|
Nebakenezzer posted:I think of this whenever people talk about "augmented reality", google glasses etc I liked the Martian-esque "let's solve the practical problems of getting people into space" part of Seveneves. But the stupid fight-for-no-reason colony politics and fantastically racist future society were way off the rails.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
Anathem is one of my favourite books but I found Reamde boring and holy poo poo Seveneves was bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
I dunno, Seveneves was pretty good for the first... 50-60% or so. The later in the book I got the less I liked it, with the final part being just pure garbage. The Neil DeGrasse Tyson expy was annoying the whole way through, though. E: NightGyr posted:I liked the Martian-esque "let's solve the practical problems of getting people into space" part of Seveneves. But the stupid fight-for-no-reason colony politics and fantastically racist future society were way off the rails. Yeah this sums up my thoughts pretty well
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
I liked Reamde (though could've used less not-WoW) and Cryptonomicon was fun and light. Baroque cycle was awesome until I just put the books down and never finished. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pftompkins/status/848982344111280130
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Seveneves kicked a lot of rear end all the way up to the 5,000 year leap into the future, and then it just fell apart. If he'd spent more time talking about how humanity had learned to survive and grow in space, like a continuation of the first halfs "holy poo poo how do we make this work" it could have been great. I wanted to know more about how the diggers and the pingers adapted and survived too. Genetically engineered space-racists was just an insultingly bad way to end what was otherwise a pretty good near-future scifi novel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
goatsestretchgoals posted:Fake edit: Favorite part about Diamond Age was a throwaway world building comment about how optical HUD implants fell out of fashion when they kept getting hacked to display 24x7 ads and suicides ensued. This actually makes me want to read it. That's loving awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
crazyivan45 posted:How viable/effective would an AWACS MV-22 be? I'm assuming not as good as an E2, but how much worse assuming it has the latest whiz-bang AESA radar onboard? Not very. It wouldn't have the loiter time, it probably would have to use a smaller radar, it wouldn't have the power or altitude to get the kind of range you need from these platforms, and I suspect you're going to have problems in helicopter mode with chopping off the radar in addition to aerodynamics/weight/structural concerns.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:I am so squarely within Stephenson's target reader demographic it's not funny and I found seveneves absolutely unreadable and could not finish it. MrYenko posted:I listened to Seveneves as an audiobook, and the  I knew there was a reason I liked hanging around here It's a book with any number of interesting ideas what would it be like if humanity went through another 'pinch' in our evolution like happened in our prehistory, or what if you took the moon's core, carved a city into it, and suspended it by cables from space and used it as a portable city on earth but as a novel it is terrible Many of the characters are just reskins of current prominent individuals, like Neal DeGrasse Tyson and Malala Yousafzai Humanity does nothing but suck and die. I mean, build a giant railgun to shove the moonlets out of earth orbit, use a 5 gigaton atomic device to sent the whole mess away from earth, something You have literally the entire earth's economic output to work with here (I know that's not a fair criticism because as you mention the book wants to be as grimdark as possible and humanity being saved doesn't run with that, I just like the stories where humanity is all "no, gently caress you" to the grimdarkness more) Oh, and what if we create different races of people? Are they not interbreeding, undoing your genetic modification? That makes no sense Also for gently caress's sake by the time those eight women get together in a room and have a conversation (the entire point of the earth being destroyed BTW), you'd think somebody would have the wit to say "hey, human evolution allowed us to survive a race-destroying event not once but twice. Should we REEEEALLLLYYYY be loving with the genetic future of the human race like Gods, especially as we point of fact can't predict what those consequences will be? Hasn't this entire story been to this point humanity trying to control events and failing, massively?" No, not good book
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
I'm a big sucker for Stephenson books, even if Anathem and some of the Baroque Cycle took a few tries and a running start to get into. I haven't read Seveneves, and every time I set down REAMDE for a few days I have to backtrack to figure out why they're on a boat or if this girl is the taxi girl. The thing to keep in mind is that Neal Stephenson stories don't end, they run at full speed into the back cover and explode.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Can the F-22 carry the 120D internally? Or is it too large? I know the C had tips clipped, did that carry over to the D as well?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
goatsestretchgoals posted:Diamond Age and Snow Crash were great, Cryptonomicon was him writesturbating about how much math he knows, and it went downhill from there. Diamond Age and Snow Crash were both great but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Zodiac. It's earlier Stephenson and less sci-fi than his later stuff, but there are some truly entertaining parts in there as well. It's also a lighter/faster read than his more recent stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Not very. It wouldn't have the loiter time, it probably would have to use a smaller radar, it wouldn't have the power or altitude to get the kind of range you need from these platforms, and I suspect you're going to have problems in helicopter mode with chopping off the radar in addition to aerodynamics/weight/structural concerns. So that's an order for 2 per MEU?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Can the F-22 carry the 120D internally? Or is it too large? As far as I know, it's still 'undergoing testing' and should become operationally-usable in the same Block update that green-lights the AIM-9X. They've been testing both missiles on the -22 since *2006*. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Can the F-22 carry the 120D internally? Or is it too large? Seems clipped to me. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:The handheld version had software problems. Got somebody killed. Wasn't it a highly unusual field expedient, anyway? I mean how many guys can rip a Vulcan out of a crashed fighter and carry it on their back in the Aleutian winter?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:46
