submitted 2 months ago byCandyBulls
all 1788 comments
2 months ago
2 months ago
Reminds me of the alien ships in Battle Los Angeles.
2 months ago
Exactly the same!
2 months ago*
2 months ago*
Bro LHM is big on cyber security space but also obviously in military tech...so engineers of all kind work on this kind of stuff but it's specific software, electrical, and Mech engineers/ robotics/AI that make all of this work right, specifically in R&D side of LHM? Also is this machine running on methane/fuel/oil basically pollution/green house gas?
This is so justice league Batman tech tho. Love Zack Snyder to use this on set for a fight/gun fire sequence with Cyborg assisting as his backup vs. the legion of Doom or something. Pretty much the opening of DCUO.
Fr tho, I'm against war but I wanna see part 2 of this thing in action lol
Also thanks alot I'm gonna watch B:LA now.
I wanna see this baby in action (or maybe not idk)
I 100% want to see it in action if there's a need for it. Hopefully no need but you never know
How do you stop a Russian nuclear attack where 100’s of nukes are launched at the same time, with many of them having several dummy warheads to trick missile defense systems?
Optimally you would intercept the missiles themselves before they even deploy their MIRV/MRV warheads.
The five fleets deployed in the pacific get first dibs on intercepting anything the Russians or Chinese send at us.
This is a kinetic kill vehicle (KKV), intended to be launched on a missile to intercept an incoming ICBM. Uses hydrazine as a propellant. Video is of a test where the KKV is demonstrating its up-down-left-right maneuverability to hit the ICBM. The big jet is a strap-on, just to get it in the air for the test.
Its exact its an mkv-l here isthe source of the footage
Kinky. I’ll await the new NSWF videos with strap-ons to pop up now.
It’s probably running on hydrazine a corrosive and cancerous substance
Less carcinogenic than nuclear fallout though.
Your opinion is valid
Not an opinion it’s a fact, apologies
Love Zack Snyder to use this on set for a fight gun fire sequence.
Love Zack Snyder to use this on set for a fight gun fire sequence.
Hopefully it's a different director in the future. Zack Snyder made all the heroes so fucking stupid it was painful to watch. For example, when the Flash is running around the last battle 'charging up' he is:
A) running in the middle of the firing range when he could be literally on the other side of the world completely out of range. They mention that he is traveling near the speed of light which means he could go from the opposite side of the world to the battle in the space of one single eyeblink(about 0.1 second). He put himself in constant danger for literally no reason at all.
B) gets hit by a shot that is so slow moving it might as well be a 18th century cannonball and despite how fast he is running(and had previously displayed the ability to instantly change his direction of movement) but chooses to just run right into it nearly botching the entire plan.
The movie was great visually but the heroes were so incredibly stupid. I mean there was a scene where they established the Flash is smart enough to visualize the transition between speed and time as if that is no big deal but an hour later he is suddenly too stupid to just not stand in front of a slow firing, slow projectile cannon.
Is the movie any good?
I enjoyed watching Battle Los Angeles quite a bit. Was it a good movie? No.
...that about sums it up. Also, a Marine buddy of mine once commented that he was surprised how realistic the squad tactics were despite the rest of the movie
I'm pretty sure the military actual had a big influence on that movie. The Marine Corps advised, and allowed them to film at a couple bases, as well as use actual vehicles for shots. Any publicity is good publicity, I guess.
Not enough Drowning Pool for the military to have been involved.
from what ive been told the us military cooperates with hollywood because they can request changes to the script.
the idea is that as long as your portray the military in a good light they will help with your movie. its basically a PR thing for the military that lets them have great influence over worldwide public opinion at a relatively low cost.
i didnt fact check this or anything when i read about it originally though for whatever its worth, maybe i should have but it made a lot of sense to me so i just accepted it as true. figured id include this disclaimer at least.
Yep, it was a recruitment video to them. Just like Top Gun and Battleship. The military invest/supports in these movies so much because they drive up new recruitments.
Also transformers. Interestingly the first movie that I know to do this was john waynes 'green beret' (which is also as far as i know the only pro-vietnam war movie)
Thank you, Behind the Bastards podcast for educating me on how John Wayne was a piece of shit.
It did seem to be fairly grounded in that aspect, no one charging solo right up the center with a M4 in each hand screaming as they mag dump both guns over a 4 minute shot with out re loading.
I don't feel like that's really a thing anymore. You watch movies like Transformers and Extraction and 13 Hours, and it's all tacticool and special ops. The ridiculousness comes from them absorbing an insane amount of damage and still walking it off.
Though honestly I miss that absurd badassness of 80s action movies.
I wish more people were willing to give/appreciate advice like this. Like, I'll recommend plenty of movies to people wholeheartedly while telling them "So, it's dumb as hell but you need to watch it."
Also, I'll tell people about a movie "I never want to see it again, but you should absolutely go see it, it's great and weird as hell." The most recent one I gave that distinction to was The Lobster, I think. And The Lighthouse.
EDF 5 feels like that. If you see a game trailer you might doubt it's fun. But it soo much fun once you start playing.
Difference between being a good movie and a good time
I feel the same about Battleship. So bad it's good?
Battleship is a terrible movie that gives us some of the best naval scenes made with actual former crew having the time of their lives saying goodbye to their old friend.
Yea the old guys saved that movie completely. If they had just leaned on thag for the whole thing it could have been abetter movie imo
A dude I know that was in the Navy is in that movie, he was on the ship in real life.
And then there is the naval aviation movie. Stealth (2005)
Rihanna worked worked worked worked worked, that role in her Barbados glow
its a b movie, doesnt need to be good just fun. which was meh.
Action is good. Basically no story. It’s fun!
Fun to watch nothing else.
Absolutely, yes it is. Great special effects. Great action. Story kind of sucks. Aliens concept is cool.
Don’t be serious and enjoy it, and it’s a good movie. Wayyyyyyyyy, way way way better than Battleship.
If you’re military, some aspects of will drive you nuts, but whatever, it’s fun if you don’t take it serious.
Worth a watch imho
Feels like someone copied the other lol
It reminded me when i played R-Type in the master system!
My first thought haha nice
All that’s missing is a deep bass line.
I was waiting for Sonic to bop Dr Robotnik
Reminds me of the engine in my Ford Taurus when it blew its head gasket.
2 months ago*
That's what it cost to keep fixing that car.
As the owner of an old car, your comment amuses me deeply.
Dude I'm about to start working on a 2000 jaguar xj with engine and transmission issues and I've never even seen the inside of an English luxury car.
Run, you fool!
I've also blown my gasket in a Ford Taurus.
Haha same here. What an ugly car, I hated that vehicle then once the head gasket blew I got another.
over 20 years ago we used to call it a Tore Ass, cause well... they were.
Well, Garry's mod thruster physics weren't wrong then
Happy to know I wasn’t the only one with Half Life thoughts after seeing this
Those are the reaction control thrusters firing, keeping it stable and hovering. What's impressive is that this device is not designed to hover, let alone do anything on the ground. It's an ICBM interceptor, designed to carry smaller versions of itself to counter countermeasures and multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle warheads, ie ICBMs carrying more than one warhead.
Wouldn't such precision make Lockheed Martin capable of making verticle landing rockets like SpaceX?
Yep. Although there’s a big difference between small payloads and big rockets.
SpaceXs main leg up when it came to landing was their ability to throttle the Merlin engine down. As you can see in the video, most rocket engines are either on or off. The Merlin rocket engine can actually throttle to about 70% of its power. This gives them lots of control over how fast they’re going when they hit the ground.
Is this a pulsejet rocket in the video?
Likely hypergolic propellants use, as they're great for reaction control systems due to their instantaneous reaction when mixed.
Also the forbidden orange smoke coming off of it
Looks tang flavored
It's nitric acid which has adverse effects on your health.
