News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The physics behind how fire ants band together into robus... by jmpman on Thursday December 12, 2019 @10:48AM (#21772789)
I’ve always wondered why the military hasn’t created massive airship aircraft carriers using a collection of small bladder cells each isolated from the other, inside of a heavily armored hull.

Such a platform could remain stationed above a battlefield, above the range of small arms fire, and if properly constructed, even tolerant of multiple SAM hits.

Re:The physics behind how fire ants band together into robus... by alexhutcheson on Thursday December 12, 2019 @11:19AM (#21773192)
Physics, mostly. To hold the weight of any significant armor, fuel, materiel, etc. you would need an unbelievably large interior space surrounded by a relatively thin exterior.

Deployment is another issue - how do you get it to where it needs to be quickly?

Armor also isn't a good defense against modern missiles. The goal is to intercept or avoid getting hit in the first place, rather than sustain multiple hits.

Re:The physics behind how fire ants band together into robus... by jmpman on Thursday December 12, 2019 @01:49PM (#21774927)
I’m thinking more about a battlefield like Afghanistan, where the opponents aren’t firing anything larger than a stinger, and there is already air superiority. As buoyancy is a function of volume, which increases to the third power, and armor just needs to increase proportional to the surface area, which is the second power, a heavily armored floating aircraft carrier seems possible.
Re:The physics behind how fire ants band together into robus... by jmpman on Thursday December 12, 2019 @02:12PM (#21775184)
A 97000 ton aircraft carrier is equal in weight to the amount of air in a 450M x 450M x 450M cube. Aircraft carriers are only 320M long, so this doesn’t seem that far fetched.