oh well at least we get to play DXHR before judgement day. so it better be damn good. LOL

thanos
14th Aug 2011, 00:04
Bloody well better get the chance to play it before Judgement day.

Romeo
14th Aug 2011, 04:54
The sad thing is, you wouldn't even have to hit anything with a nuke, airburst the thing and the EMP will do all the work for you,and since a lot of people have little to no clue how to hunt ,much less dress or skin a deer. A good fraction of the population would starve,no money because the EMP rendered atms useless and wiped out bank records to pay for food,and no clue how to forage.Cars would be useless unless you knew which parts to replace. an airburst nuke, wouldnt even have to be a big one,a small one would do the job, would cause chaos and panic in any heavyly populated city.
As the solar flare that hit Montreal proved, an EMP is not eternal. Or even that big a deal, really. Generators simply take over until power is turned back on, most protected electronics remain unaffected. Cars would stall during the event, and then work as normal after. And food will still last a few days in an ice box without power, and of course canned food would all still be fine regardless.

An airburst would do nothing but slightly annoy a country. And irradiate it.

Dead-Eye
14th Aug 2011, 16:03
Precisely my point about why I considered them a bad decision at the time. Nagasaki had absolutely no military structures to speak of, and Hiroshima wasn't exactly a military base. Picking them as targets was not an intelligent decision at all. It would've made more sense to either bombard a military location (Demonstration of ability) or to bombard somewhere less populated (Demonstration of power). Both would've served as impressive intimidation tactics, while minimizing civilian casualities.

Nagasaki was the only Christian town in all of Japan. I'm sure the satanic forces that were running our nation at the time, and still are, thought hitting Nagasaki was absolutely vital as part of their ritualistic sacrifice.

thanos
14th Aug 2011, 17:51
Romeo who hardens anything againest emp's? Really The army, and the pentagon might ,but most places more than likely dont put any protection againest emp's in place, after all no one really expects to be hit by one.

Trainwreck
14th Aug 2011, 20:25
As the solar flare that hit Montreal proved, an EMP is not eternal. Or even that big a deal, really. Generators simply take over until power is turned back on, most protected electronics remain unaffected. Cars would stall during the event, and then work as normal after. And food will still last a few days in an ice box without power, and of course canned food would all still be fine regardless.

An airburst would do nothing but slightly annoy a country. And irradiate it.

That's not true. An EMP would fry a lot of electronics and make them unusable permanently.

Romeo
14th Aug 2011, 20:33
Romeo who hardens anything againest emp's? Really The army, and the pentagon might ,but most places more than likely dont put any protection againest emp's in place, after all no one really expects to be hit by one.
Vehicles need to be hardened against EMP, as the ignition coil in your motor routinely unleashes large EMPs. And most electronic devices that use high voltage capacitors in order to jump exposed air become unprotected EMP, which as a result, need to protect themselves from that same interference. Quite a few circuits do, just out of necessity (Pace makers, circuits near MRIs, circuits near diesel generators). Most circuits also have the ability to reset themselves, or soak up interference as well.

Zorvan
17th Aug 2011, 09:43
Look at the shape of that "aircraft".

Tell the world you're making an "aircraft" that can be anywhere in an hour or less, and they'll take it in stride figuring they can still just shoot the thing down no problem.

Tell the world you're building an "inter-global thermonuclear warhead" with an unprecedented nuclear payload capability and watch the **** hit the fan.

Rainbow6Team
17th Aug 2011, 19:17
This technology will eventually be commercialized meaning faster travel times and less polluting aircraft.Don't forget that today's commercial jets technology began in a world at war.

thanos
17th Aug 2011, 19:18
Dont we already have suborbital tech ?

Rainbow6Team
17th Aug 2011, 19:20
Whatever...

Anyway as I say,countris can benefit from this,create faster traveling commercial airplanes.

MaxxQ1
18th Aug 2011, 06:20
Dont we already have suborbital tech ?

Yep... it's been around since the '50's. Anything that goes more than 50 miles up and comes back down without going into orbit is considered suborbital. Alan Shephard and Gus Grissom were the first Americans to go suborbital in their Mercury spacecraft (because the Redstone booster rocket wasn't powerful enough to get them to orbit). It wasn't until John Glenn in a Mercury-Atlas that we finally got into orbital flight. I suppose you could also include the pilots of the X-15 (99 flights total), since many, if not all, of those guys ended up with astronaut wings.

Nowadays, Virgin Galactic, and maybe SpaceX will be catering to the consumer crowd for suborbital flights, and more than likely in the next 15-30 years, orbital flights.

thanos
19th Aug 2011, 04:00
Dont forget the SR-71 blackbird. Though to this day I still think it would be better named weepingbird than blackbird.

Anyone that gets into a plane that leaks fuel,either really brave or really crazy.

