Questions and Ideas

but arent nowadays missiles who looks exacly almost like a plane? or maibe with some retractile wings would allow to make a hybrid like weapon?

There are missiles which fly very fast and have small control surfaces and there are missiles that don't fly fast (like current western anti ship missiles and cruise missiles in general) but they also tend to have small control surfaces.

missiles like cruise missiles often already have deployable wings for subsonic cruise.

Most high speed missiles however travel so fast that hard manouvers are not practical... big control surfaces needed for very hard turns generate a lot of drag and will more rapidly slow the missile down.

As most rocket powered missiles burn fuel in a few seconds and then coast to the target wasting energy with high drag control surfaces is a bad thing.

GarryB wrote:

but arent nowadays missiles who looks exacly almost like a plane? or maibe with some retractile wings would allow to make a hybrid like weapon?

There are missiles which fly very fast and have small control surfaces and there are missiles that don't fly fast (like current western anti ship missiles and cruise missiles in general) but they also tend to have small control surfaces.

missiles like cruise missiles often already have deployable wings for subsonic cruise.

Most high speed missiles however travel so fast that hard manouvers are not practical... big control surfaces needed for very hard turns generate a lot of drag and will more rapidly slow the missile down.

As most rocket powered missiles burn fuel in a few seconds and then coast to the target wasting energy with high drag control surfaces is a bad thing.

but cannot be made a fast swich mechanics from deployed/undeployed wings ? like swich right in the moments the missile get close to the plane ...like 1 km or so....something maibe based on electromagnets

but cannot be made a fast swich mechanics from deployed/undeployed wings ? like swich right in the moments the missile get close to the plane ...like 1 km or so....something maibe based on electromagnets

When the missile gets close to the target it is coasting... deploying wings would increase drag, fill up internal space that would be better used for more fuel to extend range.

Very simply the missile will have one slashing attack on the target... it wont chase it around like in the hollywood movies... and that one attack will have it zoom down from high altitude at mach 4-5 so one second before impact it will be about a kilometre away from the target... a second later it will blow past and either explode or miss... whether the target is pulling 9g or flying straight and level wont be very important... especially with large Russian missiles that often have directed energy warheads that detect where the target is as it blows by and directs its stream of fragments at where the aircraft is like a super shotgun blast... it does not have to make contact to get a kill.

GarryB wrote:

but cannot be made a fast swich mechanics from deployed/undeployed wings ? like swich right in the moments the missile get close to the plane ...like 1 km or so....something maibe based on electromagnets

When the missile gets close to the target it is coasting... deploying wings would increase drag, fill up internal space that would be better used for more fuel to extend range.

Very simply the missile will have one slashing attack on the target... it wont chase it around like in the hollywood movies... and that one attack will have it zoom down from high altitude at mach 4-5 so one second before impact it will be about a kilometre away from the target... a second later it will blow past and either explode or miss... whether the target is pulling 9g or flying straight and level wont be very important... especially with large Russian missiles that often have directed energy warheads that detect where the target is as it blows by and directs its stream of fragments at where the aircraft is like a super shotgun blast... it does not have to make contact to get a kill.

It is boiling down to the cost of the system.

Increasing the complexity of the system increasing the cost as well, and ultimatedly the purpose is to destroy the target by the cheapest means.

So if you have a super rocket for 2 million with 0.7 kill chance , or two budget for 1 million each with 0.5 kill chance then the later has lower cost per destroyed opponents,even if it is inferior compared to the prior one.

Re-deployable big control surfaces require complex mechanism/electronic, increasing the mass, decreasing range, increasing manufacturing/test/design cost.

GarryB wrote:
When the missile gets close to the target it is coasting... deploying wings would increase drag, fill up internal space that would be better used for more fuel to extend range.

Very simply the missile will have one slashing attack on the target... it wont chase it around like in the hollywood movies... and that one attack will have it zoom down from high altitude at mach 4-5 so one second before impact it will be about a kilometre away from the target... a second later it will blow past and either explode or miss... whether the target is pulling 9g or flying straight and level wont be very important... especially with large Russian missiles that often have directed energy warheads that detect where the target is as it blows by and directs its stream of fragments at where the aircraft is like a super shotgun blast... it does not have to make contact to get a kill.

