BAE systems , true IR cloaking technology for tanks now available.

[William Gaatjes]

BAE Systems plc and BAE Systems inc are separate entities, despite the inc being a subsidiary of the plc. Since BAE Systems plc is an English company, they set up a subsidiary in the states called BAE Systems inc that has all American management and mostly all American staff. They proceeded to purchase many university spin-offs (major raw talent pools), start-ups and established defense companies to drive their growth. Technology rarely flows between BAE Systems plc and BAE Systems inc. This allows them to compete for US government contracts that have export control requirements and places them on equal footing with "all American" contractors like Northrup, SAIC, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

I have difficulty examining...
What is the specific difference between the starters of silicon valley (Frederick Terman , William Shockley) and the part of the text i made bold ?

As a side note :
Startups being bought up. Instead of new companies arising. It is obvious but it destroys arguments about unregulated free market enterprises. The slow responsiveness of the Moloch, the fight between David and Goliath. Funny stories...

 

[Schadenfroh]

Startups being bought up. Instead of new companies arising. It is obvious but it destroys arguments about unregulated free market enterprises.

Defense companies are among the most regulated of companies and their business transactions are under some of the heaviest restrictions out there. Everything that a defense contractor sells is scrutinized by the government and they have to seek approval for just about everything they do in regards to exports or transferring products to other companies. Acquisitions of defense companies are also heavily scrutinized / regulated by the government.

For example, I'm sure that BAE plc would love to "cut out" the middleman of BAE Systems inc, eliminate the parallel management structure, directly control them and share the IP with their other divisions. But, the US government would not consider them for most contracts if they did not have US management in place and measures to prevent BAE plc from having access to BAE inc IP, so they cannot. They also would love to sell arms to other countries freely, but the government regulates / controls the sale of arms to other countries and they even regulate the arms once they are in the other country (so country A cannot sell arms purchased from the USA to country B without the approval of the US).

The sheer volumes of paperwork, oversight and regulation is insane and people / companies get fined, go to jail and lose contracts every year for violating the heavy, complex regulations.

 

[feralkid]

If i am not mistaken, i recall that BAE systems is already a major contractor for the US army. Through subsidaries or directly but nevertheless.

Is lockheed martin not owned by BAE systems for example ?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Inc.

If the wiki entry is correct, it is save to say that BAE is the Omni Consumer Products of the US defense.

I miss ED209.

Nice robot; too bad he couldn't handle stairs.

 

[Nintendesert]

Enemy anti-tank weapons at this point have a difficult time taking out our light transport vehicles (M1151s, MATVs, MRAPs.)

The only weapons capable of disabling our tanks are top-attack missiles like the Javelin or Spike missiles. And our tanks already have systems that make it impossible for those systems to lock on and track them.

Honestly infantry is just not a huge concern to tanks, and it never has been. Anti-tank soldiers are some of the lowest survivability soldiers, expected to die within one minute of encountering their target.

I'd be interested to see how they plan on adapting this fancy IR tech to real armor, especially considering the layout\texture of the newest reactive armor packages employed on the M1 and T90.

Not true. IEDs are very good at destroying tanks.

http://www.archive.org/details/theMotherofallieds


You can watch that crap and see them destroy an Abrams, the last crappy part of the video is the overturned burnt out tank. There's also other videos out there that show the turret very clearly being blown right off an Abrams. IEDs are extremely effective weapons against our armor.

Then again you see this:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e1cf736b14


And it's pretty impressive just how powerful a blast a tank can withstand.



Infantry however still is a threat to tanks, there are handheld HEAT grenades that when thrown parachute down or straight against the hull of a vehicle and inject a super heated plasma, copper or something like that, into the vehicle. They can melt through many inches of steel.

You can look up attacks in urban environments with these. I forget the Russian name for them, but they hit the top of an Abrams and they'll kill the crew. I've seen what these can do to a Marine in a vehicle when they're hit. :\

 

[William Gaatjes]

Not true. IEDs are very good at destroying tanks.

http://www.archive.org/details/theMotherofallieds


You can watch that crap and see them destroy an Abrams, the last crappy part of the video is the overturned burnt out tank. There's also other videos out there that show the turret very clearly being blown right off an Abrams. IEDs are extremely effective weapons against our armor.

Then again you see this:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e1cf736b14


And it's pretty impressive just how powerful a blast a tank can withstand.



Infantry however still is a threat to tanks, there are handheld HEAT grenades that when thrown parachute down or straight against the hull of a vehicle and inject a super heated plasma, copper or something like that, into the vehicle. They can melt through many inches of steel.

You can look up attacks in urban environments with these. I forget the Russian name for them, but they hit the top of an Abrams and they'll kill the crew. I've seen what these can do to a Marine in a vehicle when they're hit. :\

I think The grenades or rockets that you mean contain some sort of thermite mixture. Thermite grenades or incendiaries. RPG.

But i have seen an example promotion movie once of what these devices can do. The rocket or grenade creates only a tiny hole of an inch or 2 to 3 straight through the armor into the inside of the vehicle. The inside of the tank is completely burned out leaving (Sprayed with liquid copper and other elements ) only an empty shell.

 

[Nebor]

Not true. IEDs are very good at destroying tanks.

http://www.archive.org/details/theMotherofallieds


You can watch that crap and see them destroy an Abrams, the last crappy part of the video is the overturned burnt out tank. There's also other videos out there that show the turret very clearly being blown right off an Abrams. IEDs are extremely effective weapons against our armor.

Then again you see this:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e1cf736b14


And it's pretty impressive just how powerful a blast a tank can withstand.



Infantry however still is a threat to tanks, there are handheld HEAT grenades that when thrown parachute down or straight against the hull of a vehicle and inject a super heated plasma, copper or something like that, into the vehicle. They can melt through many inches of steel.

You can look up attacks in urban environments with these. I forget the Russian name for them, but they hit the top of an Abrams and they'll kill the crew. I've seen what these can do to a Marine in a vehicle when they're hit. :\

On average, IEDs are not very effective against our tanks. It takes a truly massive IED to kill an M1 Abrams.

But I was referring to conventional weapons, like the RPG type weapons, which aren't very effective against the M1.

Pretty much every kind of anti-tank weapon works on the principal of making a small hole and spraying spall inside the tank.

 

[Nintendesert]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKG-3_anti-tank_grenade


I want to say these are the grenades. And not every anti-tank weapon relies on that principle, the US has weapons that are simply pure kinetic and break a vehicle apart. Some missiles etc. that are pretty crazy to watch. You can find some videos on youtube.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I think The grenades or rockets that you mean contain some sort of thermite mixture. Thermite grenades or incendiaries. RPG.

But i have seen an example promotion movie once of what these devices can do. The rocket or grenade creates only a tiny hole of an inch or 2 to 3 straight through the armor into the inside of the vehicle. The inside of the tank is completely burned out leaving (Sprayed with liquid copper and other elements ) only an empty shell.

EFP's - explosively formed penetrators - use an explosion to create a jet of molten metal which is what actually punches a hole in tank armor, IIRC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator