Author Topic: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh  (Read 3559 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« on: September 14, 2015, 08:25:20 pm »
OK, I think I need to bring this back. For those that are new here (is anybody new here?) I had a thread back in 2008 (seven years? we need to have a reunion folks... Spore, Daxx, and other failures... anyhow, where was I? Oh yeah.) where I talked about weapons and technology....

Link to the old thread, most of the pictures are shot bit I can rebuild them if there is interest....
http://www.gamingsteve.com/blab/index.php?topic=11675.0

I was talking about the F-35 in another thread (http://www.gamingsteve.com/blab/index.php?topic=6078.26295) but I figure I should keep going on its own topic.

So lets do this again!

-Lego

« Last Edit: September 14, 2015, 08:35:39 pm by Legodragonxp »



Offline Rysworld

  • Autoduel Mechanic
  • *****
  • Posts: 4219
  • hhhhhhhh
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2015, 08:48:29 pm »
I guess I can start off by saying my favorite handgun ever is the Webley-Fosbery Automatic Revolver.

A bit of an obvious choice, but it is just so cool. It's not even that good, it's just such a stylish gun.

What're you guys' favorite guns?

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2015, 08:55:38 pm »
I guess I can start off by saying my favorite handgun ever is the Webley-Fosbery Automatic Revolver.

A bit of an obvious choice, but it is just so cool. It's not even that good, it's just such a stylish gun.

Yeah I brought that up in post number 7 of the old thread. I'd love one in a modern caliber, just as I would love a Mauser Broomhandle in a modern caliber (.45ACP was a Chinese police staple). Here is the painful truth on both of those guns; they will probably never be made again due to cost. Both would cost about $2000-$3000 to be made now because there is so much tooling involved. Maybe 3D printing will allow it, but for now it is just too much work/cost to make them viable for production.

In the case of the Broomhandle, Star Wars dried up the supply. While Han Solo shot first, his actions and gun caused the prop-replica world to by up all the surplus Broomhandles. You can order replicas or airsoft, but the real McCoy is gone or a collectors item.


-Lego



Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2015, 09:04:21 pm »
OK, I am going to add to the guns, Guns, GUNS thread from before (old thread, page 9) where I mentioned that a US Navy F11 Tiger shot itself down with its own cannons.

It turns out that the US Navy was able to repeat the process, but this time with a guided missile...

OK, pause here to be fair. Technically they were not US Navy pilots (Grumman test pilots) and technically is was a pre-production test flight, but it was a US Navy fighter project and that is close enough. CNN and FOX wouldn't bother to mention that, but I have working brain cells and my parents were married so I am mentioning it here.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.ejectionsite.com/F-14%20SHOOTDOWN.pdf

The TL:DR read is that they were testing a Sparrow missile partial launch failure from an F-14 prototype at a specific speed and the missile struck the plane, effectively destroying it.

Why do test programs take so long? Crap like this.

-Lego
« Last Edit: September 14, 2015, 09:05:52 pm by Legodragonxp »

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2015, 09:32:06 pm »
You ever fired a XP-100? They look pretty neat and I want one.

Part of the reason I got into reloading was so I could make the .221 fireball to feed the XP-100 I might own someday. :3

Offline Brandonazz

  • Baseball SuperStar
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
  • Hoc etiam transibit
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #5 on: September 14, 2015, 10:52:51 pm »
Can I axe you some questions, Lego?

I want a functional, but realistic (including materials), replica of a 17th or 18th-century rifle.

As in, I'd like it to be (approximately) like the real deal, but functional because I want to play with it.

How hard would such a weapon be to obtain? Are they a dime a dozen because they're less complex, or outrageously costly collectors items?

Non-fiscally, what hoops would I have to jump through to fire off a flintlock musket in my back yard?

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24485
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2015, 02:07:43 am »
I've hung out with re-enactors before and I don't know the specific rules in your country but generally there are some sort of exemptions for things like that if you're part of a historical or re-enactment society.

Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2015, 05:45:10 am »
You ever fired a XP-100? They look pretty neat and I want one.

Part of the reason I got into reloading was so I could make the .221 fireball to feed the XP-100 I might own someday. :3

No I never have fire one of those. When they were popular I wasn't interested in them. It would be more reasonable to look in to getting a Thompson Contender pistol with a custom barrel or to get a .22 barrel blank and ream your own. Do not try to build your own XP100 from a rifle. Turning a rifle in to a handgun is illegal in the US without the proper licenses and fees (gun laws are screwy).

Can I axe you some questions, Lego?

