|
jaxashby caught in his own lie
yeah, geocities.
shen, you don't seem to have enough intelligenc to be able to figure out -- on your best day -- that eric made that quote up. You're hilarious. First, you don't even know who you're responding to. And second, if you actually had enough "intelligenc" to do a google search you'd see that he didn't make it up at all, that it's a verbatim cut'n'paste from he http://www.geocities.com/minuteman_missile/specs.htm So tell me again how ICBMs have no navigation system... Steve Minuteman ICBM Technical Specifications: Guidance: Improved NS-20 (INS-20) gimbaled inertial guidance system manufactured by Autonetics Division, Rockwell International. The bus, or post-boost vehicle, is maneuvered by six pitch and yaw motors, and four smaller roll motors. Current plans are to retrofit the existing force with the gimballess AIRS (advanced inertial reference sphere) developed for the Peacekeeper (MX) missile. This will increase accuracy to 330ft (100 m), comparable to the Peacekeeper. Jax is too funny. Now he's trying to convince people that the inertial navigation system in ICBMs that guide them to "aim towards a target as they lift off" (his words) is not a navigation system. Talk about not even knowing English as a language. Steve (JAXAshby) wrote in message ... Ah, I see. So then since the ICBMs are in the silos pointing straight up and they have no navigation system, then the only thing they could ever possibly hit is the silo that launched them. Very good. You nailed that one too. who said that couldn't be programed to turned to aim towards a target as they lift off. Who said that was a "navigation" system. dumb cluck. don't even know English as a language. |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
On 19 Mar 2004 15:21:12 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:
yeah, geocities. Well, at least we now know that you know you were wrong when you said he made that quote up. But since you don't like geocities, how about these for starters: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=113 LGM-30 MINUTEMAN III Primary Function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance systems: Inertial system http://www.strategic-air-command.com..._Home_Page.htm Peacekeeper Primary function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance system: Inertial ....the MX's extremely accurate guidance--an inertial system capable of being updated in flight by signals from navigation satellites... Damn Jax, if you were only smart enough to do a google search on "ICBM navigation system" you'd realize how wrong you are. Steve shen, you don't seem to have enough intelligenc to be able to figure out -- on your best day -- that eric made that quote up. You're hilarious. First, you don't even know who you're responding to. And second, if you actually had enough "intelligenc" to do a google search you'd see that he didn't make it up at all, that it's a verbatim cut'n'paste from he http://www.geocities.com/minuteman_missile/specs.htm So tell me again how ICBMs have no navigation system... Steve Minuteman ICBM Technical Specifications: Guidance: Improved NS-20 (INS-20) gimbaled inertial guidance system manufactured by Autonetics Division, Rockwell International. The bus, or post-boost vehicle, is maneuvered by six pitch and yaw motors, and four smaller roll motors. Current plans are to retrofit the existing force with the gimballess AIRS (advanced inertial reference sphere) developed for the Peacekeeper (MX) missile. This will increase accuracy to 330ft (100 m), comparable to the Peacekeeper. Jax is too funny. Now he's trying to convince people that the inertial navigation system in ICBMs that guide them to "aim towards a target as they lift off" (his words) is not a navigation system. Talk about not even knowing English as a language. Steve (JAXAshby) wrote in message ... Ah, I see. So then since the ICBMs are in the silos pointing straight up and they have no navigation system, then the only thing they could ever possibly hit is the silo that launched them. Very good. You nailed that one too. who said that couldn't be programed to turned to aim towards a target as they lift off. Who said that was a "navigation" system. dumb cluck. don't even know English as a language. |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
schlackoff, English even as a third language is way beyond you. You are