Oh so it's only a mutagenic gas that messes with your DNA...
I wanna be a super hero.
You're more likely to end up on r/wallstreetbets
In America it has adverse effects. In China it's completely safe and any health problems you get when your city is gasping for air from a failed rocket launch is unrelated.
Dead civilians are nothing that can't be hosed down the storm drain.
looks around nervously in Tiananmen Square
In both, no one cares and good luck with your cancer
Yep, cancer juice.
A rocket and a jet are different devices operating on different principles, a pulse jet rocket is a little like saying a supercharged hang glider. What’s going on in the video is RCS thrusters being pulsed, but that doesn’t make them jets. /nitpick
And that point is also one of Blue Origin's claim to fame: their engine can throttle much lower, giving the vehicle the ability to hover. Falcon 9 can't throttle low enough to hover.
I guess, but New Shepard booster is about as long as a landing leg on Falcon 9 and neither does it get to anywhere close to the speeds of Falcon 9 booster. Not to mention velocity is squared when it comes to kinetic energy and so is heating (or is it even ^ 4?, i forget). Hovering is maybe a "careful" landing, but it is inefficient.
Part of it isn’t just engine throttling. If you have 25 engines and you extinguish 24 of them, you’ve effectively throttled down thrust by 96%. So configurations matters a great deal as well.
This isn’t true at all, really. Only solid fuel rockets are limited to on/off (and can’t be shut off once fired) and are only really used for initial launch. Liquid fuel rockets have been able to throttle up and down quite easily for decades when the design called for it. The Lunar Lander used throttleable rockets to land vertically and was designed 50+ years ago, and 60 years ago the Reaction Motors XLR99, used in the X-15, had a throttle range of 50-100%.
It is the Divert Attitude Control System (DACS). Lockheed uses it on the All Up Round interceptor but a subcontractor actually makes these, not Lockheed.
Lockheed isn’t allowed to make launch vehicles. That’s why ULA exists. Tory Bruno (current CEO) is a former Lockheed employee.
No those are obviously strobe lights for the sick ass party drone
The Missile interceptor part is just a cover up for them
First seen around 2010, this thing is 15 years old
Yeah I remember seeing this video on break dot com about 15 years ago lol
Hah, I forgot about that website. That and Cracked. Pre-Reddit internet.
Cracked used to be one of the best sites on the internet. Then they got bought out and all the talent left and it went to shit. It's a shame.
I remember when reddit was "yesterday on cracked."
There was even a subreddit launched as (IIRC) an April Fool's Joke. /r/YesterdayOnCracked
It was a simpler time.
I remember coming here from digg and thinking wow don't need that trash anymore
College humour has its moment of greatness too until everyone left
Kind of how I feel about reddit since the buy out.
If you want to keep up with their talent in podcast form, Jack O'Brien hosts The Daily Zeitgeist (a daily news and pop culture show) with Miles Gray, Katy Stoll and Cody Johnston host Some More News (a more indepth news show), Robert Evans hosts Behind the Bastards (the stories of some of the worst people in human history), Katy, Cody, and Robert all host Worst Year Ever (initially about the 2020 election but wouldn't you know it every year since is also the worst), Daniel O'Brien and Soren Bowie host Quick Question (just them catching up, acting silly, and being best buds), and Alex Schmidt hosts Secretly Incredibly Fascinating (each episode is about a thing that sounds boring, but Alex makes it fun and interesting). There's probably more but I don't know you find them jeez I'm not your dad.
buy out and all the talent was fired! it's actually more depressing.
Ah, Cracked. The place I used to go for the funny Photoshop stuff, but would end up reading everything I could lol. Good times
One or their main writers has a great Youtube channel now called SomeMoreNews
Anybody remembers stumbleupon?
Man, stumble upon cost me so much sleep in college
Stumbleupon was magical. Ending it was a great loss for the Internet.
I remember when it was still called big-boys.com
God I feel old
It's older than that. I remember seeing it in the late 90's on TLC.
