Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,295 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 388,957
Pageviews Today: 1,286,125Threads Today: 668Posts Today: 14,871
06:19 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Rods from Orbit

 
darth

User ID: 28178764
United States
12/30/2020 07:29 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 77624073
United States
12/30/2020 07:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
I would look up DEW’s just because you are on the subject.. I agree that they could make smaller rods but they don’t.. it’s to expensive to get the rod into space and they are the big boys. Anything smaller can be done with a dew.
darth  (OP)

User ID: 28178764
United States
12/30/2020 07:52 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
I would look up DEW’s just because you are on the subject.. I agree that they could make smaller rods but they don’t.. it’s to expensive to get the rod into space and they are the big boys. Anything smaller can be done with a dew.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77624073


I WORKED on DEWs. The efficiency is very poor especially when shooting through the atmosphere.

The only really powerful DEWs are Earth based, not space based.

Remember when we shot the Shuttle with a big laser from Haleakala on Maui in 1984? We were testing a device to remove atmospheric distortion. I got an award for my work because I figured out how to use the Shuttle and save the USAF millions of dollars to complete the experiment.

The power supply for a big laser or particle beam in space would weigh many tons and it would VIBRATE which screws up targeting. Plus you gotta refuel it.

Kinetic kill was always the way to go.

BTW, there IS one DEW that was quite feasible to use against sats and nukes. It only worked in space. I called it the "Photon Torpedo" because it looked like the one on Star Trek.

I would be amazed if its not on orbit right now.

SCIENCE, Dude!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5246435
United States
12/30/2020 08:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
why the remake of a thread?
pushing ignorance again i see.
Red Hot Chilean Pepe
Resident Chilean GLPer

User ID: 79780291
Chile
12/31/2020 01:11 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Great Thread Darth! I recall the thread where the remote viewers said this kind of tech was available for "atlanteans" but they had a matter compressing system that would have a marble sized ball with a mass of several tons, and that launched from orbit was even worse than nukes.
All great truths begin as Blasphemies.
G.B.S.

GLP is like a diamond mine of information, in the sense that you have to shovel mountains of crap to find the diamonds, but it's still worth the pain.
roguetechie81

User ID: 79785318
United States
12/31/2020 01:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
 Quoting: darth


There are other interesting systems you can put up that are far more efficient and effective Though.

Dropping tungsten telephone poles is amateur hour.
roguetechie
Red Hot Chilean Pepe
Resident Chilean GLPer

User ID: 79838033
Chile
01/01/2021 08:20 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
I just noticed that you discard the idea of Nashville Bomb being a DEW. There’s a Lockheed Martin granted patent that talks about coherent matterwave beams. It is based in part on the Bohm-Aharonov effect.


[link to patentimages.storage.googleapis.com (secure)]

From the patents invention summary:

“ According to various aspects of the Subject technology, a directed beam of low-entropy coherent massive particles similar to laser beams may be produced, but with concentrations millions of times higher than any intense laser beams currently available. Furthermore, unlike laser beams or the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) (e.g.,a form of coherent matter wave),the Subject technology may produce coherent matter waves that allow both Fermions and Bosons to achieve coherence.”
All great truths begin as Blasphemies.
G.B.S.

GLP is like a diamond mine of information, in the sense that you have to shovel mountains of crap to find the diamonds, but it's still worth the pain.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5041193
United States
01/01/2021 08:33 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
I just noticed that you discard the idea of Nashville Bomb being a DEW. There’s a Lockheed Martin granted patent that talks about coherent matterwave beams. It is based in part on the Bohm-Aharonov effect.


[link to patentimages.storage.googleapis.com (secure)]

From the patents invention summary:

“ According to various aspects of the Subject technology, a directed beam of low-entropy coherent massive particles similar to laser beams may be produced, but with concentrations millions of times higher than any intense laser beams currently available. Furthermore, unlike laser beams or the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) (e.g.,a form of coherent matter wave),the Subject technology may produce coherent matter waves that allow both Fermions and Bosons to achieve coherence.”
 Quoting: Red Hot Chilean Pepe


lol,mmkay.ill bet lm never presented a working prototype.

its all kenetic energy.
whatever weapon you use.all kenetic.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79772691
Australia
01/01/2021 10:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
 Quoting: darth


What accelerates the rod to 7km/sec that’s 25,200km/hour. Gravity alone would not do this due to friction? Help me understand this!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79625622
Spain
01/01/2021 03:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
 Quoting: darth


Wrong!

The mass of a pole sized (a cylinder 20 feet long and 1 foot in diameter), tungsten rod is:

M = pi · r^2 · h · rho = 3.1415927 · (15.24 cm)^2 · (20 · 30.48 cm) · (19.25 g/cm^3) = 8562399.7 g = 8562.4 kg = 18877 lb

Since the premise is false, the argument is invalid, and the rest of your observation is irrelevant.

A salute
darth  (OP)

User ID: 28178764
United States
01/02/2021 04:56 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
I just noticed that you discard the idea of Nashville Bomb being a DEW. There’s a Lockheed Martin granted patent that talks about coherent matterwave beams. It is based in part on the Bohm-Aharonov effect.