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Wasn't it a highly unusual field expedient, anyway? I mean how many guys can rip a Vulcan out of a crashed fighter and carry it on their back in the Aleutian winter? I think you're talking about something completely different
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Cryptonomicon was fun and light.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Light in tone not physical weight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:I think you're talking about something completely different Something way cooler, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:44
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Something way cooler, yes. Go on 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Diamond Age and Snow Crash were both great but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Zodiac. It's earlier Stephenson and less sci-fi than his later stuff, but there are some truly entertaining parts in there as well. It's also a lighter/faster read than his more recent stuff. Zodiac has some great bits. This is from around page 2, so not much of a spoiler: quote:“Sangamon’s Principle,” I said. “The simpler the molecule, the better the drug. So the best drug is oxygen. Only two atoms. The second-best, nitrous oxide—a mere three atoms. The third-best, ethanol—nine. Past that, you’re talking lots of atoms.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Zodiac has some great bits. This is from around page 2, so not much of a spoiler: I'm high on oxygen 24/7
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Diamond Age and Snow Crash were both great but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Zodiac. It's earlier Stephenson and less sci-fi than his later stuff, but there are some truly entertaining parts in there as well. It's also a lighter/faster read than his more recent stuff. Collateral Damage posted:Zodiac was good too.  But yeah I agree, if you're going to start reading Stephenson, Zodiac is a good primer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Zodiac has some great bits. This is from around page 2, so not much of a spoiler: radon, the best drug, cures life with a mere 1 atom per molecule
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
crazyivan45 posted:How viable/effective would an AWACS MV-22 be? I'm assuming not as good as an E2, but how much worse assuming it has the latest whiz-bang AESA radar onboard? Dead Reckoning posted:What the gently caress is this? Are you doing this to hurt me? Things you want in an AWACS platform: -Good endurance -Robust generators and excess electrical capacity -Good cooling -High altitude performance -High cruising speed -Fuel efficiency Things you don't want on an AWACS platform: -Props that stick up into the radar beam Are you seeing the problem yet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Things you don't want on an AWACS platform: 21st century synchronization gear? EM waves are pretty quick, they should be able to fit between two rotating prop blades. Bonus points if you steer the beam in sync with the blades.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Not very. It wouldn't have the loiter time, it probably would have to use a smaller radar, it wouldn't have the power or altitude to get the kind of range you need from these platforms, and I suspect you're going to have problems in helicopter mode with chopping off the radar in addition to aerodynamics/weight/structural concerns. I don't really think the question was whether it would be as good as an E-2 or E-3, since the obvious answer is no. But that doesn't mean it would be totally ineffective. The royal navy uses helicopters for this with, apparently, some success--so then the question is, would this work better or at least as well as that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
hahaha I love that its an ad for hiring people. They must really be hard up. Hauldren Collider posted:I don't really think the question was whether it would be as good as an E-2 or E-3, since the obvious answer is no. But that doesn't mean it would be totally ineffective. The royal navy uses helicopters for this with, apparently, some success--so then the question is, would this work better or at least as well as that? E-2 Endurance is 6 hours vs 5 hrs for AW101 AEW, no idea what V-22 is but based on the weight of the E-2 vs C-2, I'd bet the V-22 would need to drop a lot in the way of capability to carry the same subsystems. CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
I imagine a V-22 AEW platform would look a lot like a typical helicopter-borne AEW setup, with the radar underslung and well below the rotors. The size of the radar is obviously limited by the practical length of your undercarriage, so its performance will be limited. And as mentioned, the V-22 lacks the range and endurance of a comparably sized fixed-wing aircraft. On the other hand, a V-22 could operate from an LHA or even smaller ships and can also be aerially refueled. You'd want an E-2 over a hypothetical EV-22, but you'd certainly prefer an EV-22 to nothing. And in that role, it would be superior to a helicopter-borne AEW. So while I don't see it as a good E-2 replacement, it is hardly a crazy idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
I've seen another EV-22 concept image somewhere that had AESA radar antennae scattered around the fuselage a la the Israeli gulfstream AWACS, to deal with the rotor issue. Obviously nobody thought that was useful enough to buy it either. Bear in mind the V-22 isn't pressurized, which makes it less than ideal for high altitude flying. Just about the only reason you'd want a V-22 AWACS is if your alternative is this: 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
