open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked RL Covert Ops Cloaking Device
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Caghji
Posted - 2011.01.09 10:48:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Caghji on 09/01/2011 10:49:15
Cloaking Device
Shocked

Cool



Lord Mathious
Posted - 2011.01.09 10:55:00 - [2]
 

Vary cool now if I could just have that for the next time I go hunting.....

Iraherag
Posted - 2011.01.09 11:02:00 - [3]
 

This is clearly the right forum for that type of news...

Thoraxe Rig
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.09 11:02:00 - [4]
 

Why is it always 5 years... 2016 is going to be one hell of a year...

Kara Sharalien
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.01.09 11:13:00 - [5]
 

See, there's this problem with invisible tanks. Tanks leave noticable tracks, and throw up a lot of mud and dirt.

When you see a big old tank-shaped dirt-thing leaving tank-tracks behind it, you are probably gonna twig.

xVALERIAx
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.09 11:17:00 - [6]
 

Quote:
The electronic camouflage will enable the vehicle to blend into the surrounding countryside in much the same way that a squid uses ink to help as a disguise.


how does squid ink help the squid to project the surrounding seabed onto its body?!
Rolling Eyes



CCP StevieSG

Posted - 2011.01.09 11:20:00 - [7]
 

Moved to Out of Pod from EVE General.

Jaina Sunspot
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.01.09 11:29:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Kara Sharalien
See, there's this problem with invisible tanks. Tanks leave noticable tracks, and throw up a lot of mud and dirt.

When you see a big old tank-shaped dirt-thing leaving tank-tracks behind it, you are probably gonna twig.

Yes but with the newest advantages in Cloaked Broom and Duct Tape technology the worry of tread marks is a thing of the past.

Trooper uncloak that broom while you sweep the Barracks, it is creeping me out!

Bhaal
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.09 14:01:00 - [9]
 

So where/when is the UK ever going to use tanks?

It's cool tech, and when you give that tech to your US ally, we'll make use of it I'm sure :)

Thanks!

Vak'ran
TUIG Inc.
Posted - 2011.01.09 14:29:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Kara Sharalien
See, there's this problem with invisible tanks. Tanks leave noticable tracks, and throw up a lot of mud and dirt.

When you see a big old tank-shaped dirt-thing leaving tank-tracks behind it, you are probably gonna twig.


That's all just because the OP was wrong, its not a covert ops cloak, its a prototype cloak. No warping cloaked, yet.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.01.09 14:34:00 - [11]
 


Lady Skank
Ban Evasion inc
Posted - 2011.01.09 15:03:00 - [12]
 

Total waste of money considering the increasing prevalence of other technology like passive and active IR systems and the rate of development radar and LADAR threat detection sensors are undergoing, it might be of some use against human eyeballs or basic vehicle mounted visual light cameras but in the modern battlefield just camouflaging it is not much use and the extra technology is just added weight and more expensive to deploy and maintain.

TimMc
Brutal Deliverance
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2011.01.09 15:27:00 - [13]
 

Complete waste of money, and a tech that will need to be repaired and maintained whenever someone bumps into the tank - let alone shoots it.

Surely its cheaper to just have some tanks with different camo, or cover a tank with camo nets in the green zone?

Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari
Guiding Hand Social Club
Posted - 2011.01.09 16:36:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: xVALERIAx
Quote:
The electronic camouflage will enable the vehicle to blend into the surrounding countryside in much the same way that a squid uses ink to help as a disguise.


how does squid ink help the squid to project the surrounding seabed onto its body?!
Rolling Eyes


Looks like someone hasn't heard of the Self-Printing Camosquid.

Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari
Guiding Hand Social Club
Posted - 2011.01.09 16:39:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Lady Skank
Total waste of money considering the increasing prevalence of other technology like passive and active IR systems and the rate of development radar and LADAR threat detection sensors are undergoing, it might be of some use against human eyeballs or basic vehicle mounted visual light cameras but in the modern battlefield just camouflaging it is not much use and the extra technology is just added weight and more expensive to deploy and maintain.

Nah, e-ink is pretty remarkable stuff. It has no passive power consumption, and just takes a microscopic initial charge to get it to change color. It's also light enough to be used in printed sheets, i.e. about the weight of paper. A sheet of it on the side of a tank, configured to display images, is a creative but hardly science-fictiony application of the stuff.

Yeah it only works on the Mk1 Eyeball, but every little bit helps in a combat situation. If I was in a tank in a field, I'd rather the tank looked like the field, than a tank. Who knows, maybe some guy with an anti-tank missile two miles away will fail to spot me.

Sporked
Posted - 2011.01.09 16:47:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Bhaal
So where/when is the UK ever going to use tanks?

It's cool tech, and when you give that tech to your US ally, we'll make use of it I'm sure :)

Thanks!


We'll need to be keeping it to prevent your airforce type dudes from repeatedly firing on our troops. If you can pass on the memo for them to learn what the enemy looks like and/or OPEN THEIR EYES before firing, that would be awesome.

Thanks!

Marcus Druallis
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.01.09 17:47:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Lord Mathious
Vary cool now if I could just have that for the next time I go hunting.....


Because deer are so dangerous.

Adst
Posted - 2011.01.09 18:54:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Adst on 09/01/2011 18:55:00
Originally by: Bhaal
So where/when is the UK ever going to use tanks?

It's cool tech, and when you give that tech to your US ally, we'll make use of it I'm sure :)

Thanks!



US Ally? We have that?

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2011.01.09 19:12:00 - [19]
 

What interests me is that the UK is building a super carrier but there are no plans at the moment for fighters to go on them. I wonder if this because of a disagreement about buying lots of F35 jets for them.

The UK is a pet alliance to the USA to use an EVE'ism. And there is a process of pass the parcel that goes with that. Big US merchant bank builds new HQ in London. We buy US military platforms such as the F35 versatile fighter. Realpolitik.

Adst
Posted - 2011.01.09 20:02:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Adst on 09/01/2011 20:01:57
Originally by: Vogue
Stuff


tbh.. If people bothered to think about it for a split second and compare the sizes of UK and US; is it any wonder? We here in the UK don't have the military budget of the US and never will.

Haydee Onna
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.09 20:03:00 - [21]
 

Hmm, not so much cloaking device as adaptive camouflage, it seems. Wake me up when they make a tank that can't be seen by the naked eye from 20 meters.

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2011.01.09 20:28:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Vogue on 09/01/2011 21:27:15
I am in awe of the US's military capability. And as a hypothetical argument if the USA did not exist to assert no #1 superpower status the world could have more world wars.

I am just one of the stubborn pithy Brits ugh

Adst
Posted - 2011.01.09 21:13:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Vogue
I am in awe of the US's military capability. And as a hypothetical argument if the USA did not exist to assert no #1 superpower status the world could have more world wars.

I am just one of the stubborn pity Brits ugh


hehe It's ok - we still have a better Special Forces than those yanks.. SAS ftwRazz

baltec1
Posted - 2011.01.10 08:51:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Adst
Originally by: Vogue
I am in awe of the US's military capability. And as a hypothetical argument if the USA did not exist to assert no #1 superpower status the world could have more world wars.

I am just one of the stubborn pity Brits ugh


hehe It's ok - we still have a better Special Forces than those yanks.. SAS ftwRazz


The Americans think the Light Dragoons are an elite force just because they are used for recon missionsLaughing

They also leave pallets of ration packs just sitting around which tend to vanish into the back of a land rover with a load of said squaddies hanging off itTwisted Evil

Lady Skank
Ban Evasion inc
Posted - 2011.01.10 11:23:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
Who knows, maybe some guy with an anti-tank missile two miles away will fail to spot me.