[link to patentimages.storage.googleapis.com (secure)]

From the patents invention summary:

“ According to various aspects of the Subject technology, a directed beam of low-entropy coherent massive particles similar to laser beams may be produced, but with concentrations millions of times higher than any intense laser beams currently available. Furthermore, unlike laser beams or the Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) (e.g.,a form of coherent matter wave),the Subject technology may produce coherent matter waves that allow both Fermions and Bosons to achieve coherence.”
 Quoting: Red Hot Chilean Pepe


Red Hot, thanks for the info.

I had not visited my own thread for a day or so. Thought there were no replies.

However, any large DEW requires a huge power source unless its nuclear.

Will read your info.
darth  (OP)

User ID: 28178764
United States
01/02/2021 04:59 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
 Quoting: darth


What accelerates the rod to 7km/sec that’s 25,200km/hour. Gravity alone would not do this due to friction? Help me understand this!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79772691


YES, gravity alone does this.

Achieving low Earth orbit takes over 7 km/sec. Getting to a high orbit can take nearly 10 km/sec.

That potential energy goes into the projectile when the orbit is diverted to one that impacts the Earth.

YES, there is air friction, but that is why a rod shape works. Low cross section = less air drag.

For example, nuke RVs can retain about 6 km/sec. when they hit the ground. They are usually cone shaped to maintain accuracy.
darth  (OP)

User ID: 28178764
United States
01/02/2021 05:08 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
Dan Bongino, who is normally totally reliable, linked to an article about penetrators from space:

[link to www.wearethemighty.com (secure)]

However, their math is off. A 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter rod of pure Tungsten will weigh NOT 24,000 lbs. as stated, but about 180,000 pounds! The Specific Gravity of Tungsten is 19.25, therefore, a cubic centimeter of the metal weighs 19.25 grams. Incredible density plus very high melting point.

We would need a heavy lifter to get even one of these on orbit which makes it a very expensive weapon system.

However, the rod could be much smaller. Yeah, a twenty footer weighing 90 tons would be great for attacking deep underground structures, but much smaller rods could be used for targets on or near the surface.

IIRC, each pound of material coming in at 7 km/sec. has kinetic energy equivalent to 28 lbs. of TNT. In other words, a 100 lb. rod would pack the punch of a 2800 lb. bomb. Somebody please check my maffs!

Back over 30 years ago there were open source papers on using windows on the front of hypersonic projectiles so that the missile or bomb could steer itself directly to the target, even a moving target like a truck. The windows were made out of gem material and sometimes cooled to withstand the high heating rates.

A cheaper alternative is to simply put into orbit reentry vehicles like we use for nukes now and fill them with either Lunar or asteroid soil. It's the MASS that makes the weapon effective. That mass would be far cheaper than any boosted from Earth.

Space based penetrators would work best if stationed in highly elliptical orbits. At apogee (the top of the orbit), very little energy or delta V is required to make the penetrator hit any point on the globe. It would take longer to arrive at the target than if stationed in low Earth orbit but be more versatile in targeting. It would take a lot of energy to get a low earth orbit vehicle very far off its orbital track.

In case you all are not aware, most of the Chicom leaders are ENGINEERS and they know full well that off-world resources would make dandy weapon systems.

All the more reason we have to control the High Ground.

Ad astra

P.S. For those thinking that the Nashville attack was a DEW, the amount of energy required would be mind boggling. Most lasers are not very efficient and such a laser shot would require many, many megajoules of energy.

Lasers from space COULD take out high altitude aircraft, other satellites, or nukes in space. However, hitting something at ground level would lose a lot of that energy traversing the atmosphere. Probably could fry an enemy though!

Note that I grew up reading SF with my slide rule in my hand, so I naturally ended up working on Star Wars systems.
 Quoting: darth


Wrong!

The mass of a pole sized (a cylinder 20 feet long and 1 foot in diameter), tungsten rod is:

M = pi · r^2 · h · rho = 3.1415927 · (15.24 cm)^2 · (20 · 30.48 cm) · (19.25 g/cm^3) = 8562399.7 g = 8562.4 kg = 18877 lb

Since the premise is false, the argument is invalid, and the rest of your observation is irrelevant.

A salute
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79625622


Thanks for checking my math.

My calculator is old and its hard to see where the decimal point is.

Yep, I was off by an order of magnitude.

Hanging my head in shame.

However, that does NOT negate the other points I made.

The only diff is that putting some rods in orbit just got easier.

I remember discussing such weapons in an unclassified setting about 30 years ago with the USAF.

Would be amazed if we don't have a few on orbit right now.

Hardest part would be launching payloads without the enemies knowing that you put something up there.

BTW, I HAVE seen stealthy sats. There is tech to hide both IR and RF signatures.
Google_It

User ID: 77935151
Canada
01/02/2021 05:12 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Rods from Orbit
popcorn
The Voice Of Reason @NewsAlternative @THEWATCHTOWERS [link to twitter.com (secure)]





GLP