Type the topic in any language to check out real time results of Who's Talking on Social Media Sites

• Twitter + Facebook
• Twitter
• Facebook
• Flickr
• Youtube
• Picasa
• Google+
• Digg
• Blog
• Forums
• Yahoo Answers

Most recent 20 results returned for keyword: F-35 (Search this on MAP)

Doug Allen : 2 hours ago - Via Google+ - View - SimCenter Tampa Bay : Have you heard about us?The Team Fighter Jet Mission is something you can ONLY do in our flight center... Have you heard about us?The Team Fighter Jet Mission is something you can ONLY do in our flight center and nowhere else in the USA. You and a buddy completing a mission in one hour, one of you in the F-16 and the other in the F-35, with the two jets linked together.  http://www.simcentertampabay.com/ 5 hours ago - Via Community - View - Asuran Kerala : Watch the video: F-35 flight take off F-35 flight take off 8 hours ago - Via YouTube - View - TAMER ÖZONAR : Watch the video: F-35 The Future Is Now Extreme Bad ASS Role Stealth multirole fighter National origin United States Manufacturer Lockheed Martin Aeronautics First flight 15 December 2006 Introduction After 2016[1... 12 hours ago - Via Google+ - View - Simon Taplin : Sukhoi PAK-50 - Russia's/India's answer to the F-22 and F-35 Sukhoi PAK-50 - Russia's/India's answer to the F-22 and F-35 13 hours ago - Via Community - View - Yi-Shiuan Huang : Alien technology Alien technology Watch the video: The F-35 Amazing Aircraft. The F-35 Amazing Aircraft. 20 hours ago - Via Google+ - View - Khushal Khan : Proposal for the Counter Insurgency Command: U.S.C.I.C This Command will rely on Air Force Special Forces... Proposal for the Counter Insurgency Command: U.S.C.I.C This Command will rely on Air Force Special Forces to seize airfields for U.S cargo aircraft, special cargo airplanes capable of using ordinary highways, VSTOL cargo aircraft like the Osprey and the Swing (for cruising), Swivel (For varying the angle of attack to facilitate short take-off and landing,) and Vectored Thrust (For short take-off and landing) jet cargo aircraft proposed by me in 2007. In addition, it would rely on the U.S.A.F, Navy, and Marine Corps for its transportation needs. All elements of this command would have ground radars, electric and magnetic anomaly sensors, seismic sensors, acoustic sensors, IR sensors, GPS position locators, video cameras, laser illuminators, communication microphones and thermal imagers feed the relevant information to other formations and services for support. These would also include large detachments from engineers (for mine clearance, demolition, infrastructure creation, and obstacle clearance operations), electrical and mechanical engineers (for IED detection and defusing operations), supporting arms, and special personnel drawn from a wide array of academic disciplines and services. And all of the disparate elements from the various specialties and services would be blended into one cohesive and potent force The U.S.C.I.C will rely upon the following: 1- Intelligence Elements: These would comprise of Intelligence units from the U.S military, not relying on traditional sources of intelligence, which have been thoroughly compromised as a result of their infiltration by enemy agents. These would resort to satellite, aerial, human observer, human interrogation, human reward, and human coercive intelligence (3rd degree methods). 2-Military Elements: These would comprise of the following elements: a- Heavy Combat Troops: These would be troops with heavy armor protection and large caliber weapons for enemy obliteration. These would be Armed with heavy ground, aerial, amphibious, and naval craft (Aircraft Carriers like the Iwo Jima ), weapons, sensors , and communications gear for cordoning off areas and destroying all hostile resistance within it. b- Light Combat troops: These would be troops armed with heavily armed but light and versatile craft to pursue hostile elements on foot and in extremely versatile grounds( high- speed, light vehicles, with high angles of inclines and departures, and armed with weapon platforms for an assortment of weapons), aerial( AV-8Bs, AH-64s, RACH-66s, and OV-22s), amphibious(amphibious armored vehicles), and marine craft(Swamp Crafts with folding wheels capable of even ground pursuits, and armed with mortars, automatic grenade launchers, 50 cal sniping rifles, ATGMs, and the Armbrust AT weapon(In fact these would be the standard weapons for all elements and on most platforms; whether foot parties, ground vehicles, amphibious vehicles or marine vehicles) – all armed with ATGMs, MLRS systems, Automatic grenade launchers, light and heavy mortars, medium and light machine guns, bull-pup assault riles (with changeable barrels and feed mechanisms for the different roles), collapsible stock 16” automatic shotguns, MP-7s, palm sized revolvers, and supported by UAVs, attack helicopters, heavy cargo helicopters(OV-22 Ospreys for troop and weapon transportation), light RACH(light reconnaissance, attack, and cargo helicopters (For the pursuit of bandits. These could be modified Comanche(s) or other modified helicopters) c- Siege Troops: These would lay sieges to hamlets, villages, towns, and cities by laying aerially or missile dispensed minefields (Including illuminating mines) around them, taking positions well out of the range of even medium caliber fire. They would then engage the breaches of the siege with long-range weapon systems or feed the info to other units and have the bandits taken out by them. Ultimately all of the areas surrounded by