More ways to blow themselves up
TTFN (or maybe not. LOL)
JohnP
On 02/13/2012 03:36 AM, ogbi-web kenobi wrote:
> ‘More ways to blow themselves up’ (http://tinyurl.com/85astj9)
i don’t read in that article that the launched projectiles are only
useful in carrying an explosive…
so, how why do you assume the purpose of the research is to “blow
themselves up”? (or, i guess more correctly: “blow up a target”?)
anyway, do you prefer to be defenseless when invaders advance?
–
DD
Read what Distro Watch writes: http://tinyurl.com/SUSEonDW
On 2012-02-13 09:58, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 03:36 AM, ogbi-web kenobi wrote:
>> ‘More ways to blow themselves up’ (http://tinyurl.com/85astj9)
>
> i don’t read in that article that the launched projectiles are only useful
> in carrying an explosive…
That’s being picky 
On the other hand, the electric guns contaminate less. Do you know the
environmental paper mess you have to fill to fire a big chemical gun?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 02/13/2012 01:13 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> That’s being picky
no, there are lots of thing which might be inside a parachute delivered
canister launched by the articles ‘gun’, it could contain a dust which
is spread over a location which causes abdominal problems of the
incapacitating but non-deadly kind…
it could be carrying meal packets, medical supplies, toilet paper,
chewing gum to friends encircled by non-friends…
or maybe an ‘intel’ delivery of air dispersible sensor packets (to
‘listen’ for ground troop movement, the rumblings of tanks, etc etc etc)
there are far too many different things to name them all here…
sure, that gun might also deliver high explosive weapons, incendiary
devices, binary chemical weapons, nuclear weapons and other things…but
the fact remains that the OP assumed only one use…
> On the other hand, the electric guns contaminate less.
yes one would suppose that an electric launch would be less polluting
than a chemical one…but, i think that might depend on how the
electricity is generated…like if made from diesel generators they
might both produce about the same polutions…
now, a wind or solar powered gun might be REALLY good to have as long as
one could depend on only being attacked on sunny and/or windy days…
> Do you know the
> environmental paper mess you have to fill to fire a big chemical gun?
generally speaking, attacking hordes do not file paperwork prior to
firing their cannons…and, neither do the defenders wait for approval
from the Environmental Protection Agency before commencing to defend the
otherwise defenseless under attack.
–
DD
Read what Distro Watch writes: http://tinyurl.com/SUSEonDW
DenverD wrote:
> yes one would suppose that an electric launch would be less polluting
> than a chemical one…but, i think that might depend on how the
> electricity is generated…like if made from diesel generators they
> might both produce about the same polutions…
Surprisingly, this device lacks the hoardes of whacko generated by earlier
generations of “super weapons”. I was doing some laser-related work for
Kirtland when the airborne laser was the hot topic and the crazies were
coming out of the woodwork. I guess we just have to wait a while to give
them a chance to discover that there is a new “cause” on the table.
Oh - to add to the topic at hand - the larger push of the same generic
device is as a launch mechanism for carrier aircraft. The concept has been
under discussion since the 1960’s at least as a propulsion scheme for
railroads. Do a search on “linear accelerators” - Rube Goldberg would be
proud!
–
Will Honea
On 02/13/2012 09:15 PM, Will Honea wrote:
> Do a search on “linear accelerators”
in the '60s at a high school “science fair” i saw several garage built
variations able to ‘shoot’ a BB…
one had a barrel about 6 feet long, and a series of external
electro-magnets which were switched on/off with some kind of magic way
to ‘coax’ the pellet along its way…it could shoot a “BB” at probably
near deadly speed…
–
DD http://tinyurl.com/DD-Caveat
Read what Distro Watch writes: http://tinyurl.com/SUSEonDW
On 13.02.2012 14:04, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 09:15 PM, Will Honea wrote:
>> Do a search on “linear accelerators”
>
> in the '60s at a high school “science fair” i saw several garage built
> variations able to ‘shoot’ a BB…
>
> one had a barrel about 6 feet long, and a series of external
> electro-magnets which were switched on/off with some kind of magic way
> to ‘coax’ the pellet along its way…it could shoot a “BB” at probably
> near deadly speed…
>
That is all very interesting, but i wonder if there any other
applications then boom boom.
Perhaps it will have use for space exploration and replace rockets for one.
Since the future wars are more and more fought with bots i can not see
what use it may actually have.
But i am no scientist and so my imagination is limited.
–
Windows, supports nearly all software, hardware, and viruses.
Linux Counter: 548299 https://linuxcounter.net/
JoergJaeger wrote:
> That is all very interesting, but i wonder if there any other
> applications then boom boom.
> Perhaps it will have use for space exploration and replace rockets for
> one. Since the future wars are more and more fought with bots i can not
> see what use it may actually have.
> But i am no scientist and so my imagination is limited.
As I said earlier, do a search on the topic of “linear accelerators” or
“linear motors”. Weapons were not the original focus of eletromagnetic
propulsion nor are they the primary focus today. There are a bunch of
applications being developed. First problem is efficiency - useful
elctromagnetic forces typically require VERY high current hence substantial
losses at room temperature.