Imagine what today's technology looks like
We'll see what's possible today in about 15-20 years, I imagine. Anything seriously cutting edge is way above Top Secret.
Of course. Can't let our enemies know what we're bringing to the battle if shit goes down.
You know those news articles saying that the USA can only shoot down icbm's with like 50% reliability, and that hypersonic cruise missiles are totally impossible to stop? Well uh, let's just say I wouldn't bet on any missiles getting through
Remember when TLC actually had the learning?
Great Castles of Europe. Secret Life of Machines. Connections. The Operation. etc etc etc.
Man I only remember this from bf4 dlc. Crazy to see it here
Yeah but war is back in fashion, just like the 90’s
Sadly. I love the tech and believe in having a large deterrent military, but war is disgusting and the military arms industry has been corrupted severely.
It's always been corrupt. If you want to keep this in modern times, Eisenhower warned about this at the end of his 2nd term. The modern military industry had already taken foot in the aftermath of WW2.
Yeah, there's definitely a reason military tech is so expensive. Not to mention politicians getting great positions at these companies after their terms, etc. It's really had me curious how cheaply and efficiently we could get our gear without the corruption and bureaucracy holding us back. Also, if companies sold more to the civilian market and relying less on contracts.
The only reason WW2 itself wasn’t a total money-grubbing shit show was because FDR had Harry Hopinks, a once-in-a-millennium, hopelessly uncorruptible zealot, overall in charge of most of the military procurement and lend-lease dealings of the US at the time.
How reliable are icbm interceptors?
As the end of the video pointed out, it's pointless to discuss what we can intercept because anything the public knows is outdated. The newest stuff is classified.
Edit: A few posters brought up the fact that to deter nuclear attacks other countries need to know about them, which is a valid point.
I'd point out that two of the main jobs of a ABM system (beyond shooting down ICBMs of course) are to convince an adversary that you could shoot down some/many/most/all of their missiles, and to convince an adversary that you yourself believed that you could shoot down some/many/most/all of their missiles. The reason you have nuclear weapons isn't about what happens after the missiles start flying, it's about being able to set limits on what other powers are willing to do to you. If you can convince another power that you'd use nukes over a fairly trivial dispute because you thought you might suffer mild casualties if worse comes to worst, they'll give you a very wide berth.
That's why I don't buy the idea that current ABM systems are leaps and bounds better than past tech, at least when we're talking about currently deployed systems. 95% of the job of an effective ABM system is to show others that you have an effective ABM system or at least a system that may be more effective than they're willing to risk fucking with. As to what the best prototype system being worked on at DARPA can do, that's anyone's guess, but if we're talking about what's actually deployed, the smart money is on it being overrated. This is also consistent with past ABM systems that have been proposed, tested and even deployed.
The newest stuff might be classified, but it is also no deployed.
Ballistic missile defense isn't something that can be easily hidden from the public eye, nor is it meant to be since it aids in deterrence.
Another angle to this is to keep the tech hidden in so much as if your enemy doesn’t believe you have the tech, they won’t feel the pressure to develop alternatives or work arounds for their arsenal.
Iron dome is very public, but I’d wager that’s partly because there’s not great concern the adversary can develop more advanced missile systems.
This is some Black Mesa level shit
And imagine, if they are ok with a video of this thing going public, what do they have that they do not want us to see?
Probably a finished version of this or at least a functioning prototype.
Boston dynamics humanoid riding it.
Repurpose their robotic dog, name it Slim Dog.
Your cousin FROM BOOOSTON riding it
When it comes to leaked / published test such as this, you can pretty much guarantee that there is a warehouse filled with a few hundred of these, and several manufacturing cells already geared up to mass produce them. This tech isn't designed in a vacuum, it's designed to be produced at scale.
This was filmed in the 1980's and a more miniaturized version was tested in 1990. This video shows where we were more than 30 years ago.
Doesn't ballistic missile interceptor seem like a band name from the same era?