MaxxQ1
19th Aug 2011, 06:03
Dont forget the SR-71 blackbird. Though to this day I still think it would be better named weepingbird than blackbird.

Anyone that gets into a plane that leaks fuel,either really brave or really crazy.

First of all, as far as I know, the SR-71 has never made it to suborbital altitudes. At best, we're talking 100-120K feet (about 22-25 miles). The internationally recognized border for astronaut wings is 50 miles, or may be 100km now. Either way, best altitude for the Blackbird isn't even half that distance. Keep in mind, I'm a former USAF member, and so was my uncle, who actually worked with Blackbirds while he was in.

Secondly, the SR-71 was purposely designed to leak fuel while on the ground. At the speeds it flew, the body would heat up and expand at the seams*, sealing the joints and stopping the leaks. This is why generally there would always be a tanker waiting for an SR-71 to fill up after takeoff. Also, the lubricants used for various systems was specially formulated to work at higher than normal temps, and would require pre-heating before engine start.

Lastly, the fuel used on the Blackbird was JP-8, a somewhat thicker and more powerful fuel than the normal JP-4 kerosene-based fuel used in more conventional jet aircraft. JP-4 has a high enough flashpoint that you can drop a lit match in a puddle of it, and all that would happen is that the match would go out. JP-8 has an even higher flashpoint, because of the aforementioned aerodynamic heating of the aircraft. Even the tires are embedded with aluminum dust (maybe titanium? I can't remember for sure - It's one or the other, anyway) to help dissipate heat, which is why they look more silver than black in photos.

*Almost the entire fuselage was nothing more than a fuel tank with wings, which is why the leaks would occur from the body, and not from internal tanks. There are also tanks in the wings, and again, the leakage was intentional and compensated for.

thanos
19th Aug 2011, 17:15
Thats not the info I was given. the metal used in the skin of the plane was designed because of the high temps the plane had to endure.

The leaking problem,I was given to understand was because they never found a plastic,ploymer or metal that wouldnt melt ,change shape or contract at the high temps to make tanks out of. Also pilots had to be preped roughly 24 hours in advance and you only had about 20 min to hit a tanker and refuel. < This is the info I was given or was made known to me,I do not dispute your claims.

But still regardless of the safety measures and design, something tells me getting in a plane that leaks like a slieve is not so much a good idea,and i`ve done my share of crazy things in my day. And not sure the cost of JP-8 but i`m sure it isnt cheap.

MaxxQ1
19th Aug 2011, 17:28
Thats not the info I was given. the metal used in the skin of the plane was designed because of the high temps the plane had to endure.

The leaking problem,I was given to understand was because they never found a plastic,ploymer or metal that wouldnt melt ,change shape or contract at the high temps to make tanks out of. Also pilots had to be preped roughly 24 hours in advance and you only had about 20 min to hit a tanker and refuel. < This is the info I was given or was made known to me,I do not dispute your claims.

But still regardless of the safety measures and design, something tells me getting in a plane that leaks like a slieve is not so much a good idea,and i`ve done my share of crazy things in my day. And not sure the cost of JP-8 but i`m sure it isnt cheap.

The skin is a titanium alloy. A fairly basic one at that. OTOH, the *paint* was spec

Abram730
20th Aug 2011, 17:59
And yet, even if different targets were picked, that is no guarantee that the Japanese would have surrendered more readily. It is amazing to me that even after the end of the war, there were still so many individuals who continued to hold out (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout#Japanese_Army_stragglers_after_the_end_of_World_War_II). Bushido code, and all of that.

Japan was ready to surrender. Negotiations is all the nukes stopped.:eek:

It wasn't about saving lives, that just sounds better.:flowers:

Dead-Eye
20th Aug 2011, 19:11
Japan was ready to surrender. Negotiations is all the nukes stopped.:eek:

It wasn't about saving lives, that just sounds better.:flowers:
Yup! :thumb:

Just like how FDR knew that Pearl Harbor was going to happen and he let it happen so he could get the U.S. into the war. He had been provoking the Japanese for years leading up to the war by halting Japanese assets inside the United States and putting embargoes on the nation, they attacked because they had to for their own survival. By the time Pearl Harbor was about to happen, American guns for hire were already working for China as the First American Volunteer group; getting payed 700 (1941)dollars by the Chinese government for every Japanese plane they shot down.

One member from the AVG, who was part of the 3ed group know as the "Hell's Angels" latter went on become one of the founders of the Hell's Angles biker gang. I guess he never got tired of being a gun for hire. It's interesting because the Hell's Angles had this dream of becoming a privet army and working for governments all around the world. This dream is very well depicted in the movie Sky Caption and the World of Tomorrow, in which the main character is a former AVG pilot who now runs his own private army.

