"The Pentagon hopes to exploit sharks' natural ability to glide quietly through the water, sense delicate electrical gradients and follow chemical trails," \n\n"By remotely guiding the sharks' movements they hope to transform the animals into stealth spies, perhaps capable of following vessels without being spotted."\n\nhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060301/od_afp/sciencemilitaryoffbeat_060301191421
122283
I think that you need a lot of answers to this. I am also against the use of animals in trials. I aggree with the previous answerer that it is sad and I will add that it is also scarring the purpose they are using them for.\n\nKaterina
165258
The US Armed Services are pursuing new tactical concepts...among them are Targeting Vehicle, Tactical Mobile Robots, Solar Blind Detectors, Metal Storm, Combat Hybrid Power Systems, and the pre-cursor efforts of the Future Ground Combat System...all coordinated with the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and with DARPA's Small Unit Operations project.  The civilian flights of technicians and engineers continue to and from the Directorate for Development Plans Area (Groom Lake Air Base), so we know something is afoot.
501000
omg fantastic, i love sharks and am hoping to cage dive next year, that clip was shown on sunday on planet earth i think, i missed it but my boyf was going on about it, thanks!
620642
Under what conditions?\n\nI recall seeing an article about a hotel in the Florida Keys that has made a series of underwater "bungaloes" that guests need to SCUBA dive down to, and out of.  Looks like it would be interesting.  And there are deep-sea researchers that live at depth for some time.\n\nBut either one requires a great deal of support at this time, since none of them could be considered self-sufficient.  Perhaps in the future?
527237
Actually it wasn't the plans, but a computer operated machine that could accurately cut the necessary contour on a sub propeller to make it difficult to detect because it was so quiet and gave off a very small acoustic signal.\nThe US government had asked Toshiba not to do it but they went through with it anyway.  \nI don't believe it was a ruse by the US.  I think it was Toshiba trying to make a buck, damn the consequences
359158
The "Active Denial System" is pretty cool, and I heard/read somewhere that it may be deployed in Iraq.  It looks like a square radar dish mounted on a HUMVEE and it sends out an electromagnetic beam that penetrates the skin just deep enough to stimulate the pain receptors.  I imagine it feels like you're wearing a full-body TASER suit.  One of it's proposed uses is for riot and crowd control.\n\nYou might look at all those cell phone towers a bit differently now.  ;-P
264534
It is a myth that sharks have to constantly swim or else drown.  As so often with exotic animals, apex predators in particular, we find such stories to be passed on through generations, and even tons of excellent studies on the animals cannot change commonly held opinion.  What is the basis for this wrongly held believe?\n\nMost "fishes" breath by producing a conintuous water flow over their gills making use of what is called the buccal/opercular pump.  You surely have observed fish in an aquarium before, and have noticed how they rhythmically open and close their mouths.  What you may or may not have seen was that in the same rhythm, only slightly delayed, a bone on the side of the head opened and closed.  What you saw was the buccal/opercular pump at action.  The bone on the side of the head was the operculum.  It covers the gill openings with the gills.  When the fish opens its mouth (i.e., the buccal cavity), the operculum is closed.  The fish fills its mouth with water rich in oxygen, opens the operculum and at the same time closes its mouth.  As an effect, the water is being pressed out through the gill openings and over the gills.  Next, the operculum is closed while at the same time the mouth opens and the cycle is repeated.  By this form of active breathing the animal can indeed achieve a constant flow of water over its gills. \n\nSharks, like all other elasmobranchs (i.e., sharks, skates, and rays) do not have operculi.  Instead, their gill slits are visible at the side of their heads.  Early biologists thought that sharks therefor could not be stationary at the sea bottom, since without an operculum they could not achieve water to flow over their gills and would certainly - believe it or not - drown.  Not quite so.\n\nIt is true, sharks usually breath "inactively", that is they achieve a constant water flow over the gills by swimming with their mouth slightly open.  But quite frequently, sharks can be found stationary on the bottom, where they breath actively.  Like teleost they achieve this feat by opening and closing their mouths.  The lack of operculu certainly makes this form of breathing less sufficient, but the gill openings are constructed like window blinds that are partially closed (or opened, in case you are an optimist...).  In other words, water can be pushed through in one direction, opening the gill slits, but if it were sucked the other way the individual skin flaps collapse on top of one another and close the openings.  It is not the most efficient form of breathing, but it works.  \n\nAt times, you will find animals that hover on the sea floor positioned in a moderate water current so that by simply opening their mouths the current constantly moves water over their gills.  But even without this current, sharks can do quite well breathing actively on the floor.\n\nI suggest, you take your son to an aquarium and check out some of the sharks on display.  I am sure their will be one or two specimens hanging out happily on the floor demonstrating what I just described.\n\nHope this helps.
237577
Spy satellites and communications.  That's all I can say.  If you know where the enemy is and what they are planning, then they have already lost the battle.  Good intelligence is a premium!
135687
For one thing they wanted to prevent the Germans from gaining bases for their U-boats on the Atlantic coast of Africa.\n\nHaven't gotten further then the first 1000 pages of Churchills memoires yet, sorry.