GarryB, I have a question about countries that purchases missiles from Russia. What if they purchase a cruise missile like Klub, an air to air missile like R-37 or maybe the S-400 and then try to increase the range of these missiles? Is it possible? Thanks.

Yes, of course.

The international treaty that limits the export of missiles with warheads bigger than 500kgs and ranges of 300km is intended to reduce the spread of weapons that could deliver WMDs, but only applies to exports... if Russia sells Yakhont technology to India but a weapon with a flight range of 290km and a payload of 400kgs then that is fine.

If India uses its own resources and technology and adapts the missile with an enlarged fuel tank and payload and ends up with a weapon with a range of 700km then that is not violating international agreements.

GarryB wrote:Yes, of course.

The international treaty that limits the export of missiles with warheads bigger than 500kgs and ranges of 300km is intended to reduce the spread of weapons that could deliver WMDs, but only applies to exports... if Russia sells Yakhont technology to India but a weapon with a flight range of 290km and a payload of 400kgs then that is fine.

If India uses its own resources and technology and adapts the missile with an enlarged fuel tank and payload and ends up with a weapon with a range of 700km then that is not violating international agreements.

Yeah but the last time India tried to do something like that they sank their own submarine.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

GarryB wrote:Yes, of course.

The international treaty that limits the export of missiles with warheads bigger than 500kgs and ranges of 300km is intended to reduce the spread of weapons that could deliver WMDs, but only applies to exports... if Russia sells Yakhont technology to India but a weapon with a flight range of 290km and a payload of 400kgs then that is fine.

If India uses its own resources and technology and adapts the missile with an enlarged fuel tank and payload and ends up with a weapon with a range of 700km then that is not violating international agreements.

Yeah but the last time India tried to do something like that they sank their own submarine.

When ?

Didn't Saddam Hussein do the same to the Scuds delivered to Iraq in the 70's-80's, so that they could reach Israel?

max steel wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

GarryB wrote:Yes, of course.

The international treaty that limits the export of missiles with warheads bigger than 500kgs and ranges of 300km is intended to reduce the spread of weapons that could deliver WMDs, but only applies to exports... if Russia sells Yakhont technology to India but a weapon with a flight range of 290km and a payload of 400kgs then that is fine.

If India uses its own resources and technology and adapts the missile with an enlarged fuel tank and payload and ends up with a weapon with a range of 700km then that is not violating international agreements.

Yeah but the last time India tried to do something like that they sank their own submarine.

When ?

There was a famous case where the Indian's tried to augment one of their submarine's munitions, the one's that were gimped due to MTCR treaty, augmentation only led to the munition going off and sinking the submarine, and the Indian's refused to let the Russian's expect because of the embarrassment and possible legal ramifications.

GarryB is more knowledgeable about the incident, you can ask him for more specific details.

Didn't Saddam Hussein do the same to the Scuds delivered to Iraq in the 70's-80's, so that they could reach Israel?

Yes, but without redesigning or strengthening the missiles by adding more fuel to extend range their terminal speed was increased which made them break apart as they reentered over the target.

This made the job of the Patriots much harder because there were sometimes multiple targets including engine and warhead.

The very high speed of the modified scuds and the fact that the PAC-2 Patriots were designed to hit aircraft in their centre of mass meant an incoming scud would have a patriot explode beside it... the speed of the incoming scud meant the middle and rear of the missile were shredded by the patriot warheads but by this stage the scuds were falling onto their targets so losing their engines and rear motor areas meant nothing... the warheads would still fall onto their targets...

S-300 is designed to hit the warhead and has a directional warhead that directs its fragments to shatter the nose of the target to make it detonate or breakup... much more effective at bringing down missile targets (which is understandable as the S-300 was designed to hit ballistic missiles as well as aircraft whereas the Patriot was not.)

i have a question :
as far as i know the radio antenna (some of them) has sensitivity to one direction..... if we have 2 antennas with the most directivity in diferent direction ....the waves that are hitting those two antennas ....are registered as different in the two antennas? because like this you can see wich waves are moving according to a direction of a plane .....

A simple hoop or circle direction finder antenna can be used for that...

yesterday i had this idea about a compression method in computer science.
is like this. lets say we assign to the whole ASCII code a number each 3 digits. every ASCII character and symbol would have it's own number.
then we take something for example a game. we take all the characters and symbols of the game from it's source code and we give each the number from what i've said above. we then create a number raised at a power wich give when calculate a long long row of numbers exacly like all the numbers in the row of the game code. when we will extract the game all to do is calculate the number raised at the power then each 3 digits in the result would be the corresponding character or symbol. thus if i'm not wrong a whole game of 3 GB let's say can be compressed into few bits.
can work?