It's funny because no one really knows that Sky Caption and the World of Tomorrow has anything to do with the Hell Angles biker gang. That's because you need to know that Japan was provoked into the war by the U.S. to see the connection. Most people in the states believe the governments lies and can't put the two together. Seeing as we all know who all runs Hollywood, I would say this is them laughing at us again.



Yes, it is acceptable for the U.S. and its Western allies to stockpile nukes, and no, it is NOT ok for tyrannical regimes like Iran, Iraq, or North Korea to do the same. Are you really so daft? The U.S. does not care if Britain, France, Japan, South Korea, Australia or another stable, free democracy is powerful; in fact, we want them to be.
You have too short of a list for tyrannical regimes. You forgot to add the United States, the United Kingdom and basically all western allies. :p



Frankly, I understand people's skepticism and reluctance to use radioactive materials, but I'd much rather something useless be used as a bullet than going through the expense of creating tungsten carbide (Which is an extremely expensive procedure, if you've ever had to go through carbide bits).
Well, who trusts the nuclear industry? I sure as heck don't:
IJ9Wxmwab0M
70% of all nuclear reactors in the United States are in the same state as the ones that melted down in Japan! That's not an industry I consider trustworthy.


The side-effects weren't really known at the time, all both sides new was: Nuclear bomb = Big explosion. Besides, the psychological effect would've still played out without killing thousands upon thousands. Because it doesn't take a genius to figure out than when a country can fire something with the destructive force to not only damage a city, but to quite literally eradicate it entirely, it's typically a good idea to back down.
Radioactivity was discovered in the early 20th century. Not to mention the United States had already caped a nuke in New Mexico. Believe me, the United State Military leaders already knew what the bombs would do. The United States is not as incompetent as it pretends to be.

That's why I get so upset at the ridiculousness of the political situations right now. People really need to wake up to the fact that their government is lieing to them and almost everything they do is planned for an agenda. Look at history, the United States Military has a record for being some of the most competent people with the most resources on the face of the earth. So when they go around say "We can't find the terrorists" Or "We need more money to root out terrorist" I can see it's all just B.S. being hand fed to the American people to have them pay for their own enslavement, and people just go along with it.


My god the zombie Apocalypse already happened didn't it! America is a nation of brain dead zombies, that believe anything they see on the T.V!

God, when will this nightmare end!


Oh and specking of Agent Orange (again something they totally knew would work like it did), you know who made that? The same people that are trying to kill you with GMOs right now!
Oza03d4HCK0

Please stop being zombies America.

Rindill the Red
20th Aug 2011, 19:24
Oh and specking of Agent Orange (again something they totally knew would work like it did), you know who made that? The same people that are trying to kill you with GMOs right now!
Oza03d4HCK0


I live in St. Louis. My high school physics teacher and his wife used to work for Monsanto getting paid over $100,000 per year to do genetics modification research.

His greatest achievement? He and his team singled out a gene switch that stops second generation genetically modified seeds from growing correctly, which forces farmers to buy new seed from Monsanto every time they want to plant a new harvest. After completing the project he found that what he did didn't sit well with his conscience, so he quit and is now a pastor and high school physics teacher (and a damn good one too).

Dead-Eye
20th Aug 2011, 19:36
^^ Yeah, Monsanto is pure evil. They breath money and spit out death.

Turns out those GMOs are leading to infertility in primates they studied them on. What a surprise.

Rindill the Red
20th Aug 2011, 19:50
^^ Yeah, Monsanto is pure evil. They breath money and spit out death.

Turns out those GMOs are leading to infertility in primates they studied them on. What a surprise.

They aren't pure evil. Say what you want, farmers wouldn't buy from them if the products they provided didn't save them money/let them make more money. Roundup/pesticide/etc. resistant crops that grow with less water/nutrients/etc. and provide superior produce lets the farmers farm more efficiently.

Have you ever considered that to support the research costs to develop such radically more efficient crops requires a lot of money? If Monsanto spends billions developing a better crop, and then farmers buy some seed once and keep using it, Monsanto wouldn't be able to stay in business, and there would be no economic incentive to develop more efficient crops.

Vasarto
20th Aug 2011, 21:43
Yeah I have been aware of that aircraft for a while back when they thought it could get to Newyork to L.A in half an hour.

Of course that was a passanger plane design lol.

Eventually we will have them.

Romeo
21st Aug 2011, 07:56
Well, who trusts the nuclear industry? I sure as heck don't:
IJ9Wxmwab0M
70% of all nuclear reactors in the United States are in the same state as the ones that melted down in Japan! That's not an industry I consider trustworthy.


Radioactivity was discovered in the early 20th century. Not to mention the United States had already caped a nuke in New Mexico. Believe me, the United State Military leaders already knew what the bombs would do. The United States is not as incompetent as it pretends to be.