them would be forced into capitulation because of starvation and dehydration. d- Control and Consolidation Troops: These would have a blend of elements from the regular military, UAV units, aviation units, air force units, marine corps units, rangers units , navy units, intelligence units, special forces troops , police-like troops , military police troops, prison control troops, and psychological warfare, counter propaganda, and forensic experts for siege, checkpoint control, search, patrol, interrogation, and prison control operations; with all of these disparate elements blended into one cohesive and potent force. All of these would be equipped with thermal sensors, magnetic and electric anomaly detectors, and EHF scanners for searching the population; speakers, cameras and microphones for communicating with the population at the checkpoints; and remotely controlled guns for having the suspects taken out. The checkpoints would be reinforced with U.S troops in turreted underground-concrete bunkers and provided with covering fire from tall watch towers and Helium balloons(these would have a secure zone of around 1 km around them to keep them safe from even medium caliber fire) equipped with ATGMs, Gatling guns or Mini-guns (provided they can withstand the recoil), automatic grenade launchers, 50 cal sniping rifles, and cameras, IR sensors, magnetic and electric anomaly sensors, ground radars(both orbital projectile locating and personnel radars), acoustic sensors, GPS position locaters, laser range finders, and laser illuminators for either direct engagement or feeding data to combat aircraft or supporting heavy- weapon batteries). These would also establish watch towers and checkpoints in all the localities, once the localities have been sealed with electrified razor-wire in order to have the traffic into and out of these localities controlled. They would search people and neighborhoods using both electronic aids and physical searches; with surrounding neighborhoods sequentially sealed off, all of the population forced out, and then both premises and personnel separately searched. Those even suspected of even the slightest links with the insurgents would be confined to makeshift prisons run by this particular force, where they would be subjected to thorough interrogations until their entire networks have been taken out. e- The information from all ground radars, thermal imagers, video cameras, microphones, magnetic and electric anomaly sensors, EHF scanners, acoustic sensors, seismic sensors, and laser illuminators would be fed into a Central Image Processing Unit that would delete the irrelevant pieces and combine the relevant pieces into a composite picture for each checkpoint, battlefield scene, surveillance team, search party, siege force, or pursuit party. It would then relay this over the new VPN that would carry all forms of data for the U.S military for and its access by the different units with the relevant authorization for that particular zone. Higher level commanders and units would be provided with both the composite images for their entire command areas and also with images for specific scenes. f- The communications link would have different channels with different qualities of service. The highest quality of service would be allocated to the target engagement channel, the next to the target engagement request, the next to the target acquisition data, the next to battlefield communications from a higher level to a lower level commander depending on the flag raised by him for that particular communication to notify of the network of its urgency, and the next to battlefield views for the different command levels. However each channel could be assigned a different priority depending on the software-flag raised by it. Initially the target data would be broadcast to all resources within the vicinity, the different resources would then raise software flags indicating the time for target obliteration, according to these flags the target would be sequentially assigned to different units with different priority levels each unit for its obliteration, if the first unit fails, it would raise a flag, and the target would automatically be assigned to the next unit with the next lowest time for its obliteration, and so on. Finally the obliteration image would be displaced to the unit that first acquired the target and an increment also added (to the counter for that particular type of target) for the commander responsible for that battle zone and the chain of commanders within that battle zone. All communications would be over a secure VPN, preferably on a dedicated military VPN, but at times even on a non-dedicated civilian channel. g- The U.S military would rely on ground based wireless and cellular networks, stratospheric balloons, aircraft, satellites, the universal marine cable, and maybe even the commercial Intelsat satellites for relaying this information. We’ll of course have a complete C3 suite (Communications, Control, and Command). The Army Commander will have a large LCD screen on which the scenes from the different fronts and computer generated graphs will be displayed. The Divisional, Brigade, Battalion, Company, Platoon, and Section, and Squad Commanders, and individual soldiers will either have LCD screens or goggles. The standard goggles at eye-distance provide the optical effect of a 6-ft screen. All communications would be over secure VPN. This would include both Vo/IP, Vio/IP, and Da/IP. I would prefer a satellite based system, but the lag introduced would