So you are suggesting assigning a number code to a number code?

Ascii is a numeric code to represent a letter or character already... ie 0 to 255

It is an 8bit representation system... 8bit being 2 to the power of 8, or 2x2x2x2x2x2x2x2=256 which equals the numbers from 0 to 255.

The advent of non european users of computers have made ASCII totally obsolete so Unicode is used instead... the current UTF-32 uses 32 bit encoding... so instead of 256 combinations you can have just under 4.3 billion possible characters... so it can include the letters in pretty much any or all languages...

well sort of....add the fact that the entire compressed file is sent as a single ( or couple) number(s) raised at a power ....
there was a explanation that i received from someone that that is not possible because prime numbers are rarely.
how that comes?
point is also that on your own pc you dont need all the languages. you can have the native language and english or something else for international speak

i have a question.
can be made a type of radar by inserting into air in a section of sky some heat (no matter how much but to be same everywhere ) and whatch with a IR ? i mean a plane even if have IR signature reduce materials still offers a different temperature to the air around. so maybe by plug some heat into air (or light or whatever) you could see the plane like a "different spot compared to the nearby air"....or like a "black hole" or something .....
same with a laser

Radar is generally active so bouncing a pulse of energy at a target and listening for the reflection and measuring the shape of the wave that returns and the time it takes.

For an IR system the target emits its own energy so there is no way of timing the signal to determine range.

An IRST already calculates angles to IR targets... a LRF then measures range or the IRST can be used to aim the radar antenna and a very short ranging pulse can be used to detect range and flight direction and speed.

victor1985 wrote:i have a question.
can be made a type of radar by inserting into air in a section of sky some heat (no matter how much but to be same everywhere ) and whatch with a IR ? i mean a plane even if have IR signature reduce materials still offers a different temperature to the air around. so maybe by plug some heat into air (or light or whatever) you could see the plane like a "different spot compared to the nearby air"....or like a "black hole" or something .....
same with a laser

If the air is heated by waves, more so should warm up the aircraft. Anyway, your idea is not entirely wrong: the quantum radar could use photons (laser) instead electromagnetic waves, but not in order to warm up the air or the target.
And even today, also on the ground, it is better not to stay in front of a powerful radar, when it is turned on. On the fighters radome you can see the symbol of electromagnetic danger, for the ground personnel. I think it is a principle similar to the microwave oven.

Giulio wrote:

victor1985 wrote:i have a question.
can be made a type of radar by inserting into air in a section of sky some heat (no matter how much but to be same everywhere ) and whatch with a IR ? i mean a plane even if have IR signature reduce materials still offers a different temperature to the air around. so maybe by plug some heat into air (or light or whatever) you could see the plane like a "different spot compared to the nearby air"....or like a "black hole" or something .....
same with a laser

If the air is heated by waves, more so should warm up the aircraft. Anyway, your idea is not entirely wrong: the quantum radar could use photons (laser) instead electromagnetic waves, but not in order to warm up the air or the target.
And even today, also on the ground, it is better not to stay in front of a powerful radar, when it is turned on. On the fighters radome you can see the symbol of electromagnetic danger, for the ground personnel. I think it is a principle similar to the microwave oven.

nope photonics is one field and a good one, but quantum radar is different but it uses photonics in one part of its operation...

both are very promising since radar has been losing battle since 90s , it seems it could make a deffinitive and a heavy comeback.

GarryB wrote:We really don't know how gravity actually works right now... is it a beam or is it a field...
.

its both at the same time.... observation makes the switch to particular aspect of it.