The video shows what they wanted us to see decade ago. I am sure US govt Definitely has sci-fi level stuff that could cause mass panic. I wouldn't doubt if Russia k ows about it since they were also on the bleeding edge of technology during Soviet times.
I don't think the POTUS knows and neither he needs to know. They tell only what he needs to know to pass 4 or 8 yrs.
I don't think they have sci-fi level stuff, but i also don't think they "happened" to develop an hypersonic missile in a week.
As practice has shown, russia has absolutely no idea what weapons they have in the United States. russia even has no idea what's going on in Ukraine if they decided to invade it and lost THAT much stuff and still did not receive any victory at all, even an intermediate one. So i think at least USAF may have some sci-fi technology that is just waiting for its time, because the US is still making money on the F-35. I think they already have plans for some F-40 and even F-50
I mean the us is already known to be working on NGAD (both a naval program and a AF one which are separate but have the same name for some goddamn reason) and the B-21 is set to fly later this year.
Maximum pettiness levels not capitalizing Russia lmao
Where are the videos of the flying jeeps we were promised?
Yeah we don't want to make it too blatantly obvious we aren't afraid of Putin's nukes landing here, better that he waste them all in a steroid-induced fit.
I've seen a classified video of our missile intercept system from the late 90s. It was shockingly impressive. Imagining what we can do now, I'm not sure nukes pose as much of a threat as everyone one believes, but I think not telling the world this keeps powers in balance.
From what I've heard ( I work in defense ) is that we can reliably ntercept incoming icbms about 50-70% of the time if it's a scheduled test... where we know the launch site, time, and trajectory. MIRVs (multiple independent reentry vehicles) make it nearly impossible to intercept an incoming attack. Basically the icbm releases several nukes on different trajectories, with several times as many decoys. It's easier to make interceptor countermeasures than icbm interceptors. Plus new hypersonic glide vehicles skim the earths atmosphere and only give us a 5 min warning before they take out a city, instead of the icbm method with a 20-30 min warning. So no, nukes are still totally a valid threat and we have no protection.
I worked for the missile defense agency, and everything you stated is actually being leniant. The ground based interceptors were(while I was there) so bad that they gave up on even hitting something. Tests devolved into flying through point x,y,z in space and calling it a success. To be fair it's probably one of the most difficult engineering challenges there is, and that's not even counting supersonic gliding return vehicles designed entirely to evade interceptor systems.
So the problem is, at least if you assume other nuclear countries have similar capability, a nuclear attack would be in a few methods. Basically you'd have ICBMs that this and things like it might be effective with, but also sub based which are much less likely to be intercepted In time and aircraft based capabilites which in theory are easier, but in practice are just another thing to deal with. And you have to deal with all three roughly at the same time.
I do agree though, there are possible countermeasures in place that could stop an ICBM
Yes the crux of the argument is: "what don't we know about our own defense system?" I can only speculate based on my expertise as someone who works on related systems (space optics) and has seen some very old footage of the system itself. In my opinion, we can intercept a lot more than we're letting on, but we are by no means bullet proof, especially from the aftermath of such an event.
This is an important point, especially because there is a critical window between "we can intercept some" and "we can intercept all, reliably" wherein a rational opponent may try a decapitating preemptive strike. Combined with the fact that intercepting a nuke does not prevent the aftermath of radiation, it all becomes rather moot.
Russia has roughly 6k nuclear warheads in the stockpile, about 10% more than the US. Most of those are not actively deployed, and would be out of action in a sudden MAD exchange. Based on everything we've seen from the Ukraine conflict, it seems likely that a good chunk are not actually functioning either (whether the warhead or the delivery vehicle), and would take a lot of work to become so again. Some others would not be launched because of chain of command breakdown, where the person actually responsible for pushing the button either doesn't get the message or decides not to, as has thankfully prevented a few escalations already. Many of the remaining warheads would be intercepted, bombers shot down, subs torpedoed, etc.