not be compatible with battlefield tolerances, so either the different commanders would have to rely on different systems or else all have to settle for an array of satellites, lower atmospheric Helium balloons, and the various antenna types. At the individual soldier level, the antenna would be around the helmet. Every soldier would wear normal goggles with no magnification for eye-protection over which either these T.V goggles would slide over or else another set of optical-magnification, thermal imaging, laser range-finding, and rifle sights( or a separate rifle sight with the cross hairs automatically corrected for wind, elevation, recoil, and MV of that particular gun. These would have both solar and kinetic sources and would also be rechargeable from a hand-cranked source or a vehicle or radio battery), cameras, laser illuminators and GPS systems combined into one optical sight that would slide down from the helmet. These goggles would have switches at the sides to allow them to communicate with different entities: only with the staff officers or squad members or to communicate with the different lower and higher echelons (Higher echelons would have the prerogative to set the access levels for different data in order to have it available to the various echelons. The higher echelons would also have security permissions to obtain access to any lower echelon data.), to communicate with aircraft, missile, and artillery batteries by either sending live video, GPS, or laser data to have the enemy taken out by them. In this way the army commander would have live data from the entire battle-front and the divisional, brigade, battalion, company, platoon, and squad commanders, a comprehensive picture in terms of live and some computer generated data from their fronts. An armor assault needs to move in a smooth and continuous manner at a very high pace or speed. It shouldn’t move in an intermittent or interrupted manner or lose its speed and momentum. Any delays or any prior warnings of the assault would doom it to failure. Your M-1 weighs 70 tons, it can neither be lifted by the Ch-58 Or 47? Chinook nor the MI-26 (Crane) (airlift capacity limited to 40 tons). In fact not even another cargo airplane apart from the C-17 can lift it. Even if you were to airlift it or employ engineers or armored bridge layers for bridge-laying etc., you’d still be assembling, then organizing and finally deploying, which would doom your assault before its commencement. The M-2 Bradley is too lightly armed, while the M-1 Abrams is too heavy. You either need to use the Marine Corps Hover Craft battalions or else you need a new armored vehicle for fighting insurgencies. You don’t need a 120mm gun for insurgencies even a 75, 90, or 105 mm gun with mostly HEAT and some APDS or APFSDS rounds would suffice. I myself would prefer a rocket platform to a tank. This should be no taller than 3 feet, and no wider than 4 feet to limit its silhouette and use that for its survival. It would carry up to 8 missiles for simultaneous launch and another 8 to 16 in reserve. It of course would be heavily armored, but not to the same extent as the M-1. You’ll only have the crew and munitions areas heavily armored. The crews of the attack and reconnaissance vehicle would lie on their backs glaring at L.C.D screens, while the armored personnel carrier would have infantry personnel, again, lie on their backs and rollout from the sides and the back while to disembark. Acoustic sensors, magnetic and electric anomaly sensors, thermal imagers, and video cameras, and ground surveillance radars would all feed into an image processor which would alert the commander to the presence of any personnel or vehicles or any changes in the image. These would be displayed on the display screen. The commander would either engage these by simple using his finger to select the targets and then pushing fire or would leave the fire-control system on the auto-mode, whereby it would automatically engage any changes in image or movement through its complement of missiles, all protected within their own compartments, at safe distances away from each other, and with an auto-disposal mechanism that would eject them if the vehicle is hit itself. The vehicle would will also be equipped with a small RPV( not a UAV) or helium balloon( which would be handy for its ability for extended durations of surveillance, but which would also be a liability for its visibility as an indicator of the presence of the force). These would be tracked and completely amphibious vehicles with water-jet propulsion, so that they can use any terrain for assault if the major approaches have been blocked by the enemy. For helicopters, you would need a longer version of the osprey with extremely narrow frontal and lateral silhouettes by limiting the width to just accommodate soldiers sitting opposite each other or vehicles no broader than 4 feet in width and no higher than 3 feet in height. You would course would have to allow for troop disembarkation and embarkation, for which you might have to extend the height to 4 feet (The soldiers don’t have to stand). This hybrid plane-helicopter would carry 40 soldiers or 4 vehicles or the number of Medevac stretchers proportional to the space. This helicopter would also be able to fly backwards, if not then sideways, so as never to expose its lateral section to enemy fire. This would replace both tactical airlift airplanes and cargo helicopters, so that troops can be ferried directly to the theatre. The strategic airlift aircraft will fill the gap