Crazy ideas thread

[Coalescence]

I think Ocean is to large, maybe minor seas like bohai sea or baltic seas, and as you said not to much of it, since aquatic life needs light.

Also White paint is good, but actual maybe cheap mirrors reflect like 99.9% i guess.


In the same way we can cover chinas inland reservoirs, for example those of the north south water transfer project with it to reduce evaporation of water and at the same time reflect.

There is also idea to use concentrated solar power mirrors to heat sea water to desalinate which at least uses the heat of the sun for industrial purposes.


Put some of those im Gobi and built a canal so that sea water from Bohai enters the dome and voila, fresh water.

And from the remaining Brine China can exteact Lithium & Uranium.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

White paint could work, but the advantage of these shade balls is doesn't need a structure built to be painted on, and it can be scaled up and installed easily by just flooding it on the bodies of water like a ball pit. While mirrors can reflect almost all the light its a bit more expensive compared to the plastic used in shade ball, and there's also factors like the mirror losing its reflectiveness overtime.

Another good location to flood these would be on the Artic ocean where there's not a lot of human activity or wildlife there that can be disrupted. But I'm starting wonder if these sea spaces should be utilized more better, like having solar panels on top of the bodies of water.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Desalination is another topic I'm interested in as well. There's a lot of possible industrial chemical uses for brine, that I hope will become scalable and help make desalination more cheaper and possibly profitable in the future.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[ficker22]

Another good location to flood these would be on the Artic ocean where there's not a lot of human activity or wildlife there that can be disrupted.

True I can fully see the red marked bays being sealed with those white ballies to compensate ice loss, but we must consider mechanisms so that the dont float away.

But some cuntish nation claim antarctica, so this again this will be internationally disputed by some.

 

[ficker22]

White paint could work, but the advantage of these shade balls is doesn't need a structure built to be painted on, and it can be scaled up and installed easily by just flooding it on the bodies of water like a ball pit. While mirrors can reflect almost all the light its a bit more expensive compared to the plastic used in shade ball, and there's also factors like the mirror losing its reflectiveness overtime.

Another good location to flood these would be on the Artic ocean where there's not a lot of human activity or wildlife there that can be disrupted. But I'm starting wonder if these sea spaces should be utilized more better, like having solar panels on top of the bodies of water.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Desalination is another topic I'm interested in as well. There's a lot of possible industrial chemical uses for brine, that I hope will become scalable and help make desalination more cheaper and possibly profitable in the future.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Also, if white plastic balls are to expensive and ecological unfriendly (plastics and stuff), we can also generate artifical clouds.

Cumulus and Stratus have similiar reflective properties as snow.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If we then can force the path of the clouds via, lets say the Jet Stream, which convienently flies over Tibet, Gobi and Taklamakan, and we achieve forceful percipitationmover those regions, we create more freshwater resources in China.

I for one would wish if parts of the Tarim Basin can be flooded that way greater a sea sized freshwater lake in Tarim. Also forced percipitation over Tibet should create new glaciers and stop existing ones from Melting.

The middle of Tarim where Taklimakan is, is deeper than cities like Korla, so these places will become Beach resorts!

 

[Coalescence]

Also, if white plastic balls are to expensive and ecological unfriendly (plastics and stuff), we can also generate artifical clouds.

Cumulus and Stratus have similiar reflective properties as snow.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If we then can force the path of the clouds via, lets say the Jet Stream, which convienently flies over Tibet, Gobi and Taklamakan, and we achieve forceful percipitationmover those regions, we create more freshwater resources in China.

I for one would wish if parts of the Tarim Basin can be flooded that way greater a sea sized freshwater lake in Tarim. Also forced percipitation over Tibet should create new glaciers and stop existing ones from Melting.

The middle of Tarim where Taklimakan is, is deeper than cities like Korla, so these places will become Beach resorts!

