🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0ozH8.4p4.1@cs.cmu.edu>, roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes:

>. Commercial fiber optic cable is great in stationary applications,
>but it's too easy to stretch it or bend it beyond the radius of curvature
>limits. The people who install our fiber optic links put up warning signs
>with a drawing of a hangman's noose, implying what will happen to anybody
>who tries to move the equipment. :-)
>
>Does anybody (the phone companies or the military, for instance) use 
>fiber optic cable that's stiff enough to reduce the risk of breaking?

There are at least two missiles (Army/FOG-M, and a Navy project) which use 
some sort
of spooling mechanism to pay out "cable" (well, probably not more than a
strand). The Army system is (forgive me pureists) basically a longer range TOW
anti-tank missile, designed to be launched off a trailer dragged behind a 
Hummer, and will go against either tanks or helos. The Navy missile is more 
interesting because they pay out cable between a fast moving attack plane and 
the missile at up to hmm, at least 20 kilometers; Army system is some number
not more than 10K.

However, both Army and Navy don't have to worry about rewinding the cable after
the packages are delivered :-)

Both systems have been demonstrated as feasible/workable/makeable, but I'm not
sure what the current political funding headaches are. It's more a matter of
money & politics rather than technology which is holding up full-scale 
production and deployment of both systems.
                    I have talked to Ehud, and lived.
  -- >                  SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU                        < --