It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: StargateSG7
What Bedlam is trying to illustrate is that generally Energy in = Energy out
and +/- radiative loss and +/- input loss from the heat pump mechanism itself.
I just happen disagree on the AMOUNT of input over the initial thermal energy
amount that needs moving say to move 30 watts between two places.
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: StargateSG7
What Bedlam is trying to illustrate is that generally Energy in = Energy out
and +/- radiative loss and +/- input loss from the heat pump mechanism itself.
I just happen disagree on the AMOUNT of input over the initial thermal energy
amount that needs moving say to move 30 watts between two places.
It can't be better than the Carnot limit. Peltier modules aren't even close, they're horribly inefficient. And again, the heat just doesn't vanish away, it can be put elsewhere but then you have even more to be rid of. There's a LOT of energy in jet engine exhaust. So it will be a LOT of energy to move somewhere, but in a jet fighter you don't have a lot of options. And then it takes even more energy than you're moving to move it. Since the primary energy source of a jet IS the exhaust, coming up with more energy than the jet exhaust is ...tough.
There's been a lot of work on passive cooling. If you heat up a lot of air a LITTLE bit, then it's hard to detect. You just don't want hot spots, because the 'brightness' of the hot spot is like a 4th power relationship with the ambient air temp. So a little hotter is a lot brighter.
One method of active cooling I've dropped the dime on very indirectly a couple of times. Basically, if you could take the waste energy and do...something...with it that's not aimed back or down, it's going to be hard to see.
And you might get something else out of it. Or maybe a few other things.
originally posted by: Forensick
If your sources knew you were posting their chats with online, do you think would still tell you?
If the answer is no I would stop posting this.
Whilst I love to read potentially cutting edge science technology, I would hate to think it came at the end expense of a jail term and potential ruined life's for a family.
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: StargateSG7
What Bedlam is trying to illustrate is that generally Energy in = Energy out
and +/- radiative loss and +/- input loss from the heat pump mechanism itself.
I just happen disagree on the AMOUNT of input over the initial thermal energy
amount that needs moving say to move 30 watts between two places.
It can't be better than the Carnot limit. Peltier modules aren't even close, they're horribly inefficient. And again, the heat just doesn't vanish away, it can be put elsewhere but then you have even more to be rid of. There's a LOT of energy in jet engine exhaust. So it will be a LOT of energy to move somewhere, but in a jet fighter you don't have a lot of options. And then it takes even more energy than you're moving to move it. Since the primary energy source of a jet IS the exhaust, coming up with more energy than the jet exhaust is ...tough.
There's been a lot of work on passive cooling. If you heat up a lot of air a LITTLE bit, then it's hard to detect. You just don't want hot spots, because the 'brightness' of the hot spot is like a 4th power relationship with the ambient air temp. So a little hotter is a lot brighter.
One method of active cooling I've dropped the dime on very indirectly a couple of times. Basically, if you could take the waste energy and do...something...with it that's not aimed back or down, it's going to be hard to see.
And you might get something else out of it. Or maybe a few other things.
iam sure if we looked in to parents in the last 10 years we can come to some understanding of how this system works......if at all this is not misinformation!!!
originally posted by: StargateSG7
originally posted by: Bedlam
originally posted by: StargateSG7
What Bedlam is trying to illustrate is that generally Energy in = Energy out
and +/- radiative loss and +/- input loss from the heat pump mechanism itself.
I just happen disagree on the AMOUNT of input over the initial thermal energy
amount that needs moving say to move 30 watts between two places.
It can't be better than the Carnot limit. Peltier modules aren't even close, they're horribly inefficient. And again, the heat just doesn't vanish away, it can be put elsewhere but then you have even more to be rid of. There's a LOT of energy in jet engine exhaust. So it will be a LOT of energy to move somewhere, but in a jet fighter you don't have a lot of options. And then it takes even more energy than you're moving to move it. Since the primary energy source of a jet IS the exhaust, coming up with more energy than the jet exhaust is ...tough.
There's been a lot of work on passive cooling. If you heat up a lot of air a LITTLE bit, then it's hard to detect. You just don't want hot spots, because the 'brightness' of the hot spot is like a 4th power relationship with the ambient air temp. So a little hotter is a lot brighter.