It wont be long until man portable anti armour missiles like the Milan have much better imaging and sensor technology that wont be fooled and the same goes for night vision equipment, it wouldn't surprise me to see a helmet mounted LADAR in the next 25 years that could scan terrain ahead and prioritise threats the way vehicle mounted systems do at the moment, they are already fitting lightweight systems like this to prototype ground drones.

Colonel Handgrenade
Posted - 2011.01.10 23:21:00 - [26]
 

I wonder how long it will take them to develop energy barriers (shields) for the tanks? Then they won't need camoflage at all.

Just remeber that in warfare technology, there is always a counter-measure made for every new advancement. If man can make it, man can break it... or blow it into millions of tiny, red-hot pieces!

Keep your heads down!

Lady Skank
Ban Evasion inc
Posted - 2011.01.11 00:21:00 - [27]
 

"Sheilds" in the sci fi sense of energy barriers are a long way off but energised armour that can resist shape charge warheads on light vehicles are being developed and point defense weapons that can shoot down small missiles or tank and artillery shells are also being tested.

If these technologies do eventually work out there wont be any need for shields as they can resist current weapons tech very well, of course ultra high velocity vehicle mounted coil and rail guns are also under development that might obsolete traditional armour which again would need another leap in technology and make the idea of shields a more pressing prospect.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.01.11 00:31:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Colonel Handgrenade
I wonder how long it will take them to develop energy barriers (shields) for the tanks? Then they won't need camoflage at all.

Just remeber that in warfare technology, there is always a counter-measure made for every new advancement. If man can make it, man can break it... or blow it into millions of tiny, red-hot pieces!

Keep your heads down!


Never, simply because the physics just doesn't support it. Please remember that a true "force field" suffers from drastically decreased effectiveness with respect to range. This is because a force field takes a finite amount of energy, and spreads it equally across a large volume of space - drastically reducing its effectiveness. Also realize that this force field would also exert force on EVERYTHING inside of it - including the tank and its occupants!

The closest thing we have to an "energy shield" is a plasma window. unfortunately, Plasma windows can currently only withstand about 9 atmospheres of pressure before rupturing, so they are only really good at resisting air molecules - nowhere CLOSE to being able to resist a liquid or solid trying to pass through with great force. And it most likely never will - thanks to the differences in density between a plasma and a solid.

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.01.11 00:34:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: article
The programme is based around seven different military vehicles, both manned and unmanned, which will be equipped with a wide variety of lethal and none lethal weapons.


What the hell is a none lethal weapon? Razz

Lady Skank
Ban Evasion inc
Posted - 2011.01.11 00:56:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: Colonel Handgrenade
I wonder how long it will take them to develop energy barriers (shields) for the tanks? Then they won't need camoflage at all.

Just remeber that in warfare technology, there is always a counter-measure made for every new advancement. If man can make it, man can break it... or blow it into millions of tiny, red-hot pieces!

Keep your heads down!


Never, simply because the physics just doesn't support it. Please remember that a true "force field" suffers from drastically decreased effectiveness with respect to range. This is because a force field takes a finite amount of energy, and spreads it equally across a large volume of space - drastically reducing its effectiveness. Also realize that this force field would also exert force on EVERYTHING inside of it - including the tank and its occupants!

The closest thing we have to an "energy shield" is a plasma window. unfortunately, Plasma windows can currently only withstand about 9 atmospheres of pressure before rupturing, so they are only really good at resisting air molecules - nowhere CLOSE to being able to resist a liquid or solid trying to pass through with great force. And it most likely never will - thanks to the differences in density between a plasma and a solid.


In the Star Trek theory of shields maybe but what about a very localised distortion or repulsion field that is not permanently active and only targets incoming projectiles? Who knows what leaps we might make in electromagnetic and high energy physics or even a focused targeted burst of electricity with enough energy to vapourise a projectile.

Stuff like this is a long way from even being theoretical but the way technology advances its not easy to say what is and isn't impossible.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only