Commander-598 0 Posted June 7, 2003 I believe the jetpacks they used in shows were actually real, but weren't very fuel effecient. Its total flight time was measured in either seconds or a couple of minutes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DracoPaladore 0 Posted June 7, 2003 Edit: Forget it, the link isnt working Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLF 0 Posted June 7, 2003 you guys are talkign as though its going to be introduced tommorow same with the OICW, that guns current implementations is alot smaller. lol ill laugh in 20 years or so when a derivment of this and the OICW is circulation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Renagade 0 Posted June 8, 2003 So how long do u think it`ll be before the US builds a deathstar :P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Frenchman 0 Posted June 8, 2003 I wonder how much taxpayer money the U.S. Military wastes on the development of shit they will never use. Does anyone remember that article in Popular science a few years back in which the U.S. Army's concept of a soldier in 2012 would be? They had this army guy dressed in black with what looked like a motorcycle helmet, and a wrist mounted gun/rocket launcher, complete with a cooling system in the suit. I also remember watching CNN and a special they had on futuristic army kit, which included a robot 'mule' which could wheel around a soldiers kit instead of having him carry a rucksack. I would have loved to see someone try and use that in Afghanistan. Friggin' morons. Who recruits these R&D guys anyway? The U.S. military is the strongest in the world, yet some guys in it feel the need to make it stronger and stronger. Some people just baffle me. Â Oh well. Tyler You are right, the US wastes too much money with crazy, stupid expensive looking planes and other stuff. I hope the new uniforn project is dropped with that invisable soldier camo and keep everything the way it is. How many new ways does the military have to see someone die. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MLF 0 Posted June 9, 2003 ^^^ Yes with that attitude the bouncing bomb would never have been developed, and everything else the military uses now/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Milkman 1 Posted June 9, 2003 What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blackdog~ 0 Posted June 9, 2003 What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Â Apparently North Korea shot some lasers at some Apaches patrolling the N/S Korea border a few months ago Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Frenchman 0 Posted June 9, 2003 What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Â Apparently North Korea shot some lasers at some Apaches patrolling the N/S Korea border a few months ago I never heard of that before Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Supah 0 Posted June 9, 2003 What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Â Apparently North Korea shot some lasers at some Apaches patrolling the N/S Korea border a few months ago I told them to not sell those laser pens to everyone! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex -USMC- 0 Posted June 10, 2003 What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Â The key is to prepare for the next war, not the last one. If that war happens to be something out of Return of the Jedi, well, so be it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted June 10, 2003 @ June 10 2003,11:04)]What bothers me is that we don't really need anything like the X35's and OICW. Uless we are preparing for some alien invasion, these hi-tech units are worthless. It isn't like Syria or Iran has Lasers and UFOs to deal with, so why create weapons and vehicles that are so far advanced that they serve no real purpose in modern combat? Â The key is to prepare for the next war, not the last one. If that war happens to be something out of Return of the Jedi, well, so be it. Â The other reason is so any third world country's military that is living in last century whose best MBT is a T-55 will get a severe flogging by your military that is living in the current century. Imagine is the US and British militaries still used the same equiptment as they used in the last 70's early 80's in the war against Iraq. It would have been a lot more equal. And yes, it is good to be ready for the next big war so if you find yourself confronting the the PLA in some funky battle armour outfit, you've got your own battle armour kit. If it wasn't for military technological developement, we'd still be cluddbing each other the head with crude melee weaponary. Instead we're taking down targets at 400m with a high powered assualt rifle or blowing up our enemies base form a 1000km away with a missile. Having said that, I'm not supporting spending billions and billions of dollars on experimental military technology when it's needed elsewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Necromancer- 0 Posted June 10, 2003 Having said that, I'm not supporting spending billions and billions of dollars on experimental military technology when it's needed elsewhere. If there were no billions of dollars spend on military technology, then you wouldn't even have gotten to drive a M1A1 abrams tank in OFP... Never mind flying around in an AH-64 Apache in OFP.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Kurtz 0 Posted June 10, 2003 Having said that, I'm not supporting spending billions and billions of dollars on experimental military technology when it's needed elsewhere. If there were no billions of dollars spend on military technology, then you wouldn't even have gotten to drive a M1A1 abrams tank in OFP... Never mind flying around in an AH-64 Apache in OFP.. Â The question is, could that money have been more wisely spent? Well, who cares! Funky military technology is cool. By the time I'm fifty I expect deathrays and stardestroyers to be in wide spread service Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