One method of active cooling I've dropped the dime on very indirectly a couple of times. Basically, if you could take the waste energy and do...something...with it that's not aimed back or down, it's going to be hard to see.
And you might get something else out of it. Or maybe a few other things.
===
One modality of thermal energy movement is to CONVERT IT to microwave energy
and beam it BACK to a pickup vehicle which can be POWERED by the microwave beam
(i.e. Electric powered recon aircraft) so in essence you take the exhaust heat of the
PRIMARY CRAFT convert it to a "EM Beam" and power a higher flying secondary recon
craft, cruise missile or communications/ECM craft.
You could also pocket-heat parts of the atmosphere to create an Atmospheric Lens
so that other EM bands can use that "lens" to bounce or focus large amounts of other
EM energy for 3D ground penetrating radar purposes, long-range over-the-horizon
communications or for bouncing/focusing EM (lasers/microwaves) or even particle
beams into space for anti-satellite operations or to the ground or onto other
aircraft/ICBM/Cruise missiles/planes for eventual destruction.
Atmospheric lenses can also be used for TEMPORARY visual stealth because
you can create an artificial refractive index which hides or changes the look
of an aircraft that is continually heating parts of the atmosphere to form
visible-light lensing. However, I can KILL that sort of visual stealth by
using SOBEL EGDE DETECTION and RGB pixel inversion to find the path of
EDGE DISTORTIONS created by a continuously created atmospheric lens
and then fire a missile into the CENTRE of that found distorted area.
SOBEL EDGE DETECTION and RGB pixel inversion can also be used
to digital signal process radar waves to find the edge distortions
of Plasma Sheathed aircraft trying to be RADAR or ACOUSTICALLY
stealthy by mapping the incoming RADAR and ACOUSTIC data
onto an RGB bitmap based upon amplitude and frequency
and using a cheap but fancy graphics card (AMD S9150)
to DSP the edge distortions via visual means (SOBEL).
NOTE: I've personally designed and coded a BEAUTIFUL RGB INVERT
AND SOBEL EDGE DETECTION algorithm that does EXACTLY that
and it does even on a relatively cheap AMD Rage FURY X card
at 65,000+ objects per second at 120 fps. The more cards the
higher the frame rate! IT'S DEFINITELY BETTER AND MUCH HIGHER
PERFORMANCE than RAYTHEON's, NORTHRUP's or THALES radar technology!
---
I think Bedlam is hinting at plasma-dynamic sheathing which can be used for
Radar Stealth and as a medium for pushing the atmosphere out of the way
for making any plane enveloped in such a plasma sheath faster. You can also
create a PDWE (Pulse Detonation Wave Engine) from superheated gasses
OR you can create a virtual ScramJet out of the same.
In SOME CIRCLES I HAVE PERUSED, you could possibly create vectors
of influence where you literally allow a craft to be SUCKED into a specific
direction because certain pulsed EM radiation temporarily disables the
action of the Weak Force upon an aircraft envelope within a specific
cone of directionality. That paragraph is PURPOSEFULLY vague because
of it's source, but let's just say I have my knowledge that is absolutely
FIRST HAND high-level from an absolutely impeccable source at the
highest of levels.
originally posted by: darksidius
a reply to: StargateSG7
I stay on my opinion , it's a mistake to go slow , now with the mobile launcher you need speed to go on the theater, if your bomber take hours after hours after hours to come the objectif have move since a lot , do you think the ennemy will stay at the same place ten hours after firing ? Don't you think the bomber need dash to escape the futur 5th gen ennemy squadron ?
originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak
Might that second not yet mentioned aircraft
look something like this ?
theaviationist.com...
originally posted by: clay2 baraka
originally posted by: darksidius
a reply to: StargateSG7
I stay on my opinion , it's a mistake to go slow , now with the mobile launcher you need speed to go on the theater, if your bomber take hours after hours after hours to come the objectif have move since a lot , do you think the ennemy will stay at the same place ten hours after firing ? Don't you think the bomber need dash to escape the futur 5th gen ennemy squadron ?
They have a fast mover solution for that scenario..