Artificial clouds requires more maintenance and doesn't last very long, but could be a good way to change the local weather temporarily for respite from drought and hot weather. I wonder if we could have boats with mirrors to concentrate solar light into a dome to create precipitation to make require less energy and maintenance. Would be interesting to see what solutions can be come up with to force the path of the clouds.

Also on the previous point about artic sea claim issues and shade balls floating away, all massive geo-engineering projects would require international or regional consent from multiple countries, so its not an issue exclusive to the shade balls idea. The shade ball could be anchored maybe through tethers or some naval engineering, but I don't think it should be a big of an issue as it will be equivalent to plastic bags floating on the sea of water. It would still be able to fulfill its purpose, even if its not herded together, since each one of them will still reflect light off to space.

 

[solarz]

In the realm of crazy (or maybe not so crazy) ideas, I think drones are the future of warfare. They will eventually replace all manned aircraft in all roles, and they will be controlled by AI instead of remote pilots.

Much like how destroyers displaced battleships, we may see small drone carriers displace the massive supercarriers of today. We may even see submarine drone carriers. Hell, we may even see drone submarine drone carriers.

What if we could engineer a drone that can be launched from underwater? A drone that can swim its way to the surface and take flight, while carrying sufficient ordinance. Or maybe submarine suicide drones that patrol the sea and automatically attack enemy surface craft.

In fact, submarine drones might be an under-appreciated revolutionary weapon. Imagine being able to deploy thousands of self-navigating torpedoes: surface fleets may very well be rendered obsolete by such a development!

 

[AndrewS]

In the realm of crazy (or maybe not so crazy) ideas, I think drones are the future of warfare. They will eventually replace all manned aircraft in all roles, and they will be controlled by AI instead of remote pilots.

Much like how destroyers displaced battleships, we may see small drone carriers displace the massive supercarriers of today. We may even see submarine drone carriers. Hell, we may even see drone submarine drone carriers.

What if we could engineer a drone that can be launched from underwater? A drone that can swim its way to the surface and take flight, while carrying sufficient ordinance. Or maybe submarine suicide drones that patrol the sea and automatically attack enemy surface craft.

In fact, submarine drones might be an under-appreciated revolutionary weapon. Imagine being able to deploy thousands of self-navigating torpedoes: surface fleets may very well be rendered obsolete by such a development!

Not a crazy idea.

Unmanned and autonomous airborne drones are a given. High-medium altitude drones will be first as they are easiest.
Then autonomous low-altitude drones and handheld tactical drones afterwards. The cost versus performance ratio will be too compelling.

But I don't see smaller drone naval carriers completely displacing massive supercarriers, because large carriers do have certain advantages.
So I would expect to see a combination of smaller drone carriers and large carriers to become the optimal fleet configuration (in terms of cost, effectiveness and survivability)

I also don't see a dedicated submarine which carries large numbers of airborne drones as viable. It's a huge additional cost and such a submarine would have many drawbacks compared to a surface ship.

But submarines which can launch a smaller number of underwater/surface/airborne drones would be a very useful capability, and my gut tells me these capabilities would be worth the cost.

 

[Squidward]

When discussing airborne troops in a taiwan scenario, it seems like the general consensus is that parachuting in troops with Y-20s and such is unfiesable due to the possibility of getting shot down by random MANPADS. That's fair enough, considering they do have to get pretty close to the target location to drop paratroopers.

Hear me out here. How about instead of parachutes, you give your airborne troops folding hang gliders or wingsuits? If dropped from high enough they should be able to glide for a few dozen kilometers, allowing you to insert troops from the air much farther away, giving your transports a higher chance of survival since you could be dropping them outside the range of short range AA missiles.

It's not like they'll be any more vulnerable than a slowly falling paratrooper, either. A bunch of guys in wingsuits silhouetteed against the terrain are going to be harder to spot both visually and with radar compared to a giant transport plane, not to mention they will be moving faster and have the ability to maneuver and dodge in case they come under fire. The only problem I can see is that it might be hard to land in forested regions, but then again, parachutes get caught on trees too.