FORBIDDEN to own an EPIRB. Let Darwin teach you how to navigate. now, about that NewSpeak you found -- the one that change the word "ballistic" to "guided" without changing the word, AND the one that changes the word "intercontinental" to "short range" without changing the word ... yeah, geocities. Well, at least we now know that you know you were wrong when you said he made that quote up. But since you don't like geocities, how about these for starters: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=113 LGM-30 MINUTEMAN III Primary Function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance systems: Inertial system http://www.strategic-air-command.com...eacekeeper_Mis sile_Home_Page.htm Peacekeeper Primary function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance system: Inertial ...the MX's extremely accurate guidance--an inertial system capable of being updated in flight by signals from navigation satellites... Damn Jax, if you were only smart enough to do a google search on "ICBM navigation system" you'd realize how wrong you are. Steve shen, you don't seem to have enough intelligenc to be able to figure out -- on your best day -- that eric made that quote up. You're hilarious. First, you don't even know who you're responding to. And second, if you actually had enough "intelligenc" to do a google search you'd see that he didn't make it up at all, that it's a verbatim cut'n'paste from he http://www.geocities.com/minuteman_missile/specs.htm So tell me again how ICBMs have no navigation system... Steve Minuteman ICBM Technical Specifications: Guidance: Improved NS-20 (INS-20) gimbaled inertial guidance system manufactured by Autonetics Division, Rockwell International. The bus, or post-boost vehicle, is maneuvered by six pitch and yaw motors, and four smaller roll motors. Current plans are to retrofit the existing force with the gimballess AIRS (advanced inertial reference sphere) developed for the Peacekeeper (MX) missile. This will increase accuracy to 330ft (100 m), comparable to the Peacekeeper. Jax is too funny. Now he's trying to convince people that the inertial navigation system in ICBMs that guide them to "aim towards a target as they lift off" (his words) is not a navigation system. Talk about not even knowing English as a language. Steve (JAXAshby) wrote in message ... Ah, I see. So then since the ICBMs are in the silos pointing straight up and they have no navigation system, then the only thing they could ever possibly hit is the silo that launched them. Very good. You nailed that one too. who said that couldn't be programed to turned to aim towards a target as they lift off. Who said that was a "navigation" system. dumb cluck. don't even know English as a language. |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
|
jaxashby caught in his own lie
bass, **IN THE CONTEXT** given, the difference in distance over 120 nm is about
0.000872225 miles, or a little over 3 feet. Oh, I totally understand the differences between planar and spherical mathematics. I also understand that you are foolish if you think that, when measuring distances across the earth's surface, there is absolutely no way that planar math will give you the correct distance. No more that than in ANY circle. The chord length will ALWAYS be shorter than the arc length of the same segment. Do you disagree with this statement? If so, how? |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
From an English language dictionary.
note how the term differs from a *guided* missile, which is NOT thrown. "ballistic" is the term that differeniates the two weapons. ICBM abbr. intercontinental ballistic missile inter- pref. Between; among: international bal·lis·tic adj. Of or relating to the study of the dynamics of projectiles pro·jec·tile n. A fired, thrown, or otherwise propelled object, such as a bullet, having no capacity for self-propulsion. A self-propelled missile, such as a rocket. |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
On 19 Mar 2004 17:33:40 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:
schlackoff, English even as a third language is way beyond you. You are FORBIDDEN to own an EPIRB. Let Darwin teach you how to navigate. now, about that NewSpeak you found -- the one that change the word "ballistic" to "guided" without changing the word, AND the one that changes the word "intercontinental" to "short range" without changing the word ... You're too funny Jax. According to your strict definition, a bullet is not ballistic either since it's guided by the gun barrel for the initial portion of it's flight and travels in a straight line, not a ballistic flight path, for that portion of it's journey to the target. Well, an ICBM is just like a bullet. It's guided for the initial portion of it's trip to the target and follows a ballistic trajectory for the final portion. The only difference is that the bullet's guidance system is the barrel and the ICBM's is an inertial navigation system or now GPS. JaxSpeak is certainly a strange language. Are you now going to try and claim that a bullet fired from a gun is not ballistic since it's guided by the barrel? Steve yeah, geocities. Well, at least we now know that you