Murgos posted:21st century synchronization gear? EM waves are pretty quick, they should be able to fit between two rotating prop blades. The trons have to come back, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:I'm hearing a lot of time money and people are being thrown at the SHORAD problem- and that what's coming together is a hot mess. From a few pages ago but up until last week I was neck deep in this effort so I figured I'd answer. First point, to the range: 100km is a long, long way when you're talking about a maneuvering target in a contested ECM environment. Like, unrealistically long, for any mobile land based system. I'm sure a Buk can waste an airliner at that distance but in a full volume situation that's a big ask even for an SM-6 or Patriot MSE. Patriot is a theater level asset nowadays, every one of them. There's never enough of them to go around and they'll never make it below a corps in aforementioned situation. Hence the problem: BCTs need air defense love too and they get none at the present time. There are a bunch of initiatives underway to address this gap: IFPC, which I'm assuming we're all familiar with, fills that counter-cruise missile/UAS/fixed wing out to ~20km role, but it isn't particularly mobile due largely to its counter-RAM requirement. That's where the Manevuer SHORAD program(s) come in: there's the long term "mature" capability and then an "interim" thing; these will probably strongly resemble a Pantsir on a protected platform. The biggest issue right now outside of the engineering is the way US/NATO doctrine work with regards to ground-based air defense. Since we've always enjoyed/assumed air superiority, these systems have been very tightly controlled....BVR shots in particular must carefully coordinated with the air component. No one really cared about the WVR (stinger) stuff, as they weren't/aren't a huge threat to exorbitantly expensive fixed wing aircraft and their target set is pretty minimal in any case. The issue that is emerging today is that the Maneuver SHORAD system, along with IFPC, are going to have to engage BVR in order to be of any use: standoff munitions and surveillance capabilities have come such a long way in recent years that you have to engage them much further out to have any useful effect, and engage them very, very quickly. The problem with this is the air component is VERY uncomfortable with surface shooters having the kind of autonomy they need to shoot the bad things, as that puts the good things under more danger. But, if we're in an environment where there aren't enough good things to keep the bad things off the ground forces, something has to give. This is a huge cultural issue: aside from possibly some ancient warrant officer stashed away in a basement somewhere, no one in the US Army has done air defense like this before, nor has the air component planned for this kind of air defense. It is going to be a long and painful process to revise all of this stuff and it is just now getting started.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:I don't really think the question was whether it would be as good as an E-2 or E-3, since the obvious answer is no. But that doesn't mean it would be totally ineffective. The royal navy uses helicopters for this with, apparently, some success--so then the question is, would this work better or at least as well as that? To do what? And the modern Royal Navy is basically a case study in ridiculous decisions. Crowsnest is loving stupid. About all you're getting out of these systems is a datalinked radar feed, which does get you better line of sight than a shipboard radar, but could also be done by a loving drone rather than a helicopter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Hauldren Collider posted:I don't really think the question was whether it would be as good as an E-2 or E-3, since the obvious answer is no. But that doesn't mean it would be totally ineffective. The royal navy uses helicopters for this with, apparently, some success--so then the question is, would this work better or at least as well as that? The USMC isn't going to be trying to manage multiple fighter and attack squadrons on a 24 hr op-tempo, they are going to be managing smaller independent actions so they navy can go off and play without having to babysit. So, the big benefit of an EV-22 would be the somewhat simplified logistics trail.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
That was my reaction too. I thought they were remaking Sand Lot so I was doubly angry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Murgos posted:So, the big benefit of an EV-22 would be the somewhat simplified logistics trail. How is a newly developed variant of the V-22 simpler than a plane thats currently in production and which has been flying since the 1950s and planned to fly for several more decades simplifying logistics?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Eh. The Osprey has a service ceiling and endurance in about the same ballpark as the Saab 340, which hosts the Swedish air force's babby AWACS solution (big honking AESA radar in a rectangular box on top of a regional turboprop airliner painted gray). It's not the best platform for it and the air force is currently shopping around for something better to put it on (some kind of business jet probably), but it works and it's pretty cheap to operate. The air force originally had six systems (I think) but in the strategic meltdown around 2000-2004 four of them were sold to foreign customers and now they're trying to get as much mileage as they can out of the two they still have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:Eh. The Osprey has a service ceiling and endurance in about the same ballpark as the Saab 340, which hosts the Swedish air force's babby AWACS solution (big honking AESA radar in a rectangular box on top of a regional turboprop airliner painted gray). It's not the best platform for it and the air force is currently shopping around for something better to put it on (some kind of business jet probably), but it works and it's pretty cheap to operate. The air force originally had six systems (I think) but in the strategic meltdown around 2000-2004 four of them were sold to foreign customers and now they're trying to get as much mileage as they can out of the two they still have. IIRC the UAE just bought some. [Insert picture of gold Saab Erieye]
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:IIRC the UAE just bought some. Yeah but I'm p sure those are new built systems, not SWAF surplus. e: or are they? The Greeks had two but I think that was a lease, and the Thai have two. Pakistan has four but on the Saab 2000. The UAE ordered theirs in 2009 so that might have been the former Greek ones. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:08
|
|