I want a functional, but realistic (including materials), replica of a 17th or 18th-century rifle.

As in, I'd like it to be (approximately) like the real deal, but functional because I want to play with it.

How hard would such a weapon be to obtain? Are they a dime a dozen because they're less complex, or outrageously costly collectors items?

Non-fiscally, what hoops would I have to jump through to fire off a flintlock musket in my back yard?

I'd have to research it some. It would be a lot faster if you told me where in the world you live to start.

-Lego

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2015, 06:57:54 am »
What if I told you he lived in the craziest state in the Union. :U

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24485
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2015, 08:12:32 am »
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Brandonazz

  • Baseball SuperStar
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
  • Hoc etiam transibit
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2015, 12:14:53 pm »
I'd have to research it some. It would be a lot faster if you told me where in the world you live to start.

-Lego

Not only is it on my profile, but I complain about it constantly. Pat knows.

Florida. Tampa, specifically.

I've hung out with re-enactors before and I don't know the specific rules in your country but generally there are some sort of exemptions for things like that if you're part of a historical or re-enactment society.

I did some archery with the Society for Creative Anachronism. It's pretty fun stuff, but they're a pre-17th-century anachronistic group.

I'd rather not get an arquebus or hand cannon though. I'd take a late 16th-century musket, but I doubt the SCA would let me use it as a period-accurate thing in any of their events.

And I don't want to do American Civil War stuff because I would die of heat exhaustion in uniform by the time the performance or larp ended.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2015, 12:30:42 pm by Brandonazz »

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2015, 01:02:51 pm »
I'd have to research it some. It would be a lot faster if you told me where in the world you live to start.

-Lego

Not only is it on my profile, but I complain about it constantly. Pat knows.
Can I axe you some questions, Lego?

I want a functional, but realistic (including materials), replica of a 17th or 18th-century rifle.

As in, I'd like it to be (approximately) like the real deal, but functional because I want to play with it.

How hard would such a weapon be to obtain? Are they a dime a dozen because they're less complex, or outrageously costly collectors items?

Non-fiscally, what hoops would I have to jump through to fire off a flintlock musket in my back yard?

OK. Florida it is: (sorry I didn't check your profile) The problem here is replica gun/prop, real functioning gun black powder, or airsoft. I will assume for now you are talking about a working black powder firearm, for use in Florida.

Black powder can no longer be mailed through the USPS as of 2011. You can still ship it through Fed Ex and UPS I believe, but you would be better asking them in person. If not you'll need to buy it locally.

Since you want a replica gun from the 17th or 18th century, in the state of Florida it would be considered an antique firearm (even if it was built today, so long as it was build like the gun from 1918 or earlier).

Florida Statutes 790.001(1) defines an Antique Firearm as any firearm manufactured in or before 1918 (including any matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar early type of ignition system) or replica thereof, whether actually manufactured before or after the year 1918, and also any firearm using fixed ammunition manufactured in or before 1918, for which ammunition is no longer manufactured in the United States and is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade.

What makes this interesting is a different part of the law:

Florida Statutes 790.001(6) defines a Firearm as as any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; any destructive device; or any machine gun. The term “firearm” does not include an antique firearm unless the antique firearm is used in the commission of a crime.

So even if you are a felon in the state of Florida, you could buy a working black powder gun so long as it is of a design dating from 1918 or earlier. Neat huh?

You are old enough to buy black powder and weapons that use them.

Availability: You can buy a new muzzle-loader kit from Cabella's from $300+ and the built guns start for just a few dollars more. Now these guns are made of modern metals, but based on the original designs, from before 1919,so they are technically antique firearms in Florida.

Obviously these are still guns even if they are not 'legally' firearms. Don't be stupid.

OK, shooting in your back yard.. (reads a bit.. Florida is stupid). In the state of Florida you can't shoot over public grounds (roads and such) nor can you fire over dwellings or residential zoned land. You cannot discharge a firearm in a dangerous manner. This is state law. Cities can have their own laws and ordinances as well, but it appears that in Florida an official enacting a firearms law against the state law could get fined $5000 and lose his job. So can you shoot in your backyard? It would appear to be yes, so long as you do it in a safe manner and don't shoot over anybody else's property.

BUT

You can get hit with a disturbing the peace tag for it. Now an antique firearm is not a firearm in Florida, so you should not be able to get hit with 'discharging a firearm in public' but since you are creating a lot of noise you are 'disturbing the peace' which could be considered a crime and therefore your antique firearm is now a firearm by law.