That's why I get so upset at the ridiculousness of the political situations right now. People really need to wake up to the fact that their government is lieing to them and almost everything they do is planned for an agenda. Look at history, the United States Military has a record for being some of the most competent people with the most resources on the face of the earth. So when they go around say "We can't find the terrorists" Or "We need more money to root out terrorist" I can see it's all just B.S. being hand fed to the American people to have them pay for their own enslavement, and people just go along with it.


Two problems I noticed right off the bat here:
Depleted uranium bullets are just that - depleted. Those snipers that fire them probably wouldn't be too efficient if they were busy vomitting from radiation poisoning. Regardless of one's opinion on nuclear energy, a depleted uranium round has about as much potential for causing a nuclear meltdown as a ball-point pen.

Second problem is with your second point. The United States was the first country to really deploy nuclear technology in a weaponized format. And while radioactivity was somewhat understood (And even that to limited standards), it's reaction in such a format was not. Hell, if you want proof, consider what you yourself just said: The US is not nearly as incompotent as they appear. If they knew full well that fallout was just as big a risk as the weapon itself, they probably wouldn't have detonated a dozen times more warheads on their own country than their enemy, now would they?

Abram730
21st Aug 2011, 18:30
Two problems I noticed right off the bat here:
Depleted uranium bullets are just that - depleted. Those snipers that fire them probably wouldn't be too efficient if they were busy vomitting from radiation poisoning. Regardless of one's opinion on nuclear energy, a depleted uranium round has about as much potential for causing a nuclear meltdown as a ball-point pen.

Second problem is with your second point. The United States was the first country to really deploy nuclear technology in a weaponized format. And while radioactivity was somewhat understood (And even that to limited standards), it's reaction in such a format was not. Hell, if you want proof, consider what you yourself just said: The US is not nearly as incompotent as they appear. If they knew full well that fallout was just as big a risk as the weapon itself, they probably wouldn't have detonated a dozen times more warheads on their own country than their enemy, now would they?

Behold the power of the word Depleted.
About 100% of the atoms that compose DU are radioactive. The danger is cancer and not radiation poisoning. A CAT scanner could have a 1 in 300 chance of giving you cancer yet it wouldn't give you radiation poisoning. DU is also quite toxic.

Yes DU is radioactive!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np2v1EtQnSk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0shAgs_BJo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY1teVK3BrU


DU measured at 3,000,000% background radiation
yVNFFQmt5hI
full play list
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1Nx76dssP4&playnext=1&list=PL2C51EBC27FED8737

How much nuclear waste have we have used? More then 25,000,000% what was released at Nagasaki
K1ii2YuWCTo


25% of babies are born with birth defects in Fallujah. How many billions of children have we killed including those not yet born, as the DU will continue to kill and deform for billions of years?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYBmnw8rgio


This is American morality or total lack there of. We makes the nazis look angelic. We are the greatest danger to the continuation of the human race. The results are graphic... viewer discretion
z7TAKday7NY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Z9z1ieCDNgQ

The USA doesn't put a value on human life. Given a choice between god and evil, the government chooses evil.
The USA is engaged in radiological warfare and nuclear genocide.

Romeo
21st Aug 2011, 20:16
Behold the power of the word Depleted.
About 100% of the atoms that compose DU are radioactive. The danger is cancer and not radiation poisoning. A CAT scanner could have a 1 in 300 chance of giving you cancer yet it wouldn't give you radiation poisoning. DU is also quite toxic.

Yes DU is radioactive!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np2v1EtQnSk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0shAgs_BJo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY1teVK3BrU


DU measured at 3,000,000% background radiation
yVNFFQmt5hI#t=6m30s
full play list
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1Nx76dssP4&playnext=1&list=PL2C51EBC27FED8737

How much nuclear waste have we have used? More then 25,000,000% what was released at Nagasaki
K1ii2YuWCTo


25% of babies are born with birth defects in Fallujah. How many billions of children have we killed including those not yet born, as the DU will continue to kill and deform for billions of years?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYBmnw8rgio


This is American morality or total lack there of. We makes the nazis look angelic. We are the greatest danger to the continuation of the human race. The results are graphic... viewer discretion
z7TAKday7NY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Z9z1ieCDNgQ

The USA doesn't put a value on human life. Given a choice between god and evil, the government chooses evil.
The USA is engaged in radiological warfare and nuclear genocide.
Yes there's still radiation in it, but again, we're talking about something smaller than your pinky, which has suffered a significant enough half life to not kill the person who totes it around until they finally find a target, where it sits (Presumably around no living human, if the shooter has done his job). The purpose of DU rounds has absolutely nothing to do with radiation - if it did, it'd be a pretty useless anti-material round. The purpose of using depleted uranium is mass, and hardness. It has to be able to punch through armor far enough to either kill those within, or to penetrate the engine block. Hence why DU enjoys popularity, along with tungsten carbide (Something that is outrageously expensive to manufacture in comparison, but exists because some people are instantly concerned with anything that has even the slightest radioactive element). As for the 30000 times more radioactive than the environment statement, that's funny, because I'm willing to bet you have a CD or DVD drive on the computer you're using. Do you live within range of an AM or FM radio tower? Do you use a cell phone? Hell, is there potassium in your soil? Because all of that will also drag you well above the background radiation level, so why not start waging a war against all that technology too?