213857
You are right; it's all fluid dynamics, and even though your idea is still a fiction, the technology that could produce it is real enough. At least one Russian submarine is armed with torpedoes that exploit it. The same idea is being used to make guns for destroying underwater mines, and it could double the speed of surface vehicles such as hydrofoils. Most remarkably, it could produce an underwater vessel capable of traveling at thousands of kilometres an hour while remaining almost entirely dry. For the key to this technology lies in the humble bubble. \n \nThe problem holding back ordinary torpedoes was drag. Any object, no matter how streamlined, suffers resistance as it moves through a fluid. In the early 1960s, Mikhail Merkulov at the Hydrodynamics Institute in Kiev realised that the solution lay in a phenomenon called cavitation. It was a daring idea, because naval architects usually see cavitation as a menace, rather than something that works to their advantage. But supercavitation is a different matter - under certain conditions, a single bubble or supercavity can be formed, enveloping the moving object almost completely. \n \n Supercavitation is hard to achieve - the body has to be going pretty fast, at least 180 kilometres an hour, or 50 metres per second and the shape of the nose also has to be right, say researchers. Rather than being streamlined, a supercavitating object needs a flat nose. Then, at high speeds, the fluid is forced to flow off the edge of the nose with such speed and at such an angle that it can't wrap around the surface of the body. A supercavitating body has extremely low drag, because its skin friction almost disappears. Instead of being encased in water, it is surrounded by the water vapour in the supercavity, which has much lower viscosity and density. So in a supercavitating vehicle, only the nose of the craft causes significant drag, because this is the only part of the body actually in contact with the water. \n \nAccording to Mark Galeotti, a defence expert at Keele University in Staffordshire, prototypes of the torpedo appeared in the 1980s, but there was still plenty of work to be done. "It was only in the early 1990s that the Russians were in a position to produce a proper working torpedo," says Galeotti. Called Shkval, meaning squall, it is said to be capable of speeds as high as 500 kilometres an hour. It is fired like an arrow from the submarine, possibly with a mechanical catapult. That gets it moving fast enough for the cavity to form, so that its rocket can be lit. The Russians had built themselves a formidable weapon. Shkval leaves enemy torpedoes standing, and can knock out an opposing sub before it has time to react. It could even be used defensively to intercept enemy torpedoes. \n\nJust a few years after Shkval's debut, NUWC (USA) researchers announced they had gone supersonic. An unpowered projectile, with a carefully designed flat nose and fired from an underwater gun, broke the sound barrier in water. That's nearly 5400 kilometres per hour--or 1.5 kilometres per second. Lacking any onboard power to sustain its motion, the shell slowed rapidly, but this was still a vivid demonstration of the speeds that supercavitation makes possible. Already they aren't very far off the 2.5 kilometre-per-second speed record for conventional munitions in air, and scientists have calculated that their supercavitating projectiles should be able to match or even surpass this. \n\nBut there are plenty of technological hurdles. One thing still needed is a powerful and compact propulsion system. An aluminium-burning rocket is one answer. It would use water as its oxidiser, and so wouldn't need to carry oxygen. The problem with aluminium has been that unreacted fuel quickly becomes coated with aluminium oxide, inhibiting any further reaction. To avoid this, powdered aluminium can be injected into a vortex of water, which keeps the burning, molten drops apart. Alu
385596
Any one who as seen the photos that were supplied to to the media  through various news outlets has to come to the sober conclusion that it was not a 737 airplane that hit the Pentagon.\n What is disturbing is why did they hold on to these videos for so long? Were their video experts "enhancing" it at the Pentagon all this time?
62136
There's this little news story now,  it takes a large chunk of time on national news and print and tv,  remember its the thing about Bush authorizing the NSA to listen to cell phone calls.\n\nSo able danger ended with some admiral or general saying we were told not to pursue what we had cause some white house clinton lawyer told us not to go any farther,\nand now george bush's lawyer, the attorney general, is saying its legal for us to spy and take action\n\nkick @ss
128878
i've just asked myself the same question a few hours ago. i guess it's for them to be able to face their fears. or maybe the scientists just wanted to torture them. :P
624010
Yes they are hiding it.  and No, i'm not an alien but i have met a few of them.  lmao.  I used to work in the Navy in special forces, in there we see things.  thats all i'm saying.
655543
How's this for a conspiracy theory.\n\nhttp://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/
152936
Stalking....really. kind of an art to it. You have to kind of move when they move ...watch how they step..and watch your breathing..it can be learned...I think you can find it in an old commando manual somewhere. check the link below, they might have some books about it.
513455
Amazing the amount of engineering effort that has gone into guided missiles.\n\nGenerally it is necessary to "lock on" to a target using some type of signal (heat in the case of "heat seeking"). The electronics that record the signal needs to have "quadrature" at least ; it provides a different signal or indication to tell the quadrant ((+,+), (+,-),(-,-) or (-,+)).\nThe direction of the missile is then adjusted by the use of compressed gas jets often located near the nose.\n\nOf course there are many way to do this and the newest technology is IR video imaging with computer target recognition etc.