U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-29-2009, 07:28 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
221 posts, read 334,496 times
Reputation: 66

Advertisements

I've been reading about the DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Projests Agency, again lately. It seems that
they've recovered from such projects as training psychic people to locate places to annihilate and designing
mechanical elephants for the Vietnam jungles. They've recently developed an alternative energy source for
soldiers to power their backpack night-vision laser and GPS devices. The battery pack used to weight
almost 25 lbs. or more. (Kind of hard to retreat if you're carrying a load of bricks.)
To me, the new replacement isn't alternative. To me it is a different kind of suicide bomber technique.
The fuel cells that have been developed use a gallon of propane!

Now.... I see this article at popsci.com:

DARPA Readies an Ultra-Fast Mini-Sub | Popular Science

What happens when the bubble pops? Do they cast off the specially trained navy shipmen into the embarrassment pile, too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-30-2009, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 49,615,444 times
Reputation: 24548
DARPA islittle more than an Acadimic/Industrial welfare program. It swerves its purpose even if it never invents anything even vaguely useful. IMHO the money would be better spent encouraging invention in the open market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2009, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
221 posts, read 334,496 times
Reputation: 66
The fuel cell article that I was reading said that they had twenty outside contractors look at what was wanted and only two decided to take a R & D try at it.
It is beyond me how our soldiers would be safer with propane on them instead of batteries.
Batteries are heavy, yes. But propane? The soldiers are walking bombs! And these R & D's get paid for this?!?!? Does anyone have a son/daughter in the military? Probably not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2009, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
221 posts, read 334,496 times
Reputation: 66
So just how fast in mph is 100 knots?

1 mph = .868976 knots (according to the web)

so this new experimental sub will travel at about 115 mph.
The article said that the navy's fastest sub currently goes at about 30 knots.
This is 34.5 mph (car down a city street rate). (30 divided by .868976)

Now, India's newly launched (7/29/09) nuclear sub (their first and using Russian help, annoying
Pakistan to the hilt) powered by a 85 megawatt reactor
is said to reach a speed of 24 knots. That is 27.6 mph. This is kinda slow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2009, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,194 posts, read 17,707,264 times
Reputation: 7981
It's amusing that the people questioning the existence of DARPA are doing it using a technology created by DARPA. The irony is dripping.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2009, 03:46 PM
 
26,948 posts, read 38,201,283 times
Reputation: 34898
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
It's amusing that the people questioning the existence of DARPA are doing it using a technology created by DARPA. The irony is dripping.

Aw, Jeez, I got some on my shoe!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2009, 07:43 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
221 posts, read 334,496 times
Reputation: 66
NOw, T-H-A-T I-S amusing!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2009, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Maryland not Murlin
8,188 posts, read 21,767,384 times
Reputation: 6116
Quote:
Originally Posted by limapie View Post
The fuel cell article that I was reading said that they had twenty outside contractors look at what was wanted and only two decided to take a R & D try at it.
It is beyond me how our soldiers would be safer with propane on them instead of batteries.
Batteries are heavy, yes. But propane? The soldiers are walking bombs! And these R & D's get paid for this?!?!? Does anyone have a son/daughter in the military? Probably not.
A 25 pound back pack is not that heavy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2009, 09:43 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 49,615,444 times
Reputation: 24548
A 25 lb. back pact that explodes when hit by a tracer buller will NOT be carried. You can bet on that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2009, 03:05 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
221 posts, read 334,496 times
Reputation: 66
OKAY explain then how something that contains propane will not explode if hit by a bullet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top