left by the tactical transports if and whenever the need arises. Your attack helicopter would be the Reconnaissance Attack Helicopter, the shelved RAH=66 Comanche which is stealth, has a low thermal signature, and can even fly sideways at 100 mph to avoid enemy fire. This would have two internal weapons’ bays and even protruding weapons’ pylons for additional munitions. Each bay would carry different modules, for examples modules that would have a complement of 8 hellfire or sidewinder missiles, a module to seat 4 soldiers or accommodate 4 stretchers in each of the two bays. This would ferry the troops into the thick of the battle, whereas the ospreys to a distance within reach of the battle. Your strategic airlift aircraft would be able to take off and land using ordinary highways, so that you have multiple points of dispersal to confuse the enemy and to prevent long logistical jams. You of course would have the ordinary strategic airlift aircraft to replenish the troops from ordinary airfields taken over by air force special forces, once the attack has been commenced. You'll replace the M-16 with a bull-pup design of 4.7 mm caliber and changeable barrels in order for it to serve as an assault rifle, a sub-machine gun, or a light machine gun. You'll also need shotguns that collapse to 16 inches, are semi-automatic, and can carry at least 13 cartridges-like the South African Armsel Stryker. You'll replace all pistols with the MP-7 which collapses to just 7 inches If you're familiar with the airfoil, you'd know what the angle of A is(I don't want to refer to the word, because it might provide the murderers and terrorists with an opportunity to plot). So if you vary the angle of A, you reduce both the taking-off and landing distances. This can be done by swiveling the wing, which would also vector the thrust a little. This coupled with extra actual vectored-thrust would address the VSTOL aspect, while the Swing Wing concept would take care of the cruise speed. Whenever you reduce speed to land, the decoupled power can be coupled to a shaft to swivel the wing, while during cruise the same coupling can be moved through 90 degrees to swivel the wing. Since weight is the major problem, if you can have the same shaft used for both swiveling and swinging the wing, a part of that aspect of the problem can be addressed. Furthermore you'll just be coupling power from the jets, not using any additional motoring or gearing, because a computer controlled shaft would make gearing redundant. I proposed the idea in 2005, while trials were being conducted on a miniature concept ( a few feet) as early as 2007, which means that in about 10 years time, it can go into production. This is very different from the YB-11 and YB-12s from the 70s. It is also different from the Harrier, which uses a fixed higher-angle of A coupled with vectored thrust and the Marine Corps version of the F-35 which uses a fan in the fuselage driven by the jet for the extra thrust with the jet itself providing tremendous vectoring both vertically and horizontally. The weight of the fan, though, does limit the range. Anyway, it is the only Joint Strike Aircraft in duty with all the three services to address logistical issues through standardization. The F-22 and F-35 have made the F-122 completely redundant. The former is excessively non-aerodynamic and has a special paint which requires special shelters to be maintained at specific temperatures, while the latter two don't have any of these drawbacks. On the contrary, in addition, the latter two provide both horizontal and vertical thrust-vectoring which make them the most maneuverable aircraft ever. In the stealth role, they carry payloads of 12,000 lbs and 8000 lbs respectively within their internal weapons' bays, while in the non-stealth role (once they've addressed the air defenses), they can carry additional 20,000 lbs on hard-points on their wings. So far, there are 3000 on order with deliveries beginning in the early 2000s and completing in the 2020s. We invested a whole lot in R&D and training, so that whenever the need arose, we could militarize overnight. We put a bottom beneath the Defense Budget at $500 billion, but no top on it, so it can continue to grow with the GDP. With regards to the agencies, most of the other agencies were wholly funded by the DoD, while the CIA received 85% of its funding from the DoD and the FBI got all of its from the DoJ. Now they also receive funding from the DoHS and DNI. I also did provide organizational charts to create modular units from within the military for special purposes. I left the U.S governmental system complete in all aspects before I quit in mid 2004/ early 2005. As far as technology is concerned, it was always my passion. I had the first Tablet PC designed in 2001, but it didn't have a very friendly user-interface. The Apple Tablet was supposed to have dimensions of 9*9 or 9*7 or 7*7 or 7*5 and a GUI which was an improvement on the iPhone.It was also supposed to have a keyboard slide from beneath the screen. The first version was designed in 2005 and a marked GUI improvement made to it in 2007.However, at that time it was just on the drawing board. The convergence of the Telephone, T. V, Music system, Computer, and the automation of all Home Appliances was first implemented by a subsidiary of CISCO in 2005/2006. With regards to artillery and mortar munitions, I had 9 yrs earlier advocated grooved instead of rifled barrels that could fire both regular rounds and finned projectiles GPS, Video, or Laser guided and for the