–
Will Honea
On 02/14/2012 03:52 AM, JoergJaeger wrote:
> Since the future wars are more and more fought with bots
GOOD idea, could use this quiet firing ‘gun’ to launch a canister which
then deploys an eye-in-the-sky droneBOT at the top if its arch.
–
DD
Read what Distro Watch writes: http://tinyurl.com/SUSEonDW
On 2012-02-13 15:07, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 01:13 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> it could be carrying meal packets, medical supplies, toilet paper, chewing
> gum to friends encircled by non-friends…
Ah, I didn’t know projectiles were used for that. I thought missiles, lower
speed. Interesting.
>> On the other hand, the electric guns contaminate less.
>
> yes one would suppose that an electric launch would be less polluting than
> a chemical one…but, i think that might depend on how the electricity is
> generated…like if made from diesel generators they might both produce
> about the same polutions…
I guess the fumes of explosives are not that nice. It is not only carbon,
oxygen and hydrogen composites.
> now, a wind or solar powered gun might be REALLY good to have as long as
> one could depend on only being attacked on sunny and/or windy days…
X’-)
>> Do you know the
>> environmental paper mess you have to fill to fire a big chemical gun?
>
> generally speaking, attacking hordes do not file paperwork prior to firing
> their cannons…and, neither do the defenders wait for approval from the
> Environmental Protection Agency before commencing to defend the otherwise
> defenseless under attack.
Hey, I was joking!
I did work at a place where the people were really scared of the
environment control department, though. An oil spill scared them more
because of the paperwork involved, than because of actual cleaning job. The
worst was making a mistake when trying to clean it or stopping the spread.
Once I used an absorbent earth (diatomeas?) that apparently had been
forbidden a while ago and I had no idea. Another time a colorant can
spilled a bit, and all they thought was cover it up and say nothing.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 2012-02-13 23:04, DenverD wrote:
> in the '60s at a high school “science fair” i saw several garage built
> variations able to ‘shoot’ a BB…
Whats a BB? :-?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
If you really want to know here’s a link about BB’s:
BB gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On 02/15/2012 01:23 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> Whats a BB? :-?
a small, round, metal pellet about the size of a black pepper
seed…fired by “BB” guns or pistols…
On 02/15/2012 01:23 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> Hey, I was joking!
i was too…i just forget to slide in a smiley…forget it far too often.
>
> I did work at a place where the people were really scared of the
> environment control department
don’t misunderstand me, i am very environmentally conscious…
On 2012-02-15 09:35, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/15/2012 01:23 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> Whats a BB? :-?
>
> a small, round, metal pellet about the size of a black pepper seed…fired
> by “BB” guns or pistols…
That’s a redundant definition, you used BB on it
Ok, an air gun ammunition. The type I knew as a youngster here were made
from lead (usually cup shaped, or even hollow vase), I don’t know if that
has changed.
Thanks for the wikipedia pointer, Sagemta. I understand better.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 2012-02-15 09:39, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/15/2012 01:23 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> Hey, I was joking!
>
> i was too…i just forget to slide in a smiley…forget it far too often.
Ok
>> I did work at a place where the people were really scared of the
>> environment control department
>
> don’t misunderstand me, i am very environmentally conscious…
I am, but I expected help and advice from the enviromental damage control
department, not mountains of paperwork. So much so that employees resorted
to hiding damage.
If you have been to the mountain in my country, it is dismalling the amount
of rubish in sight. People that go out camping, treking or whatever and
leave the rubish from the food they eat there, and worse things, like baby
nappers. My parents taught me to carry everything back home as a kid. Few
people did.
I don’t know how other countries in this respect.
Now environment means a lot more, but that’s a start, no?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 02/15/2012 12:08 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> The type I knew as a youngster here were made
> from lead (usually cup shaped, or even hollow vase)
in the USA we called those “pellet guns”…and, you are right i should
not have described “BB” with a “BB gun”, those shot were just enough
smaller to roll out the barrel of a “pellet gun”…
the “pellet gun” were far more powerful (and costly) than the “BB gun”…
‘Santa’ brought me a Daisy Air Rifle (aka “BB gun”) for christmas when i
was about 6 or 8…
On 02/15/2012 12:13 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> I don’t know how other countries in this respect.
it depends on how were taught as kids…i remember driving though
Belgium with a friend from Oklahoma who lived there for a few
years…and (you know there are several different cultural sections of
Belgium) he said (something like) “See now we are in the [blank] part of
Belgium, you can tell because of all the trash in ditches, gutters and
along the roadway.”
its like that in the USA too…some parts are pretty clean, some are not.
i was taught when camping/hiking to shoot only pictures and leave only
footprints. but a former employer taught us to not leave that much
DenverD wrote:
> ‘Santa’ brought me a Daisy Air Rifle (aka “BB gun”) for christmas when i
> was about 6 or 8…
I assume you didn’t shoot your eye out?
–
Will Honea
On 2012-02-15 14:26, DenverD wrote:
> On 02/15/2012 12:08 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Recursive definitions are a Linux classic. Starting with gnu, is “gnu is
not unix”
> ‘Santa’ brought me a Daisy Air Rifle (aka “BB gun”) for christmas when i
> was about 6 or 8…
Aparently my grandfather gave me and my cousin one, but I never saw mine:
my mother made him return it at first sight. He loved hunting and probably
wanted me started
Actually, he taught me shooting at fair stalls.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)