From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Fri Apr 18 2003 - 10:38:03 MDT
--- spike66 <spike66@attbi.com> wrote:
> If we can mount one in a satellite and in an
> airplane, I don't see why not on a tank.
'Cause the airplanes these get mounted in could, if
not
carrying the laser, carry multiple tanks. It's just
that *big*, before it can even inflict enough damage
to
destroy a practically unarmored missile. Of course,
as
the system improves, it may become smaller.
> Perhaps
> humanity is seeing the end coming for traditional
> battlefield tactics, which has been with us for
> as long as there have been humans.
That may be true, and certainly there are those in the
Pentagon who openly say as much. But they cite the
improved communications technology more than the
upgraded weaponry. Imagine, for instance, what
augmented reality could give to a battlesuited soldier
(and they are working on battlesuits, too). See a
person or a tank, IFF on your HUD instantly recognizes
friend or foe; moreover, computer vision detects
everything that moves or with a heat signature nearby
and flags it, so you can tell at a glance how many
enemy soldiers still remain in the building you're
clearing. *That* is a true revolution, to them.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 18 2003 - 10:45:20 MDT