![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:07:59 -0400, Paul Austin wrote:
"phil hunt" wrote in message ... On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:06:30 -0400, Paul Austin So what data rate will FCS run at? Consider a unit such as a Brigade - will the data links be radio, or something else (laser beams? fiber optic? ethernet?) or a mixture? The first Brigade XXI exercises were run using 64Kbps links over HF radios. Not suprisingly, trials proved that slow a data fabric completely inadequate. Presumably because all the nodes were trying to talk at the same time. What if there were fewer nodes on the network, say 200 instead of 1000? There are advantages to HF links but VHF, UHF and higher frequencies will be used. The Navy is planning EHF links. Higher frequencies mean more banfdwidth, I assume. What are the advantages of lower frequencies - range? Iv wonder if there are any plans to civilianise this technology; it might complement WiFi quite well. Comms equipment is giving out radio signals; if these can be pinpointed and targeted, the unit is ****ed. Imagine a swarm of cheap cruise missiles[1] homing in on radio signals from the nodes on the tactical internet. Not nearly as easy as it seems, since everything is spread spectrum, fast hopping and anti-jam. The signal must be such that the extended receiver can hear it. So others can too, in principle. (Though detecting the signal and knowing where it's from aren't the same thing). I'm not a radio engineer but I can imagine a few ways how direction-finding might work; for example place two (or 3) detectors a few meters apart and calculate the time delay between each one receiving the signal. If your comms are degraded badly enough, you'll lose whether you have light forces or tanks; even the best MBTs don't have perfect protection against ATGMs, etc. MBTs are nearly immune to ATGMs now. About the best that can be hoped for by man-portable systems is a mobility kill. Oh? I was under the impression the Russian Kornet was pretty good. Heavier ATGMs have some hope of doing more than blowing a track but not along the frontal arc. ATGMs don't have to hit the front; they could be designed to hit the top, for example. And making the warhead bigger is not a problem to do, if the missile vis carried by a vehicle. Does this work? It sounds nice, but I'm not sure if it's practical. What if the capacitors short out? That would release large amounts of enery, if it's enough to melt a solid piece of metal. Success is a matter of sufficient development ![]() melting a 10-20mm thick rod of refractory metal in microseconds literally incredible. I'm a bit dubious too. -- "It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
---California International Air Show Pics Posted!!!! | Tyson Rininger | Aerobatics | 0 | February 23rd 04 11:51 AM |
TRUCKEE,CA DONNER LAKE 12-03 PICS. @ webshots | TRUCKEE_DONNER_LAKE | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | December 19th 03 04:48 PM |
Aviation Pics | Tyson Rininger | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 7th 03 01:04 AM |
b-17C interior pics site | old hoodoo | Military Aviation | 0 | September 15th 03 03:42 AM |
Nam era F-4 pilot pics? | davidG35 | Military Aviation | 2 | August 4th 03 03:44 PM |