My advice... move.

-Lego
« Last Edit: September 15, 2015, 01:09:12 pm by Legodragonxp »

Offline Slinky

  • Mr. Do! Disciple
  • *****
  • Posts: 2157
  • hey there
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2015, 01:16:08 pm »
I don't know if I'm comfortable with the whole "Brendan Fraser wielding a musket' scenario.

Offline Brandonazz

  • Baseball SuperStar
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
  • Hoc etiam transibit
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2015, 01:51:22 pm »
Wow, thanks for all the information!

OK, shooting in your back yard.. (reads a bit.. Florida is stupid). In the state of Florida you can't shoot over public grounds (roads and such) nor can you fire over dwellings or residential zoned land. You cannot discharge a firearm in a dangerous manner. This is state law. Cities can have their own laws and ordinances as well, but it appears that in Florida an official enacting a firearms law against the state law could get fined $5000 and lose his job. So can you shoot in your backyard? It would appear to be yes, so long as you do it in a safe manner and don't shoot over anybody else's property.

BUT

You can get hit with a disturbing the peace tag for it. Now an antique firearm is not a firearm in Florida, so you should not be able to get hit with 'discharging a firearm in public' but since you are creating a lot of noise you are 'disturbing the peace' which could be considered a crime and therefore your antique firearm is now a firearm by law.

My advice... move.

-Lego

Don't worry, I'm getting out of Swamp Asylum as soon as I can.

Offline Ultimatum

  • Wild Gunman Gangster
  • *****
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2015, 03:06:43 pm »
hey Lego,what you think of the X-Jet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams_X-Jet


Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24485
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2015, 03:21:34 pm »
Wait that goofy thing from MGS3 was real?
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #16 on: September 16, 2015, 04:05:02 pm »


"Oh that's where I left it."

Offline Mr. Wizard

  • Karate Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 3047
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #17 on: September 16, 2015, 04:54:07 pm »
Lego! I was wondering when I'd see you again! I wanted to show you this whole Youtube channel that is right up your alley!

Forgotten weapons, a bunch of ancient firearms and the mechanisms that made them work.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCwP3Dm52Ls" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCwP3Dm52Ls</a>

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #18 on: September 21, 2015, 03:55:06 pm »
The X-Jet and other flying platforms were neat ideas, but there were several issues with them including:

Noise - They can literally hear you coming from a mile away. Small jets are insanely loud, loud enough to cause hearing damage for the operator and make radio communications almost impossible.

Stability - While a modern attempt would probably be incredibly stable (ala Segway) the early attempts required incredible amounts of attention to maintain safe flight. I remember seeing footage of one of these concepts with a rifle being fired off the top and watching is rock around.

Operational issues - They could only carry one guy. What do you do with wounded? What do you do with the wounded man's flier? Instead of maintaining 2 engines for a 12 man squad on a helicopter you now have 12 engines to maintain. What happens if a flier is broken but the man is OK? Does he walk? Helicopters are more practical.

FOD- Foreign Object Damage - Hitting a branch or a bird while in a helicopter is a minor issue, in these things, fatal. Sand ingestion on such a small motor could also be a major problem. The jet wash from the engine can also loops back in to the air intakes. In certain conditions the hot air from the jet could get ingested, which is less dense and therefore reduces power.

Price - High performance engines are $1 million plus these days.

Range - Basically none. Anything with enough range is a flying gas can.

Safety - A helicopter engines fails you can auto-rotate. If these have an engine problem you become a lawn dart.

So they are cool ideas, but they need a major reliability and fuel consuption boost before being worth investing in as anything other than one-shot vehicles. I can actually see a case for these for a Navy SEAL operation, but not day-to-day.

-Lego

p.s. I LOVE forgotten weapons channel.




Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #19 on: September 21, 2015, 05:53:39 pm »
How long can a helicopter survive while auto-rotating?

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #20 on: September 22, 2015, 04:01:47 pm »
Until it hits the ground.

Autorotation is an emergency actions where altitude to traded to keep the rotors spinning. The pilot kills most of the lift in the blades so they continue to rotate (minimize drag) until they are near the ground. Once near the ground the pilot pulls up on the collective, thereby increasing rotor blade pitch, and uses the stored kinetic energy in the rotors to impart lift and slow the helicopter's decent to reduce the impact with the ground. Helicopters with skids are designed to 'straighten the skids' on a hard landing to make the landing survivable. Other helicopters have specially designed seats and landing gear to fold up or collapse to protect the crews and passengers.

