the MACH 1 jump soldiers

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

do you have a link or anything, or is this your own idea?

BTW - I agree that it can be done.

eh?

I think you'd have to have some kind of aid due to the terminal velocity thing. I can't really comment because i have only a very vague idea of what you're trying to say?

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Yes but WHAT is your point? Or is this yet another one of your vague posts that can go anywhere?

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Originally posted by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE
if you can not read or understand what is written what are you doing on this forum ???

I was going to be polite but what the hell.

Your English = Terrible

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

Kittinger followed this flight with two more. Excelsior II launched on December 11, 1959 and rose to a height of 74,700 before Kittinger left the gondola. His final flight in this series, Excelsior III, took place on August 16, 1960. Kittinger piloted his craft to an altitude of 102,800 feet before exiting the open gondola. On the descent Kittinger became the first man to exceed the Speed of Sound without an aircraft or space vehicle. It is still the highest parachute jump ever. The freefall lasted four minutes and thirty-six seconds, a record.

www.balloonlife.com...

So it would seem that no "super advanced" equipment was needed - probably just a LOT of training. The question then becomes, in what situation would this technique be the best way to land troops?

Exiting a static jump platform (negligible relative airspeed) and descending to a level where a conventional parachute will work with the intention of developing high altitude survival technology is a far cry from developing a high altitude (high speed?) troop transport (gotta have the plane first) and then a practical, survivable insertion technique that would allow for mission requirements (weapons, communications gear, etc). If you had such a plane and it was traveling at near Mach (.9+) how would you keep it stable? You can't just drop a ramp and take a green light. It's a nice thought to play with, but as usual the devil of it is in the details.

[Edited on 24-5-2004 by Mirthful Me]

I was speaking of the point after jump, obviosly the plane would have to be designed to allow the troops to safely exit it, and as I said training would go into the "technique" of insertion.

My main "beef" with the whole idea though is not in the actual technicalities of doing it, more why would one do it? It seems to me that for every reason to do a Mach 1+ jump there would be more practical ways of accomplishing the same objective.

well it could be good for SF but i dont think it would get u past radar would confuse thier radar though
nice avatar mad man

AMM my post was directed at NoGods original post, not yours, sorry about the placement of the post, but I was actually researching (imagine that?) the problems of high speed high altitude non-emergent aircraft egress. By the time I finished the blood was in the water and the sharks were on the attack.

Originally posted by devilwasp
well it could be good for SF but i dont think it would get u past radar would confuse thier radar though
nice avatar mad man

Yeah, the SF aplication is the only one I could really think of, but why would you want your SF so far behind enemy lines that they needed to be airdropped at Mach 1+?

Thanks on the avatar props - I asume yours are royal marines?

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
AMM my post was directed at NoGods original post, not yours, sorry about the placement of the post, but I was actually researching (imagine that?) the problems of high speed high altitude non-emergent aircraft egress. By the time I finished the blood was in the water and the sharks were on the attack.

Understandable

So what was the conclusion of your research?

Yeah, the SF aplication is the only one I could really think of, but why would you want your SF so far behind enemy lines that they needed to be airdropped at Mach 1+?

Thanks on the avatar props - I asume yours are royal marines?

well mabye for taking out enemy HQ's. could get u past the radar screens would look like a missile not a para
nice find though no gods gota give u that
yeah it RMC was gona get a lynx but i thought RMC would be better

In all seriousness there may be a narrow application for this type of insertion , but like so many other ideas, can the cost be justified? How many current aircraft can operate at 100,000+ feet, and could carry even two SF operatives (with gear, maybe a sniper team?) as passengers and withstand a mode of egress? Never mind operational integrity/ threat abatement of the aircraft, and of the jumpers during descent. The problems keep piling up quicker than the original hypothetical of "if we really wanted to get a couple of guys here, and do this" what would it take?. We have entered the realm of diminishing returns, quickly.

DELETED

[Edited on 26-5-2004 by NOGODSINTHEUNIVERSE]

NGITU,
This is about the most ridiculous idea I've seen. I agree with Nerdling's earlier comments. There's just a couple of other matters. First the jumper needs a space suit. There's basically no air up there. It needs to be heated otherwise he'd freeze in the first few seconds. You mention stealth. How could something requiring multistage parachutes be stealthy. Why is it that your posts really go nowhere? At first I thought it was a language problem, even in your tongue, my opinion wouild be the same.