Imagine dropping a team in tilted towers in fortnite, except it's a squad of special forces, the battle bus is replaced with a Y-20, and instead of tilted towers they drop behind enemy lines instead. Absolutely foolproof idea, there's no way this could go wrong.

 

[AndrewS]

When discussing airborne troops in a taiwan scenario, it seems like the general consensus is that parachuting in troops with Y-20s and such is unfiesable due to the possibility of getting shot down by random MANPADS. That's fair enough, considering they do have to get pretty close to the target location to drop paratroopers.

The planes would likely be flying too high for MANPADs. But the planes would still be easy targets for anything larger than a MANPAD.

Hear me out here. How about instead of parachutes, you give your airborne troops folding hang gliders or wingsuits? If dropped from high enough they should be able to glide for a few dozen kilometers, allowing you to insert troops from the air much farther away, giving your transports a higher chance of survival since you could be dropping them outside the range of short range AA missiles.

It's not like they'll be any more vulnerable than a slowly falling paratrooper, either. A bunch of guys in wingsuits silhouetteed against the terrain are going to be harder to spot both visually and with radar compared to a giant transport plane, not to mention they will be moving faster and have the ability to maneuver and dodge in case they come under fire. The only problem I can see is that it might be hard to land in forested regions, but then again, parachutes get caught on trees too.

Imagine dropping a team in tilted towers in fortnite, except it's a squad of special forces, the battle bus is replaced with a Y-20, and instead of tilted towers they drop behind enemy lines instead. Absolutely foolproof idea, there's no way this could go wrong.

View attachment 89704

Where are the supplies and equipment?

 

[plawolf]

Standard parachute drops require transports to fly fairly low, that will absolutely bring them within MANPAD range.

This is because paratroopers are only qualified to do static line jumps, where they are attached by a chord to the plane. And when they jump out, the chord automatically deploys their parachute.

This method significantly reduces the training requirements as troopers only need to learn how to control their parachutes and land without hurting themselves and basic emergency procedures on how to cut their main and deploy their reserve chute if needed.

The downside is you need to drop them fairly low else your risk them getting scattered too widely and/or drifting way off their target LZs due to winds.

For transports to fly high enough to evade all MANPADs and most SAMs, you are looking to be doing HALO jumps, which are basically currently only done by tier 1 special forces.

You will need specialist breathing gear for all troops, and all troops will need significantly more parachute training to be able to perform freefall jumps as opposed to static line jumps that all paratroopers are currently qualified on.

Even if you make that massive investment in gear and training, you will still run into barriers and limitations in terms of numbers you can safely drop at once, and their support equipment, as no one has even tried to HALO drop heavy loads like IFVs and pallets of munitions and supplies. So even if you can make large scale paratrooper HALO insertions, just how useful are division strength paratroopers with zero ground transport or heavy weapons going to be?

 

[Mohsin77]

I'll get the ball rolling and ask whether anyone has ever tried to parachute onto the deck of a flat top warship like carriers or LHDs.

The idea occurred to me when I was watching Captain Phillips, when the SEALs were inserted into the battlegroup. Some amazing panoramic areo shots of the USN fleet, and at one point I honestly thought the SEALs were going to land right onto the LHD deck.

Fun question.

So, I've done a free fall jump (only a level 1 PFF course) and from what I can tell, this would be a no-go.

Assuming it's night time, with NOGs, maybe bad weather, if you miss your landing zone by a few feet, you're in the water. Let's say you have a team of 12, and 1 guy ends in the water... then what? If you've got boats to recover him, why wouldn't you just use those boats to get on board in the first place?

Next, let's assume you land on the ship. Now your problems really begin. The tangos are gonna see you landing on their ship with a huge frekkin parachute. So you will be engaged immediately, plus you're surrounded. And your team is not landing at the exact same time. So they can pick off your team one by one as you land. It's gonna be like landing in the middle of a meat grinder.

Nah, this is too ninja!! Just use boats. You can at least return fire if you get spotted and abort if needed.