Funny thing is that, done right, the landing won't damage the aircraft. You HAVE TO demonstrate this to get your pilot's license for helicopters in most countries. You keep the engine on and disengage the transmission for the demonstration.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EklDfZw-NrU" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EklDfZw-NrU</a>

-Lego

p.s. I am working on another post for here, but I have it on another computer. Soon(tm)

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2015, 10:04:32 am »
Ok, we all know about the A-10 by now, the star of CAS (Close Air Support). Basically an armored glider with two jet engines built about a cannon the length of a Cessna. This beast was developed to have reversible parts (left aileron could be used on the right), land without landing gear deployed (that is why the wheels in the wings stick out a little),and the engines protected by the tails to get the pilot's assets back to base.

The Plane:


The Ammo:


But that is not what this post is about.

CAS support aircraft are the general term for an aircraft designed to fight close to the front line in direct support of friendly troops:
A-10 in the Gulf Wars and Afghanistan
Skyraider in Vietnam
Surplus WWII aircraft in Korea
Stuka dive bomber in WWII (top pilot Rudel was actually interviewed when they designed the A-10 to make sure they got as much input as possible).

Today we are dealing with smaller wars, brush wars, bandits (ala ISIS which I prefer to call Daesh as ISIS legitimizes their status... they're thugs), FARC, etc...

Larger modern warplanes are not only overpowered for such operations, but insanely expensive. There is actually a type of aircraft for this that is commonly referred

to as COIN (COunter INsurgency). While more modern military groups used helicopters (still an over powered/expensive solution in many cases) or drones (expensive and

tech heavy)

Now there are a lot of light planes adapted to this role, from something as simple as a Cessna with a rocket pod to purpose built aircraft like the Pucara (Argentina).



But for today we are going to set the way-back machine to the Vietnam war and the Dragonfly.

The T-37  Dragonfly was designed by Cessna for the USAF as a pilot training aircraft back in the the days when props were going away. A simple aircraft it was easy to fly and very forgiving. Its tiny engines made a very high-pitch noise and the plane earned the name Tweety Bird.



With the losses of A-1 Skyraiders and no replacements available (they actually debated starting up production again, no small task) the USAF opted to build modified T-37 Dragonfly as A-37s. There was a minor variant (A-37A) and the production variant (A-37B).



The A-37A was a totally bizarre program in that weapons testing and combat capability was developed in Vietnam under live-fire conditions(unlike the seemingly endless testing we see today with aircraft like the F-35). While it never flew in to North Vietnam it did make a name for itself supporting the South with the lower (hah) intensity conflicts (spelled no SAMs).

The plane could actually carry more weight in bombs that plane weighed, could mid-air refueled, and had a mini-gun in the nose. It was also the only plane in the USAF that was allowed to turn off an engine while in flight to save fuel. It was cheap (1/4 the cost of a fighter) and took far fewer hours to maintain (2-6 times less than an F-4).



Operational bases for the A-37 were simple airfields in the middle of nowhere of if they operated from normal airfields their take-off run was so short that they were about enemy fire before clearing the end of the runway.

The planes were loved by the troops on the ground as much as the A-10 would be loved in modern times. Their small size and unusual speed and flight profile made them hard for enemy gunners to hit. They could take a lot of damage, their wide landing gear made them very forgiving on takeoffs and landings.



A typical pilot in an A-37 might fly 1000 sorties while on rotation in Vietnam, whereas a typical fighter pilot in an F-4, F-100, or F-105 would fly 400 sorties. Many of the pilots in the A-37 were not from the ranks of fighter pilots and the USAF fighter groups all but shunned the Tweety Bird pilots. Most of the pilots were Navigators or cargo plane pilots looking for something more interesting. The USAF gave almost no real credit to these guys and very few ever went on to attain any notability in USAF leadership. Minigun in a training aircraft just didn't spark interest, never mind the fact that these guys did twice as many missions and probably saw five times as much ground fire.



After Vietnam the US kept the A-37 operational in a few reserve squadrons, but all were gone from US service in the early 90s (none saw service in Iraq).

The US Army handles this mission now mostly by using helicopters. The USAF has the A-10 and armed drones. Future conflicts will probably use drones more and more for close in work while 'fast jets' will attack from altitude.

Will we ever see another Tweety Bird? Probably. There are several companies working on armed light aircraft for low-intensity combat areas. Of interesting note is the Air Tractor, now offered as a COIN aircraft and a 9000 pound bomb load.