As for the 25% being born with defects in Fallujah, if you're honestly arguing that's due to D-38 rounds, you are an absolute idiot. I wasn't born with any birth defects, and yet my mother took quite a few planes, which use depleted uranium as counter-weights. Ever been to the dentist, or for an X-Ray? That big heavy mat they use to protect you from radiation? Yeah, that's D-38 as well. And again, if DU rounds are so radioactive, then the US would be suffering massive birth defects from carrying them around the whole time.

1134
21st Aug 2011, 20:54
OH SNAP!

Vasarto
21st Aug 2011, 21:11
Oh all of this is probably faked. OR just a Proporganda Scare like governments and activists like to do every once in a while.

Does it really matter if what the radiation is doing is wrong or right? We are America! We dont admit we are wrong or try to fix it! We just keep doing the wrong thing until it becomes right!

Dead-Eye
21st Aug 2011, 22:03
Does it really matter if what the radiation is doing is wrong or right? We are America! We dont admit we are wrong or try to fix it! We just keep doing the wrong thing until it becomes right!

And yet somehow, if we think about it logically and understand our own laws. We can see how incredibly Unamerican it is to be an American.

Cancer is a huge lie. Radiation doesn't cause cancer, it just makes your immune system weak which leads to cancer.

balanced
21st Aug 2011, 22:20
It's worth investing in, it serves a unique purpose that a ICBM can never achieve.
This craft can be sent fully loaded to a potential target in very short time, just like an ICBM. But the key word is potential. If after an hour later it arrives at the other side of the planet and the target is no longer viable for any reason then the craft can fly back again and not cause harm to anyone. An ICBM at best can deactivate itself and just cause potential damage as a heavy lump of expensive metal (and if it was a nuke, a vast amount of radioactive weapons grade material available to terrorists).

Romeo
22nd Aug 2011, 02:31
It's worth investing in, it serves a unique purpose that a ICBM can never achieve.
This craft can be sent fully loaded to a potential target in very short time, just like an ICBM. But the key word is potential. If after an hour later it arrives at the other side of the planet and the target is no longer viable for any reason then the craft can fly back again and not cause harm to anyone. An ICBM at best can deactivate itself and just cause potential damage as a heavy lump of expensive metal (and if it was a nuke, a vast amount of radioactive weapons grade material available to terrorists).
That is true, ICBMs are more or less "fire and forget" systems, which leaves them relatively worthless if the target decides to bunker down. Still, I cannot help but feel that simply improving ICBM technology would be more efficient than making a quick, long-range bomber. More mass means more fuel needed to move it through air, and more power needed to make it move quickly. Making an ICBM that has sufficient fuel for a return trip if needed, and is precise enough to make last second alterations over low-altitude terrain.

Id13
22nd Aug 2011, 07:47
Lol, I love a good thread that brings all the nut-bars out. You people are what I live for. Reading your misinformed posts is a good way to kill time in the 22 hours remaining until this game comes out.


Gentlemen,welcome to the US of A where kids starve and billlons of dollars go to waste on pointless weapons no one will ever use. Wanna know something really supriseing ? until somewhere around the 70`s to 80`s. the minute men, the people responsable for fireing the wmd's or the nukes had no encrpytion codes.Which means anyone of them could have faked a launch code and started WW3,and to think our government is so smart.

Yes, let's be fashionable and call the US evil! Except, the USA is quite good about taking care of its homeless compared to similar nations. You probably wouldn't know this because you're scared of homeless people. People starving in the US... yes, they're called anorexic and they do it by choice. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but we treat our homeless people amazing in this country compared to most of the world. People like you will try to make up anything to complain about as long as it serves to reinforce your crazy belief system.


yes. that is what I'm saying.

do you honestly think we deserve this planet? for what ? so bankers can receive millions in severance packages while millions die from curable diseases? so we can be sold coca-cola and Britney albums while the rest starves?
SO WE CAN WORRY MORE ABOUT A VIDEOGAME THAN OUR FELLOW HUMANS???
and you're happy with this, are you?

wake up kid, we're doomed.

