**Blimps** to thwart cruise missile attack?

UxoriousMagnus
The Pentagon is looking into using blimps to detect cruise missile attacks which they say is to close a gap in our current defenses.

So...my questions is....we have had this gap for how long, and "blimps" are the answer?

We have NSA listening to every conversation we have, satellites that can see a zit on your kids face and how many hundreds of billions spent on defense each year .....

but technology from the late 1800's is the answer?

where did all our money go!?

www.cbsnews.com...

Do YOU understand how blimps are going to be used

Satellites that can see a zit on your kids face, that'S BS prove me wrong !

Back to my first point prove that these blimps are 1800's tech !

wmd_2008

UxoriousMagnus
The Pentagon is looking into using blimps to detect cruise missile attacks which they say is to close a gap in our current defenses.

So...my questions is....we have had this gap for how long, and "blimps" are the answer?

We have NSA listening to every conversation we have, satellites that can see a zit on your kids face and how many hundreds of billions spent on defense each year .....

but technology from the late 1800's is the answer?

where did all our money go!?

www.cbsnews.com...

Do YOU understand how blimps are going to be used

Satellites that can see a zit on your kids face, that'S BS prove me wrong !

Back to my first point prove that these blimps are 1800's tech !

eeeh...calm down there buddy....too much caffeine can cause heart complications.....might want to look into it.
you are aware that the first blimps were used in the late 1800's right?

Obviously these blimps are way more cool and high tech but horses were the preferred choice of ambulating back then too....how excited would you be if our generals said....hey we are going to use horses on the front lines now....but don't worry they will be horses with "lasers"!!!

I just want to see them use all our anti-grav stuff that you and I both know they have.

ok?

reply to post by UxoriousMagnus



So how will they be used as an obstruction or a detection platform no answer re the zit camera either, you don't believe all that 50 years ahead tech BS do you?

I don't see the issue.

Why spend billion reinventing the wheel when a glorified ballon will do the job just as well for a fraction of the price?

reply to post by crazyewok


It's like airshows, you putt around all the F16's, F15's, C5's, C17's, B52's and even a B1, but you can never please the fanatics until you parade out a B2.

We spare no expenses. Why have a moderately priced early warning system mounted on a tested and proven deployment method that provides mobility and can augment existing EWS...when you can drop more cash than the entire existing programs cost and have something "cool".

reply to post by AtomicDew


You mean why have something cheap that you know works, that you can field quickly as opposed to something that will take years or possibly decades and potentially billions of dollars?

reply to post by wmd_2008


You really need to stop before they send a C-12 with a panoramic, multi-phased, optophonics, turbo charged, earhorn with a rare earth element fueled, mutli-fuel, diesel, multi-phased, dual-stroke, overhead cam, sidewall mount, triple stack nuclear-cobalt ram jet, to your area for surveillance and intelligence gathering.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Exactly.

reply to post by AtomicDew


Because that makes perfect sense. Why use something that exists and works when you can spend billions on something new.

AtomicDew


You really need to stop before they send a C-12 with a panoramic, multi-phased, optophonics, turbo charged, earhorn with a rare earth element fueled, mutli-fuel, diesel, multi-phased, dual-stroke, overhead cam, sidewall mount, triple stack nuclear-cobalt ram jet, to your area for surveillance and intelligence gathering.

You forgot delta wings!

It has to have Delta wings! Even if it does impact performance and drastically increases cost cause they are cool!

reply to post by crazyewok


Ah hell, I knew something was missing. We'll add those on, it'll just be a retrofitted upgrade...ah, $890m sounds about right. Besides, I highly doubt it'll cause undue stress to the airframe

AtomicDew
reply to post by crazyewok

 

Ah hell, I knew something was missing. We'll add those on, it'll just be a retrofitted upgrade...ah, $890m sounds about right. Besides, I highly doubt it'll cause undue stress to the airframe

edit on 29-1-2014 by AtomicDew because: (no reason given)

Don't forget another $100 million, you know, you have to overcharge the goverments paying and those offshore retirement funds wont fill themselves

reply to post by crazyewok


Doh! I'm so forgetful. Well, we may need to make it $250m, so I can "lose" $150m of it.