Giulio wrote:

victor1985 wrote:i have a question.
can be made a type of radar by inserting into air in a section of sky some heat (no matter how much but to be same everywhere ) and whatch with a IR ? i mean a plane even if have IR signature reduce materials still offers a different temperature to the air around. so maybe by plug some heat into air (or light or whatever) you could see the plane like a "different spot compared to the nearby air"....or like a "black hole" or something .....
same with a laser

If the air is heated by waves, more so should warm up the aircraft. Anyway, your idea is not entirely wrong: the quantum radar could use photons (laser) instead electromagnetic waves, but not in order to warm up the air or the target.
And even today, also on the ground, it is better not to stay in front of a powerful radar, when it is turned on. On the fighters radome you can see the symbol of electromagnetic danger, for the ground personnel. I think it is a principle similar to the microwave oven.

well there is a problem with the quantum radar ...and i am curious how the problem would be solved.
quantum radar works by the principle of splitting a photon from a electron and the pull that photon on the air. quantum entanglements says that both photon and the electron wich maked the photon are "paired". that means whatever the move is in the photon same will be in the electron. so you register the move of the electrons to see what happened with the photon in air. problem being that both are moving the same and yoy have no room space to track the electron. slowing down the electron would probably destroy the photon in space.

victor1985 wrote:

Giulio wrote:

victor1985 wrote:i have a question.
can be made a type of radar by inserting into air in a section of sky some heat (no matter how much but to be same everywhere ) and whatch with a IR ? i mean a plane even if have IR signature reduce materials still offers a different temperature to the air around. so maybe by plug some heat into air (or light or whatever) you could see the plane like a "different spot compared to the nearby air"....or like a "black hole" or something .....
same with a laser

If the air is heated by waves, more so should warm up the aircraft. Anyway, your idea is not entirely wrong: the quantum radar could use photons (laser) instead electromagnetic waves, but not in order to warm up the air or the target.
And even today, also on the ground, it is better not to stay in front of a powerful radar, when it is turned on. On the fighters radome you can see the symbol of electromagnetic danger, for the ground personnel. I think it is a principle similar to the microwave oven.

well there is a problem with the quantum radar ...and i am curious how the problem would be solved.
quantum radar works by the principle of splitting a photon from a electron and the pull that photon on the air. quantum entanglements says that both photon and the electron wich maked the photon are "paired". that means whatever the move is in the photon same will be in the electron. so you register the move of the electrons to see what happened with the photon in air. problem being that both are moving the same and yoy have no room space to track the electron. slowing down the electron would probably destroy the photon in space.

i tried to find some good easy explanation...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuvK-od647c
electron is subluminal its always slower then photon, it has mass.... energy you impart on it will make it move but much slower. thats why you dont use photon-photon pairs but photon-electron pairs. you dont want to touch electron measure it or have any interaction with it. in micro- quantum -world ""measuring"" means touching or engaging that object and thus interacting and influencing it , so only when em wave has traveled some distance , if it has changed its characteristics so will electron.

as far as i reach from that video is that is about spin....but how that connect two particles?
let's say there is a third one that measure same time with you...what will the answer be? let's imagine that is a machine that measure 100% of time a pair .....will that crack the sistem?
the quantum entanglement does connect two specific particles or all particles that are viewed same time in the whole world?
that means that in the same time no alien do this experiment?

because of the LAW of conservation of angular momentum of universe which is 0 in total sum. (you can use some other conservation laws too)

By definition these states are systems where the second electron is in the opposite configuration to the first. You can use photon-electron but you have to polarise  photons which is not a problem - vertical or horizontal polarization is used in radar systems antennas. then you measure electron in in that plane , the same plane you released ElectroMagnetic  wave/photon.  electron is soo small that it has besides particle a wave-like properties too ..... its duality principle means it can be considered almost equal to massless photon....

remember if one of wave-particles is measured to be up along a given direction, then the other will definitely be down without the need for measurement. that particle will exibit particular north-south (or south-north) magnetic field as it moves and you can detect it. A pair of electrons or other combined particles in this state are said to be entangled.

if its pair hasnt been influenced you wont detect magnetic field because its spin is a smudge, its bluured not resolved in wave mathematical equasions, its everywhere....

All we need to do to produce an entangled state is to bring two electrons in close enough proximity so that their magnetic fields interact and then leave them alone. Eventually, the electrons will be entangled, after maybe having emitted a photon. This is due to the fact that the electrons in opposite configuration is the lowest energy state of a two electron system. We can also think about as the first electron being the magnet that prepares the second (or vice versa).

ofcourse you can have more particles entangled. ( many think inflation didnt happen and earliest radiation of space is smooth because everything was entangled.)

http://www.popsci.com/article/science/spooky-action-threes-physicists-entangle-three-particles-light