Heh, only human are capable of such nonsense as arguing about something as meaningless as who deserves this who deserves that. So, what does "deserve" this planet? Some fictional race of ugly looking blue people like an Avatar? Honestly, why should our country go out of its way to help feed other people cure there diseases? THe government exists for the people of its country. Despite there being no reason for us to participate in any of your silly fantasies about "how the world should be," we do. We do as much or more than any other country.


Don't be angry about that, but know, that the more such things are happening, the closer the judgement of god comes.
And he himself said, that the humanity won't be prepared for his return, because they are turned away from his word.

"But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power.
(2. Timothy 3,1-5))

Are you recognizing, of which time he is talking about?

Lol, a thread full of cooks wouldn't be complete without somebody quoting the Bible for no reason relevant to the topic.

Deus_Ex_Machina
22nd Aug 2011, 08:03
Cancer is a huge lie. Radiation doesn't cause cancer, it just makes your immune system weak which leads to cancer.

Then why is that EVERYONE that has been exposed to significant amounts of nuclear radiation is riddled with cancer?

Radiation doesn't cause cancer? Ha! That sounds like something the nuclear power industry would say to promote the proliferation of nuclear power plants. Also sounds like what the tobacco industry said when studies proved that smoking cigarettes over time causes cancer.

Rindill the Red
22nd Aug 2011, 08:22
My friend's grandfather was a pilot in the Manhattan project, and later was a pilot on the third (un-dropped) nuclear bomb slated for Japan. The recent deluge of declassification meant that he finally got to tell some really interesting tails. In any case, he's had over 9 individual tumors, and a few boughts of cancer. Amazingly he's survived to a ripe old age (though he's going soon) and was able to have several children after his exposure, which he attributes to a flying saucer (or something -- an unidentified bright light that didn't show up on radar) he once identified while test flying (his co-pilot corroborated).

Saerain
22nd Aug 2011, 09:29
Whilst I'm 100% behind advancing military technology, and I'm not necessarily opposed to trimming the NASA budget in the midst of our current economic troubles, standing our military budget next to the NASA budget is very infuriating.


Cancer is a huge lie. Radiation doesn't cause cancer, it just makes your immune system weak which leads to cancer. That is true with some radiation and some cancers. Cancer isn't one phenomenon, but a category of them, and obviously thermal radiation isn't going to knock DNA molecules around—it's too crude.

Basal-cell carinoma and squamos-cell carcinoma, for example, are caused mostly, if not exclusively, by exposure to ionizing radiation like UVB light, causing direct DNA damage. The radiation excites DNA molecules, producing a dimer by forming aberrant covalent bonds between the cytosine bases (‘CC’). The DNA polymerase tries to replicate the strand, but because of the aberrant bonds, it reads the dimer as ‘AA’ instead of the original ‘CC,’ so the replication mechanism adds a ‘TT’ on the growing strand out of its proper order, and that cell replicates progressively less correctly with each cycle from then on.

It's like shouting random numbers at someone who's trying to keep count of something. Once they're thrown off, they're screwed.

Sadly, your immune system is blind to this stuff like you're blind to bacteria.

MaxxQ1
22nd Aug 2011, 16:06
Also sounds like what the tobacco industry said when studies proved that smoking cigarettes over time causes cancer.

iBELC_vxqhI

Trainwreck
22nd Aug 2011, 16:45
Whilst I'm 100% behind advancing military technology, and I'm not necessarily opposed to trimming the NASA budget in the midst of our current economic troubles, standing our military budget next to the NASA budget is very infuriating.

Defense is one of the few legitimate enterprises that the federal government has undertaken these days. Think about it: we provide stability and peace for much of the world not including ourselves. That ain't cheap. I think NASA should have a larger budget these days, and it's inexcusable that we no longer have a manned spacecraft; but I think we should cut the excessive welfare and entitlement benefits we're handing out to people who refuse to work for it.

Don't cut from our military.

El Padrino
22nd Aug 2011, 19:37
Wow. The project's second test flight of a prototype is unsuccessful and this thread turns into an emo soap opera that piles on DARPA and all of humanity.


Lastly, has anyone figured out this plane's purpose? It seems less useful than ICBMs or the B2 Spirit Bomber at both delivery and cost.

Why does it seem less useful?

Anyway, after a quick Google search (c'mon, guys), I found a website that describes what it's supposed to be for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_Falcon_Project. Hooray DARPA for helping create the Internet, and for helping Google with creating cars that drive themselves.

The purpose is also mentioned in the article used to kick this thread off.

Regarding ICBMs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/world/europe/23strike.html
"In face-to-face meetings with President Bush, Russian leaders complained that the technology could increase the risk of a nuclear war, because Russia would not know if the missiles carried nuclear warheads or conventional ones. Mr. Bush and his aides concluded that the Russians were right."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICBM
"Strategic planning avoided the concept of a conventionally tipped ICBM, mainly because any ICBM launch threatens many countries and they are expected to react under the worst-case assumption that it is a nuclear attack."



anyway, back on topic ,

what do you think they'll do now that it failed?