-Lego
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 10:39:11 pm by Legodragonxp »

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #22 on: September 25, 2015, 08:52:17 pm »
That was a really great read! Thanks for posting, as always.

I would have loved to have sat in on the meeting to hear what advice Rudel gave them about the A-10. Also, having aircraft for lighter intensity types of conflicts seems smart. Is the US Military overly obsessed with tech in some ways? These lighter, cheaper aircraft seem like a really simple way to be effective without overrunning budgets.

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2015, 10:38:11 pm »
I'll see if I can find what Rudel said. It was in a book called Warthog and talks about the A-10 in Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

Actually the US military is looking at cheaper solutions, but they are leaning more on drones than piloted aircraft. Makes sense in most cases, but it boils down to the air guys not wanting to work with the ground guys (only the Marines have it right, but they get their own aircraft). Most military commands are now 'Joint Based' which means all branches work together on a small scale to reach a common goal. The big problem is that each branch has to fight for funding, so the military becomes a business in operating rather than a business of combat. The Joint concept doesn't scale up unless you are getting directly shot at.

It would never happen, but I would like to see all the branches unified as the "US Military" and be modeled mostly on the USMC.

Back to COIN aircraft, cheaper aircraft are bad for business and often are just warmed up last year's technology. It seems trivial today since the US hasn't suffered major combat casualties since Vietnam, but our technical edge keeps us ahead in the field, but the cost of maintaining that edge is becoming unsustainable.

The F-35 is not just a plane, it is a weapon system. It has to do almost every role, operate from almost every climate and airfield, and hold the technical edge in sensors and communications to be ahead of all it faces. The sensors and communications are the biggest part of the total cost. As gamers we take for granted the rate at which data is shared between units, but the F-35 and other modern systems are trying to make it a reality.

-Lego

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #24 on: September 26, 2015, 08:44:14 am »
So when the F-35 rolls out, what happens if a rival aircraft becomes superior in one aspect or another?

Does that blow the whole F-35 concept out of the water? Is anyone else remotely close to building something like the F-35? Just how great is the gap in "their" technology compared to the US? And is it something that the US could continue to sustain with some minor/major adjustments to how money is spent?

(lol simple questions right?)

Offline Legodragonxp

  • Excitebike Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 3556
  • Now for some real user power...
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #25 on: September 26, 2015, 09:30:40 pm »
Not a simple question. Short answer is that the program gets cancelled. Long answer is that is all depends. EXAMPLE:  The B-1 bomber program was cancelled by the Carter Administration. When Reagan became president he woke it back up. Today the B-1 is on the chopping block (but the B-52 isn't.. all hail the slide rule). Why was the B-1 cancelled? Partly because the original flight profile was high altitude supersonic. But it was more because the new 'stealth technology' was going to make is obsolete.

Understand this one point: The USAF does not ever give up a combat or intel option unless something can replace it.

The B-1 became the B-1B as a low-altitude attack plane. Today it fills the role of the F-111 (which retired because they were worn out). Why did it come back? Partially camouflage for the USAF's F-117s and the plan for the B-2 (Aurora Project) but really more as politics. You see this with the F-35 as well. It is a US national construction project spanning the nation. Killing it would mean thousands of jobs. Reagan was from California (main production place for the B-1)... seems only logical to keep people employed, right?

-Lego

p.s. sorry for lack of random pictures, so I'll add one of th B-1B (there were only a couple B-1As).. nose gear failure, landed safely.


Offline Slinky

  • Mr. Do! Disciple
  • *****
  • Posts: 2157
  • hey there
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #26 on: November 30, 2015, 07:13:09 pm »


gun

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8061
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #27 on: November 30, 2015, 09:07:42 pm »
Is good gun.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Pixxel

  • Robotron Automaton
  • *****
  • Posts: 1873
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #28 on: December 01, 2015, 02:43:59 am »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5CBuyx1whw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5CBuyx1whw</a>

So, which is the best?
If you stop and think about it, Your life's longer as an old guy than a kid. Scary o.o

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8061
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #29 on: March 06, 2016, 09:58:52 pm »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3b_YQgfa7OA" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3b_YQgfa7OA</a>

I wonder how far into development this thing actually is.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28788
  • M I RITE? STICKERS?
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2016, 06:13:37 pm »
Hey Lego, do you know anything about this system?

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IjAPVTtYDE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IjAPVTtYDE</a>

Or do you have any related insights?

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24485
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Lego's weapons and technology thread part Duh
« Reply #31 on: March 14, 2016, 04:07:30 am »
I know that mistletoe is no match for a TOW Missile.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.