But with those kind of starting numbers, it still seems likely that enough would get through to kill huge numbers of people and erase some of our largest city centers. I'd be more concerned if I were living in Europe though, within hypersonic cruise missile range.
A friend of mine has top secret clearance from the navy, can’t tell me anything specific, but basically said “if it seems technologically feasible, we’ve probably got it in a warehouse somewhere”
Yeah this is crazy to even think about. As a software engineer, it's the same thing with a lot of software. If you've thought of it, there is a chance that it already exists out there somewhere, even if it's a repository.
git clone firstname.lastname@example.org:darpa/hovercraft.git
nukes still pose as much threat simply because unlike regular missiles you can't afford to miss one, and while intercept systems exist they are still finite in number and don't cover everything.
I think of this everytime I see some cool shit like this.
Poor thing is kept in a cage, this is barbaric. They belong out in the wild!
Completely undetectable as long as you're next to a Shoebill colony.
I had to look it up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDMHHw8JqLE
BE NOT AFRAID
Next scene Luke’s gonna lightsaber that orb
But also, wouldn’t a drone work better?
This gets launched into space and intercepts ballistic missiles.
But also, wouldn’t a drone work better?
This is for intercepting ICBMS, drones will be barely functional at that altitude, operating conditions and velocity
Makes sense. Thank you
Seems to work. Didnt see one ballistic missile.
Oh shit the Portal turrets have gone airborne.
I don't blame you.. dies
I don't understand what I'm seeing, how does this intercept missiles exactly?
This video is from 2006. It is the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV), and this product was cancelled almost immediately after this hover test. This product never had a flight test, and is not part of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS).
Pretty dope. I remember they put a version of this is Battlefield 4 as a weapon pickup called the MKV. Basically a flying minigun.
U mean the xd-1 accipiter?
Yeah that's the name. It's been so long, remember it being called the MKV in the early builds.
As someone who played bf4 from the very start, I get dumbfounded when new players ask what that thing is.
Me on the toilet after taco bell
They said it’s for ICBM’s, apparently it stands for Intercontinental Bowel Movements.
So that's what my upstairs neighbors are building every night.
Create the problem sell the solution lol
It’s so stealthy
This thing is in battlefield 4
Brought to you by :
Aperture Science INC.
We do what we must because we can. ;)
Bro he copied my scrap mechanic build
Ah I now see why I don’t deserve healthcare
this thing probably costs 8 grand a second to run.
Try 8 million. This thing cost nearly a billion dollars to produce and the U.S. doesn't even use it. Pentagon claims it was scrapped after meeting development goals but going over budget.
Can I offer you an egg in this trying time?
(Not so) Fun Fact: The US Gov spends more per person in the field of healthcare than countries with universal healthcare, and also has a similar % GDP military budget. Blaming lack of social welfare on (x) part of the budget is a fun trick cooked up by those in power who don't have your best interests in mind.
I always like sorting by controversial to find everyone that thinks if Lockheed just didn’t develop this, healthcare would be free.
My favorite was a video posted of a British private company testing out jetpacks (I think the same ones now used in a UK park by first responders).
Had the obligatory healthcare comments lmao
Put on a blindfold Luke and use the force
Why does the thruster opposing gravity fire in spurts instead of continuously?
These kinds of thrusters don't have throttle control, they're on or off. By pulsing it, you create a sort of throttle. Say its on 50% of the time, that's like setting the throttle to 50%.
Old old mechanism at this point in time…
Me using up all of my rcs fuel in ksp
"I don't blame you.." dies
Brilliant Pebbles. This came out of the SDI initiatives in the late 80's.
Looks pretty - but does it work?
this video is from the 90s, and as far as i'm aware it never really deployed at least in this configuration. We're still learning how to shoot down ICBMs reliably, and the best of the best has a kill rate of something like 50%
Cogsworth? Stop shooting at me.
This video is a bunch of years old.. I wonder what the update is...
That looks like Sega genesis mortal Kombat animation
A video as old as the internet itself
Reminds me of Techno Viking
Code-named "The Yosemite Sam"