mortars to even have parachute deployable rounds to seek their own targets, once over enemy positions. I had also proposed the general use of UAVs in addition to each platoon being equipped with a small RPV. Because of our technological superiority, we'll defy the conventional wisdom of dawn or dusk offensives and rely solely on night operations by using thermal imagers, ground surveillance radars, and even old fashioned flares. The prerogative to use viper-like mine clearing devices or shock waves etc to defuse the I.E.Ds would be with the commanders on the ground and their decision to either clear the path or secure surprise. It would, though, make sense to clear the paths, if an air offensive would mark the commencement of the attack. As for short-range rockets, drop your LAW-80 in favor of FN's Armbrust which uses an opposing mass in terms of pistons ejecting plastic pellets instead of the usual back blast to allow for its firing from enclosed spaces. It just requires 2 feet. My next posting would be about highly versatile logistical and reconnaissance vehicles from Jane's Support Vehicles 1986 edition that can be improved upon. Since I cannot draw sketches, I'd have to provide you with comparisons and analogies. The Breach-loading Mortar Those who scoffed at my idea of a mortar that could even be breach-loaded would again be surprised to find that both the Finnish Army and the U.S Marine Corps have mounted the mortar on both wheeled and tracked light-armored vehicles. The Finnish vehicle is named FN-92 or 99 or something and has been operational for a year or two now. The U.S Marine Corps was still conducting trials on its version, a few years back. All of these are based on the 120mm mortar with a direct range of 1.5-2.5 km and an indirect range of 9-13 km or so. You do realize that all of these are my designs from the 90s or the early 2000s. Even the Platoon or company level RPV, I think is either operational or under trials by the British and several other armies. Forget all else, the VSTOL version of the F-35 lightning-II would either be operational or would become operational with the U.S Marine Corps. So scoff all that you want! All Battalions would be authorized a UAV for a total of over 200 UAVs for the operation. A brigade, division, corps, or army will have to file a wired request for an RPV from a battalion and it would the battalion's prerogative to grant or deny such a request. In addition, each platoon will have its own RPV, a much smaller surveillance aircraft. Artillery, armor, signals, engineers, and E & ME elements will be provided to the different forces at the discretion of the brigade, divisional, corps, and army commanders from their resources all allocated according to the analysis of NSA,DIA,Military Intel, Ground or Air Reconaissance estimates or the needs of the commanders on the ground. 1- The EHF scanners(look beneath clothes), seismic scanners( explore caves and underground cavities), orbital trajectory radars(pinpoint projectiles to within a meter of their source), explosives scanners( sense explosives), UAV swarms(detect and allocate targets using computers), bug swarms( N.S.A insect-like bugs with acoustic/visual sensors), stealth and vectored thrust airplanes, and stealth and sideways flying helicopters with a very low IR signature, the V-22 Osprey, the stealth LPD ferrying 8000 marines and having a signature of a fishing boat, the M-shaped landing-craft cruising at 50 knots and munitions( like the improved versions of the m Maverick and non-naval Harpoon, the 12km version the Hellfire,SDBs, JSMs(JDAMs though with a CEP of 5-15m meters can be attached to all munitions) and both aerial and ground munitions guided by the video,IR,Laser and GPS data from any soldier or platoon etc RPV) etc., are a reality. A majority of them being my inventions from 2001-2007, while the others pre-date my inventions, none however supersede my inventions. I had only shelved the $15 million Crusader or Paladin sitting-duck gun to replace the M-109 in 2002 because some of the aircraft were cheaper and could take an entire regiment out. The transport aircraft capable of using highways are in development, while a jet version of a VSTOL cargo aircraft is in miniature trials.These are designs dating from 2002-2007, so they should enter trials and production any time. All parties need to make peace, because I've turned into more of a pacifist and less of militarist. Unless you do, you'll have to confront hese technologies in a few years.Make the best of peace, while you can still forge treaties. These technologies were in response to the decapitation of U.S soldiers by terror groups Add a comment...   1 day ago - Via Community - View - tran quoc dan : How to Down a Satellite: Go Back 22 Years. The U.S. Navy's planned attempt to destroy a de-orbiting ... How to Down a Satellite: Go Back 22 Years. The U.S. Navy's planned attempt to destroy a de-orbiting spy satellite using a ship-launched missile this month is making headlines -- but if the attempt is successful it won't be the first time the United States government has used a missile to shoot a satellite down. More than 22 years ago, on Sept. 13, 1985, U.S. Air Force Maj. (now retired Maj. Gen.) Wilbert "Doug" Pearson became the first pilot ever to shoot down a satellite, when an ASM-135 ASAT anti-satellite missile launched from his F-15A Eagle at an altitude of 38,100 feet in the Pacific Missile Test Range some 200 miles west of Vandenburg Air Force Base, Calif. Writing in 2001 for the Air Force Flight Test Center's (AFFTC's) Web article series Moments in Flight Test History, Dr. Raymond Puffer, the AFFTC's historian, noted that Maj. Gen Pearson's successful ASAT mission -- dubbed the "Celestial Eagle Flight" -- made him "the first and only space ace." (However, the United States' then-Strategic Defense Initiative Organization successfully collided two Delta upper stages in low earth orbit in 1986, in its Delta 180 experiment. Then, early in 2007, Vietnam shot down an old spy satellite using a ground-launched ballistic missile.) Maj. Pearson's mission Sept. 1985 mission represented the culmination of a six-year development and test program for the ASAT missile. The mission called for Maj. Pearson, the director of the U.S. Air Force's ASAT Combined Test Force, to fly a highly accurate flight profile so his aircraft would arrive at a precise firing point over the Pacific Ocean at a precise time. Flying at just above Mach 1.2, Maj. Pearson pulled up into a 3.8g, 65-degree climb that reduced the speed of his aircraft to Mach 0.934, just below the speed of sound. At 38,100 feet, the ASAT missile launched automatically, accelerating up to escape velocity as it streaked towards its target. The infra-red sensor of the ASAT's miniature homing vehicle (MHV) -- the 30-pound third stage of the 2,700-pound, three-stage missile -- detected and tracked the intended target, the obsolete, 2,000-pound Solwind P78-1 solar laboratory launched in 1979 and orbiting at an altitude of 345 miles. Eight solid-rocket motors ringing the circumference of the MHV were used to perform final trajectory adjustment maneuvers, with four more small rocket motors in pods at the rear of the MHV controlling its attitude as the MHV revolved around its long axis some 30 times a second to provide directional stability. At a closing velocity of about 15,000 mph, the MHV collided with Solwind P78-1, the huge transfer of kinetic energy shattering the satellite instantly into pieces of debris and -- NASA scientists theorized later -- converting enough of the two bodies' kinetic energy to heat to vaporize the plastic materials inside Solwind and coat its brightly reflective metal surfaces with soot. Last year, diligent research by Staff Sgt. Aaron Hartley of the Florida Air National Guard revealed that one of the aircraft the Florida ANG was operating was the same F-15A -- Air Force serial number 76-0084 -- that Maj. Gen Pearson had flown on his historic Celestial Eagle mission. By 2007 Maj. Gen. Pearson's son, Capt. Todd Pearson, was an active-duty F-15 pilot (and General Pearson himself was by then the vice president of the Lockheed Martin F-35 integrated test force). The stage was set for Capt. Pearson to fly his father's history-making aircraft to commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the Celestial Eagle flight. 1 day ago - Via Google+ - View - Air Force Reserve : A #reservist from the 706th Fighter Squadron recently became the first to #fly the Air Force's newest... A #reservist from the 706th Fighter Squadron recently became the first to #fly the Air Force's newest #aircraft here 706th Fighter Squadron pilot makes F-35 history A reservist from the 706th Fighter Squadron recently became the first to fly the Air Force's newest aircraft here. Maj. Joseph Scholtz is an operational test pilot integrated into the Regular Air Force's 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron here, and currently Nellis AFB's only qualifie 1 day ago - Via Google+ - View - John Francis Charles Fairchild : Phoenix Phoenix Watch the video: F-35 Flight Test Intentional Departure F-35 Test Pilot Dave Nelson talks about intentional departure and recovering from stalls during F-35A high angle of attack testing at Edwards Air Force Base,... 1 day ago - Via Google+ - View - dwi junaidi : 1 day ago - Via Google+ - View - Alex H : Watch the video: F-35 Lightning II 1 day ago - Via YouTube - View - Ben O' Hare : Why Google and the Pentagon want ‘quantum computers’ BBC CODE RED| 16 May 2013 Why Google and the Pentagon... Why Google and the Pentagon want ‘quantum computers’ BBC CODE RED| 16 May 2013 Why Google and the Pentagon want ‘quantum computers’ Sharon Weinberger Technology Computer Data Engineering Military Science & Environment Print this page Share Facebook Twitter (Copyright: D-Wave) The search giant and the US space agency are the latest high-profile backers of an experimental machine that could transform computing. But what do they want it for? Related   Will we ever get quantum theory?   Diamond idea for quantum computer   A supercomputing Titan   Building a speed machine   Ten military mind experiments Imagine a computer that can teach your mobile phone to recognize any object it sees, or one that can instantly find optimal travel routes for thousands of planes to avoid a snowstorm and deliver their passengers safely to a destination, or even one that can trawl through millions of social media posts to identify a potential terrorist. Traditional computers, including supercomputers, require substantial time to crunch that kind of big data. But scientists have long theorised that a computer that harnesses the often-peculiar principles of quantum mechanics could perform these kinds of calculations in a flash, and even solve problems that would take years for a normal computer to churn through.  