Maybe they'll turn their attention to developing a new mascara that doesn't run when you cry. Or, how about photovoltaic makeup that uses the electricity it generates to help stimulate the muscles involved in smiling? Hmm. Maybe that's more an ARPA-E thing.

Or they'll just keep working on it since it's not the end of the word, as much as you'd like it to be.


Shadowrunner;1647175']What is really dumb about this, if the technology is leaked, China will build hundreds, while the US would be lucky to have even one squadron.

That's one of the worst reasons to not develop technology that I've ever heard. Really? We shouldn't be working on this because China might steal the technology? Should GE and many, many other scientists elsewhere not have worked on laser uranium enrichment because China might steal that technology, too?

Abram730
22nd Aug 2011, 21:28
Yes there's still radiation in it, but again, we're talking about something smaller than your pinky, which has suffered a significant enough half life to not kill the person who totes it around until they finally find a target, where it sits (Presumably around no living human, if the shooter has done his job).

I think it's quite clear that you don't know what radiation is, what the different types are, and what that means. The largest contributer to the energy released in most nuclear weapons is from the u-238 tamper. The Tsar Bomb for example would of been a 100 Megaton weapon, but they replaced the u-238 with lead making it a 50 megaton weapon.

We are talking about hundreds of thousands of tons of u-238 and not a pinky sized amount. The A-10 fires about 1.5 tons of DU a second. Again if you understood what type of radiation DU gives off, you'd understand why it can be carried around and why shooting it is a problem. Hint it's something about the dust.


Military training videos(they downplay the risk), but even they talk about risks.
U93PBZIyqBs
3HekbyJhYNU



The purpose of DU rounds has absolutely nothing to do with radiation - if it did, it'd be a pretty useless anti-material round. The purpose of using depleted uranium is mass, and hardness. It has to be able to punch through armor far enough to either kill those within, or to penetrate the engine block. Hence why DU enjoys popularity, along with tungsten carbide (Something that is outrageously expensive to manufacture in comparison, but exists because some people are instantly concerned with anything that has even the slightest radioactive element). As for the 30000 times more radioactive than the environment statement, that's funny, because I'm willing to bet you have a CD or DVD drive on the computer you're using. Do you live within range of an AM or FM radio tower? Do you use a cell phone? Hell, is there potassium in your soil? Because all of that will also drag you well above the background radiation level, so why not start waging a war against all that technology too?

Purpose doesn't change reality, the physical properties remain the same.
The purpose doesn't matter.
If you were on your way to work and saw a parade blocking your rout, would it be OK to floor it and drive threw the spectators? I mean your intent would be to get to work, soooo the judge would understand? I say no.

It doesn't matter what the intent is, as the intent doesn't change the results. Also only a small fraction of the DU was used against enemy armor and well belt buckles are enemy material so why not. Right?

Radiation does come into the mix into why it's used.. See radioactive pressure plays a roll in "self sharpening".

Your main position seems to be that it's OK to to kill and deform Billions of babies so long as it saves a few dollars. Execs at Bayer had the same idea when they discovered that their drug was contaminated with HIV.. They didn't care, killed their customers and spread HIV around the globe. Is that really the type of person you are? That's how you were raised or did you make a wrong turn somewhere?

As for CD, DVD, AM, FM, cell, and bananas... really? I mean really? First I would again suggest you learn about radiation.. things like ionizing vs. non-ionizing radiation. You are being silly, just like the guests on news shows after a nuclear incident.

Imagine if mass shooting were reported the same way as nuclear leaks. That Jared Lee Loughner did nothing wrong as his shooting rampage didn't rise above background shootings and thus didn't constitute a danger to public health. I mean you can find bullets all over the place, thus it's OK to shoot people. I mean this is the PR logic you are using and defending.. simply applied to a different topic. Did Anders Behring's rampage go above background shootings? The fact is that DU will be killing and deforming children for billions of years.. More children will be killed then have ever lived and by many fold. We make hitler seem the saint.



As for the 25% being born with defects in Fallujah, if you're honestly arguing that's due to D-38 rounds, you are an absolute idiot. I wasn't born with any birth defects, and yet my mother took quite a few planes, which use depleted uranium as counter-weights. Ever been to the dentist, or for an X-Ray? That big heavy mat they use to protect you from radiation? Yeah, that's D-38 as well.

You were born in Fallujah within the last 10 years were you? Your mother lived in Fallujah during her pregnancy, did she? As for your counter-weight argument, you again are showing how little you understand about the different types radiation and radioactive material.
OK
First it's U-238, not D-38. The U stands for Uranium and the 238 is it's atomic number(146 Neutrons + 92 Protons). U-238 is an alpha emitter and alpha partials are high energy helium-4 atoms, but you don't seem to know the difference between mater, and electromagnetic radiation as evidenced by your counter-weight argument.

See alpha particles are the most dangerous form of radiation, however no very penetrating.. It's all about surface area and location... something as thin as aluminum foil can block it, yet as a dust(large surface area) and inside the body(bad location) you are toast, as they are like atomic cannon balls. In the counterweight the u-238 atoms themselves block most of the radiation. It's also very toxic, beyond the whole cooking and obliterating cells, altering DNA... ext

Uranium dust from the wars in the middle east and the Balkans has been detected all over the globe.. raining down on the USA, UK, Ice cores in the antarctic... ext
Is it just ignorance on your part or are you really in favor of killing billions just for the profits of a small hand full of elite sociopaths? I'm not just talking about you Romeo, rather the millions who collectively say the same things as you.
I do hope I can at least get you, as an individual to rethink your position. The pool of thought you defend is truly evil to the core and a danger to the continuation of the human race.


And again, if DU rounds are so radioactive, then the US would be suffering massive birth defects from carrying them around the whole time.

Yes it is that radioactive.. again here is proof..
The geiger counter isn't lying.
I've got it set to the correct part so it will take but a few seconds to see proof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVNFFQmt5hI#t=6m30s

Again surface area and location... yet
US military personnel are suffering, high rates of birth defects, cancer, illness... ext

In the 1990-91 Gulf war only 467 U.S. personnel were actually wounded during the conflict, yet about 325,000 of the 580,400 personnel became disabled(56%).

Cancer rates jumped about 1000% with some units coming out of Iraq having almost 50% malignant cancer rates. With birth defects among returning vets jumping about 500%.






PS: Nothing personal Romeo, it's the issue..
Also good luck on your diabetes... I was just diagnosed with type II and I'm hoping to beat it. I just hope I don't have partial type I.

Cures and capitalism don't mix... health maintenance and treatment make more money then cures. That's $$$ every test strip and vial vs. how much you could pay at one time for a cure. How much will you spend on supplies in your life? Compare that to how much you could pay at one time.. Drug corps also sponsor poor diet advice for diabetics. Also if researchers create a cure they put themselves out of a job, as diabetes research money will vanish. The structural impediments to cures should be looked at.

I'm going to put my mind to work on the issue though.. I'm already ripping into an epigenetic switch involved and the triggers for that switch. There appears to be a plenty/scarcity switch in mammals, diabetes risk being related to the scarcity mode. That mode is also associated with high stress responses, higher aggression, and hypertension. This switch is also used as a response to being poisoned to raise mass. I'm quite certain Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) are a much larger factor in diabetes rather then obesity. Skinny people do get it.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE77G45120110817

Abram730
22nd Aug 2011, 23:24
That is true, ICBMs are more or less "fire and forget" systems, which leaves them relatively worthless if the target decides to bunker down. Still, I cannot help but feel that simply improving ICBM technology would be more efficient than making a quick, long-range bomber. More mass means more fuel needed to move it through air, and more power needed to make it move quickly. Making an ICBM that has sufficient fuel for a return trip if needed, and is precise enough to make last second alterations over low-altitude terrain.

For all intensive purposes that is exactly what this is.. It's launched by a Minotaur derived from converted Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBM's. It can be put into LEO and dive/glide to it's target, yet still return home. It could defeat missile defense due to speed and evasive actions and even come in low and fast around laser defenses. It's also a Rods from God platform with a global reach.

Same function as this... but this is last gen and based off the shuttle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOVu-_TKmI4

We can't continue our forward deployment with our economic condition and growing debt... this would maintain a quick response global reach, so it's desirable from a military stand point.

DARPA's Next Gen body is needed if you ever want a good replacement for the space shuttle, although a plane based first stage would be desirable. A massive bomber 1st stage Ramjet/scramjet to 2nd stage scramjet/rocket boosters(cruse missile style wiglets ROV and landable) to 3rd stage rocket to 4th space stage magneto plasma drive.
here is the magneto plasma drive
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn7wNxg9_Xk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrc-fP_EqF8

Here is the HTV-2X being discussed
9jnAY6pR2FQ
It's lost control during the mach 20 acrobatic phase on both flights. There are aerodynamic issues during maneuver and/or computer control issues. I think they used my idea of creating a layer of air over the skin so that the air layer reduces friction like shark skin.. Air flows between that layer and the sonic shockwave.. If so the problem is a breakdown and an uneven one at that during maneuvers. It would probably showing up as odd vectors.. like the center of gravity is off. I'll need to think on it.

I hope this helps you better understand what it's about. It's a body with orbital, suborbital, and space plane options.

This is/was the original goal, the falcon HTV-3X. I think the concept has changed to something more DARPA.
8MhtLWB0dJ8