AtomicDew
reply to post by crazyewok

 

Doh! I'm so forgetful. Well, we may need to make it $250m, so I can "lose" $150m of it.

and fit it with buggy and half baked software that makes the thing a deathtrap so the government have to fork out another $100 million for brand new software for it.

AtomicDew
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

You really need to stop before they send a C-12 with a panoramic, multi-phased, optophonics, turbo charged, earhorn with a rare earth element fueled, mutli-fuel, diesel, multi-phased, dual-stroke, overhead cam, sidewall mount, triple stack nuclear-cobalt ram jet, to your area for surveillance and intelligence gathering.

Be my guest I would love to see it

reply to post by wmd_2008


I don't know, I can't guarantee it won't crash into something. Heck, it may not even get off the ground, but it'll be the coolest looking thing that was designed to fly.

crazyewok
I don't see the issue.

Why spend billion reinventing the wheel when a glorified ballon will do the job just as well for a fraction of the price?

I took my kids to NASA in Houston....did the whole tour....they had a presentation about possible future trips to the moon (yeah right, I know) but what struck me as funny is that the lady giving the presentation said they would use the same computer technology that they used in the 60's because if it aint' broke don't fix it....

you guys would have loved it!!

UxoriousMagnus
I took my kids to NASA in Houston....did the whole tour....they had a presentation about possible future trips to the moon (yeah right, I know) but what struck me as funny is that the lady giving the presentation said they would use the same computer technology that they used in the 60's because if it aint' broke don't fix it....

you guys would have loved it!!

Get real. Its one thing to update the computing system on the moon missions are computers have got drastically cheaper and more powerfull since the 60's! In fact I call BS on what you said because it would be stupid to use 60's computers! Hell they don't even make them anymore as they would be beyond obsolete!


But a blimp? Whats so useless about it? Why spend billions designing something when a blimp would do the job perfectly well? What would you suggest? Its already been pointed out the draws backs of satilites. Not only are they bloody expensive, not only would they have trouble looking for tiny launch signatures but its also not a simple task to just reposition a satilite, in fact its a nightmare and costs a lot of fuel, fuel that cant be replaced in orbit.

crazyewok

UxoriousMagnus
I took my kids to NASA in Houston....did the whole tour....they had a presentation about possible future trips to the moon (yeah right, I know) but what struck me as funny is that the lady giving the presentation said they would use the same computer technology that they used in the 60's because if it aint' broke don't fix it....

you guys would have loved it!!

Get real. Its one thing to update the computing system on the moon missions are computers have got drastically cheaper and more powerfull since the 60's! In fact I call BS on what you said because it would be stupid to use 60's computers! Hell they don't even make them anymore as they would be beyond obsolete!


But a blimp? Whats so useless about it? Why spend billions designing something when a blimp would do the job perfectly well? What would you suggest? Its already been pointed out the draws backs of satilites. Not only are they bloody expensive, not only would they have trouble looking for tiny launch signatures but its also not a simple task to just reposition a satilite, in fact its a nightmare and costs a lot of fuel, fuel that cant be replaced in orbit.

I am with you.....my wife and I looked at each other in disbelief when she said it.....but she said it.

....how excited would you be if our generals said....hey we are going to use horses on the front lines now....but don't worry they will be horses with "lasers"!!!

Absolutely beautiful !

I'm going to a rock concert tonight : Neal Young and Lazerhorse. Too funny.

I think this tech began in the Napoleanic wars, but- if I'm wrong about that... then American Civil War at the latest. Doesn't mean the concept is invalid. Different generation of telescope installed is all.

They should build thousands of them, and paint black and white stripes on them ( to avoid friendly fire ) and call them EBB2A... Enhanced Barrage Balloon, version 2a.

Wish they filled them with hydrogen like the good 'ol days, man what a show !