← Back to Squawk list

31

The Air Force Is Putting Death Rays on Fighter Jets. Yes, Death Rays.

送信時刻：3 ヶ月ほど前

Lasers will help older fighters stay alive while flying the deadly skies. The U.S. Air Force envisions placing laser weapon systems on fighter jets by the mid-2020s. The service is banking on a defense contractor’s SHiELD laser system, a pod-mounted laser that will protect fighters from incoming missiles. (www.popularmechanics.com) さらに...

Zachary Colescott

31 人のメンバーからのコメント

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Charlie Roberts 3 ヶ月ほど前 14

and frickin' sharks too!!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Michael Stansfield 3 ヶ月ほど前 3

LOL!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

AABABY 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

Fins to the left! }-^')

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Michael Huggins 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

Beats sea bass! LOL!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Michael Huggins 3 ヶ月ほど前 0

Whoever downvoted this apparently doesn't understand what this thread is talking about. Oh behave!!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

WhiteKnight77 3 ヶ月ほど前 3

Some people just do not get Jimmy. ;)

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

AABABY 3 ヶ月ほど前 3

Their loss. FINZUP!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Michael Huggins 3 ヶ月ほど前 3

Mermaid Man: "EVIIIL!! EEEEEEEVIIIIIILLLL!! DEATH RAAAAAAY!!"

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

alan75035 3 ヶ月ほど前 3

Some people get all the cool toys! :(

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Bruce Horwitz 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

Well, let's just say that taking your technology cues from Popular Mechanics is about one step above Buck Rogers.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

WhiteKnight77 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

While not every prediction comes true, there are things that have.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Bruce Horwitz 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

Your point being? It may be fun to see what technological developments are being played with and that is what PM does - provide entertainment for technology fans. Nothing wrong with that (I used to read Popular Science regularly when I was a kid - PM at that time really stuck to, well, mechanics). But one really shouldn't look to PM for an analysis of those technologies or read their articles as predictions of winners or losers. They are reporting, not analyzing.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

WhiteKnight77 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

That even a reknowed magazine can get it wrong. Don't forget, that even in this day and age in which information is kept in the ether, it relies on mechanical devices of some type somewhere.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Dan Grelinger 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

My suggestion is that one will get it wrong when one doesn't care about getting it right. That headline was so contrived and absurd to suggest beyond reasonable doubt that there wasn't any care given by Popular Mechanics to get it right. Unless the definition of getting it right is manipulating people into clicking a fake news headline to then make money by feeding them ads. As a discerning reader, I expect more from publications that want to be respected.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

WhiteKnight77 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

PM has been making predictions since its inception, you may have missed reading them. Even in this article, the subheading states such.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/g462/future-that-never-was-next-gen-tech-concepts/

"Popular Mechanics is in the business of predicting. Whether it's tech trends, concept cars or tomorrow's top science, we have been looking forward on the printed page throughout our 100-plus-year history. And it's not always accurate."

What you may remember about it and what I remember about it appear to be 2 different things. Their prediction in 1968 about watches being communication devices as well as time pieces was off by a few years, but surprisingly close as to function with the inception of the Apple Watch.

We can agree to disagree.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Dan Grelinger 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

You are on some other point that I did not make.

Nowhere in the article does it substantiate use of the term 'Death Rays'. And in case we might have misinterpreted the headlines meaning, it is repeated. 'Yes, Death Rays'. The use of the term had one purpose only. To get clicks by misrepresenting the facts into something absurd.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

WhiteKnight77 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

And PM has been using such article headlines since its inception as well.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Dan Grelinger 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

Too bad. That does not speak at all well of the editors.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Dan Grelinger 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

And Popular Mechanics succumbs to modern media's trend towards fake news headlines to get clicks.

"Death Rays?" Who dreamed up that absurdity? An incompetent journalist? Oh, but I repeat myself.

The article actually does a good case of suggesting this weapon as really an "ANTI-DEATH" weapon.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

nathatt 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

They've been doing this for 20+ years.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

AABABY 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

Maybe build some "X-wing" fighters and a couple of "Tie" fighters as well?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

lynx318 3 ヶ月ほど前 2

R2 that stabiliser has come loose again.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

Charlie Roberts 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

If I can fly and X-Wing, where do I sign up?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

lynx318 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

Surprised there isn't development of mini railguns to shoot missiles down with hypersonic darts.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Michael Knodl 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

This is very very impressive engineer aerospace this is music to my ears

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Charlie Graydon 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

very scary stuff California have enough problems with forest fires now you are going to let the airforce fly around with a laser weapon system it great if it hit the target but what happens when they miss ???

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Jeff Hill 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

There's a whole lot of computing required to compute the trajectories of two high speed objects that are maneuvering to avoid being hit. The radar to track the incoming missile needs to be extremely precise, and the servo mechanism to aim the laser has to be both precise and very fast to hit and keep the laser on target long enough to do any damage. On the plus side, you probably don't have to "fry the electronics" on an IR guided missile. You probably just need to heat the sensor up enough to confuse it to defeat the missile.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Rick Krejci 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

And Russia is developing...mirrors

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Philip Lanum 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

Mirrors reflect radar really well.

Not a good choice.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•上位•Report

patrick baker 3 ヶ月ほど前 1

considering the immense power requirements of such a system, i will be interested in how this defensive laser system comes to be put on aircraft....

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

D Rotten 3 ヶ月ほど前 0

Ahhhh......Lockheed Martin; the holder of all thing 'ET' Tech! They have all sorts of 'fun' stuff that the public has no clue about. The public (most) is also unaware the we've had DEW (Direct Energy Weapons) in space and here on the ground. Children are naive, after all.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

ログイン

当ウェブサイトはクッキーを使用します。当ウェブサイトを使用し、サイト内を移動することで、あなたはこれに同意したこととみなされます。

閉じる

FlightAwareのフライト追跡は広告によりサポートされていることをご存知ですか？

広告表示を許可してくださることでFlightAware.comを無料で提供することができます。表示される広告は関連性の高い控えめなものを選んでいます。FlightAwareをホワイトリストに追加する方法はかんたんに設定していただくことができます。または、プレミアムアカウントのご利用をご検討ください.

閉じる