The scientific community is still debating whether a true quantum computer can ever be built. But one quantum computing company, D-Wave, is forging ahead. It has already won over the Pentagon’s biggest weapons builder and has now received another huge endorsement: a three-way collaboration between the US space agency Nasa, search giant Google and the Universities Space Research Association (USRA) that it will buy the second D-Wave Two computer. D-Wave Systems, a Canadian-based company, came to prominence in 2007 when it stunned the scientific community by announcing that it had built the world’s first quantum computer. That claim was also met with scepticism and critics, particularly from scientists who wanted peer-reviewed, published proof of the claims, rather than just a public announcement. Since that time, however, D-Wave has not only published in the scientific literature, it’s also won important customers. The first was Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defence company, which announced earlier this year that it was buying the upgraded version of its computer, the D-Wave Two, a 512 qubit quantum computer (it had bought an earlier version of D-Wave two years ago). That a defence company would be interested in a quantum computer is not surprising: the Pentagon and US intelligence community have long been the leading funders of quantum computing in the United States. The spy world, in particular, has looked to quantum computing for its use in encryption and code breaking – a mainstay of the intelligence business. Weapon software The interest from the national security world also suits D-Wave. “Frankly, we don’t want thousands of customers, we want a handful of really deep collaborative customers to work on how they can harness this kind of technology, so in the initial phase it’s relatively low volume, low number of customers that we are selective about,” says Vern Brownell, CEO of D-Wave Systems. “On the that list are the DOD and the intelligence community.” What makes a quantum computer valuable to the military and spy world is the way it makes calculations. A classical computer does useful calculations by processing bits that represent ones and zeroes. But a “standard” quantum computer uses the idea of quantum entanglement – whereby information can exist as both a one and a zero or an infinite number of “superpositions” of the two states at the same time. Effectively these "quantum bits", or qubits as they are known, can work in parallel rather than sequentially, allowing quantum computers to solve certain problems orders of magnitude faster than its classical counterparts. There are, however, different approaches to quantum computing: D-Wave’s computer is a special type of device based on a technique known as adiabatic quantum computing, which involves using loops of superconducting metal to cool the system. If this is done in a precise way, the machines qubits seek out a low-energy state that represents the answer to a given problem. However, unlike most computers, D-wave’s machines, cannot answer any old question. Instead, it is only able to solve so-called “optimisation” problems, where there are a series of criteria all simultaneously competing to be met, and where there is one optimum solution that satisfies the majority of them – for example, the optimal route for a delivery truck to drop off packages, minimising the time and distance travelled. Lockheed, according to Brownell, hooked up with D-Wave out of a mutual interest in the types of calculations that a quantum computer could perform. “They had algorithms that were applicable to our technology,” he says. “Their particular focus is software verification.” Software is increasingly at the heart of what defence companies do. For example, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has what is described as the most complex software system of any modern weapon system, with over 24 million lines of code, according to a 2012 report by the Government Accountability Office. Quantum computing could be used to verify this huge amount of code to ensure the aircraft will operate reliably and safely. A quantum computer would also be good for a variety of other applications that involve machine learning, says Bo Ewald, the president of D-Wave’s recently launched US business. That may involve what Ewald calls “finding the essence of complex data structures”, something which could be useful for mining social media data or pattern recognition in imagery. Ewald says that the quantum computer will be able to learn the key characteristics of a particular shape, say a car, by showing it lots of pictures of cars. Once it learns the key characteristics of  that shape, it should be able to recognise them more readily than conventional systems. In addition, he says, once it has figured out the characteristics of what make a "car" recognisable, it can be used to "train" conventional computers – such as your mobile phone – how to more easily recognise a car, something which could interest the likes of Google. Other applications which may interest the Nasa-Google-USRA collaboration range from improving web search and robotics to hunting for exo-planets and optimising air-traffic control. That computer, which will be installed at what is being called the Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab, will be located at Nasa’s Ames Research Center in California, and is expected to be ready for use later this year. Bits and bets But in most cases, proving that a quantum computer will actually perform these sorts of functions faster than a classical computer is still in the realm of theory. As it is, not everyone is even convinced yet that the D-Wave computer is actually using quantum mechanics to make the calculations. Christopher Monroe, a quantum information researcher of the Joint Quantum Institute and University of Maryland, has expressed doubts in the past about D-Wave’s claims and now says that although the company has made progress in demonstrating its computer’s abilities, it has still not offered proof that it is operating in a quantum state. “I’m not convinced at all it’s a quantum computer,” he says.  “But maybe it doesn’t matter.” What Monroe means is that the D-Wave computer may indeed be able to solve some optimisation problems better than classical computers, as was shown in recent tests, even if the way it works doesn’t involve quantum mechanics. “Given the dearth of publishing from the group, it’s hard to know from all the details whether what they’re observing is a quantum phenomenon,” he says. But even some former D-Wave critics have been won over – at least in part. Seth Lloyd, a professor of mechanical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has long been involved in quantum computing, says that when Lockheed Martin first got interested in D-Wave, he tried to dissuade them from buying it. Lloyd himself had been involved in developing the principles behind the adiabatic quantum computer, but says his group didn’t patent the idea because they didn’t think a practical machine could really be built. “I was probably wrong, and [Lockheed and D-Wave] were probably right,” he now says. “The D-Wave device is doing something quantum, but it's not clear yet what that something is." Perhaps the bigger question then is whether Lockheed’s multi-million dollar investment is a signal that the company really believes in D-Wave’s quantum computer. At least one theory suggested by those in the quantum computing world is that Lockheed’s gamble is less a bet on the reality of quantum computing, than a bid to win favour with the Canadian government, a key investor in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. “I think from a technology perspective I’m somewhat agnostic to that [idea]: It’s great technology, and it’s a unique capability… and that would have got our attention under almost any circumstance,” says Brad Pietras, vice president of technology for Lockheed Martin. “The fact that the Canadian government is an F-35 partner, and we work closely with them as industrial partners and allies is just a fantastic added bonus to the relationship.” Pietras also isn’t too worried about whether the D-Wave computer has won over all its scientific critics. “In the short-term, my concern is, what is its utility? What problems can we solve?” he says. As for whether the computer is truly “quantum,” Pietras’ answer is simple: “It really isn’t a question that concerns me that much.” . Why Google and the Pentagon want ‘quantum computers’ The search giant and the US space agency are the latest high-profile backers of an experimental machine that could transform computing. But what do they want it for? 2 days ago - Via Community - View - Tony Schwartz : There is a term that was incorrectly used.  The word "opponent".  What they mean is person you want to... There is a term that was incorrectly used.  The word "opponent".  What they mean is person you want to kill because your government has ordered you to do so. Aside from that one mistake this is pretty awesome. Watch the video: F-35 Flight Test Intentional Departure F-35 Test Pilot Dave Nelson talks about intentional departure and recovering from stalls during F-35A high angle of attack testing at Edwards Air Force Base,... 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - Juan Boada : http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/16/lockheed-fighter-australia-idUSL3N0DX17I20130516?feedType=RSS... http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/16/lockheed-fighter-australia-idUSL3N0DX17I20130516?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologySector&rpc=43 Australia heaps praise on F-35, says rivals years behind 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - Muhammad Arif : F-35 Lightining Images Watch F35 Lightning in Skies......... 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - Jarosław Brecht : Pentagon furloughs could slow F-35 program, official says - Dallas Business Journal A top official at Lockheed Martin Corp. (NYSE: LMT) said that the Pentagon's plan... 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - Jarosław Brecht : Watch the video: Canadians Talk About Building the F-35 Hear from Canadians who have a hand in building the F-35. More than 200 Industrial Participation production projects for Canadian Industry have been identifi... 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - Naval Open Source Intelligence : “I don’t have the exact number yet,” Air Force Maj. Gen. Edward Bolton said Tuesday, but to pay the bill... “I don’t have the exact number yet,” Air Force Maj. Gen. Edward Bolton said Tuesday, but to pay the bill for sequestration, the service might have to cut its fiscal 2013 procurements by “two, three, four, maybe even five F-35s.” Naval Open Source INTelligence: F-35: Sequester May Cost Air Force 5 More F-35As; Air Guard, Modernization At Risk F-35B Lightning II “I don't have the exact number yet,” Air Force Maj. Gen. Edward Bolton said Tuesday, but to pay the bill for sequestration, the service might have to cut its fiscal 2013 procurements by “two, three, four, maybe even five F-35s.” “That money's just gone,” sighed Bolton, ... 2 days ago - Via Google+ - View - michael jordan : Picture for +Tom Brydon  Picture for +Tom Brydon  2 days ago - Via Reshared Post - View -