know you were wrong when you said he made that quote up. But since you don't like geocities, how about these for starters: http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=113 LGM-30 MINUTEMAN III Primary Function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance systems: Inertial system http://www.strategic-air-command.com...eacekeeper_Mis sile_Home_Page.htm Peacekeeper Primary function: Intercontinental ballistic missile Guidance system: Inertial ...the MX's extremely accurate guidance--an inertial system capable of being updated in flight by signals from navigation satellites... Damn Jax, if you were only smart enough to do a google search on "ICBM navigation system" you'd realize how wrong you are. Steve shen, you don't seem to have enough intelligenc to be able to figure out -- on your best day -- that eric made that quote up. You're hilarious. First, you don't even know who you're responding to. And second, if you actually had enough "intelligenc" to do a google search you'd see that he didn't make it up at all, that it's a verbatim cut'n'paste from he http://www.geocities.com/minuteman_missile/specs.htm So tell me again how ICBMs have no navigation system... Steve Minuteman ICBM Technical Specifications: Guidance: Improved NS-20 (INS-20) gimbaled inertial guidance system manufactured by Autonetics Division, Rockwell International. The bus, or post-boost vehicle, is maneuvered by six pitch and yaw motors, and four smaller roll motors. Current plans are to retrofit the existing force with the gimballess AIRS (advanced inertial reference sphere) developed for the Peacekeeper (MX) missile. This will increase accuracy to 330ft (100 m), comparable to the Peacekeeper. Jax is too funny. Now he's trying to convince people that the inertial navigation system in ICBMs that guide them to "aim towards a target as they lift off" (his words) is not a navigation system. Talk about not even knowing English as a language. Steve (JAXAshby) wrote in message ... Ah, I see. So then since the ICBMs are in the silos pointing straight up and they have no navigation system, then the only thing they could ever possibly hit is the silo that launched them. Very good. You nailed that one too. who said that couldn't be programed to turned to aim towards a target as they lift off. Who said that was a "navigation" system. dumb cluck. don't even know English as a language. |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
Jaxie's original "context" was actually simply mathematics. His "planar"
comment was part of the great "3 dimensional vector" discussion, where jaxie revealed his ignorance in a variety of disciplines. (The ICBM comment was also from that.) His actual comment was: "btw, if vectors are "3 dimensional", just how can they be used at a point on the Earth's surface (which by definition is planer)." And on ICBM's: "An Inter Continental Ballistic Missile is "ballistic" and thus has no navigation system." And, of course, jaxie just made up his "answer," and was wrong by a few orders of magnitude. The difference between a Rhumb Line and a Great Circle route can be a tenth of a mile on a 120 mile trip, and almost a degree on initial heading at mid latitudes. Not a great difference, I'd argue that there are difference aspects of the "non-planar" nature of the ocean that are of more relevance to the coastal sailor. In fact, one sees the effect on any trip longer than a few miles. Of course, near the poles this could be more significant At 70 N, for instance, to go 100 miles East your heading should be 87.6 degrees. "JAXAshby" wrote in message ... bass, **IN THE CONTEXT** given, the difference in distance over 120 nm is about 0.000872225 miles, or a little over 3 feet. Oh, I totally understand the differences between planar and spherical mathematics. I also understand that you are foolish if you think that, when measuring distances across the earth's surface, there is absolutely no way that planar math will give you the correct distance. No more that than in ANY circle. The chord length will ALWAYS be shorter than the arc length of the same segment. Do you disagree with this statement? If so, how? |
jaxashby caught in his own lie
You're too funny Jax. According to your strict definition, a bullet is
not ballistic either since it's guided by the gun barrel for the initial portion of it's flight and travels in a straight line, not a ballistic flight path, for that portion of it's journey to the target. ballistic \Bal*lis"tic\, a. 1. Of or pertaining to the ballista, or to the art of hurling stones or missile weapons by means of an engine. ballistic adj : relating to or characteristic of the motion of objects moving under their own momentum and the force of gravity; "ballistic missile" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com