Military Equipment Sperging Thread - The Tiger II is a better tank than the M1 Abrams edition

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
WelperHelper99 said:
Only if it knows where it is
Click to expand...
polakrobak99 said:
Well yeah, that's what a drone is, a shitty but cheap missile. It only knows the whereabouts of where it is, but it's good enough.
Click to expand...
The missile has no fucking idea where it is at any time.

It doesn't know anything, and it doesn't know where it is, or where it isn't, in fact, it could just be fucking anywhere, whichever is greater, it doesn't obtain anything, nor a deviation.

The guidance sub-system doesn't fucking work, even with all the miscalculated deviations, and the corrective commands it generates don't actually 'correct' jack shit. These misguided commands will send the missile to a point where it is, to somewhere it isn't, maybe. We really don't fucking know at all where it is and the missile doesn't either.

Consequently, the position the missile is in at any given time is colloquially referred to as 'lost', or as our researchers have gathered, the word 'gone' also suffices. The position from where it is to where it isn't, isn't an exact number, and every position the missile finds itself in will have the missile be just as lost as it was before.

In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system still has no fucking clue what's going on.

The variation between where it is and where it isn't means nothing to us, it means nothing to the missile, and it means nothing to you.

If the variation is or should be considered to be a significant factor, this is entirely lost on us, and the GEA is of no help whatsoever. The missile cannot be corrected. It is its own free agent.

In accordance to not knowing where it is, or isn't, the missile does not know where it was, or will be.

The missile guidance computing scenario doesn't work as follows:

If a variation has modified some sort of information the missile thinks it has obtained, it is not sure just where it is, and is justly not sure where it isn't within reason, and reasonably so, does not know where it was or will be.

The missile cannot subtract anything because it does not know math, and we do not either, as no math was involved during the construction of this missile.

By differentiating these randomly generated variables, this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be and where it is, it is now able to determine a single correct deviation and variation by 'air', with the only thing we and the stupid ass missile knowing for certain being that the missile will, inevitably, hit something, eventually.
 
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
Why not?
Click to expand...
Because that's not how the term is used, I don't know if you two are retarded or something, but I'm trying to give you a lesson in descriptive linguistics, the term "drone" is right now being used as follows: if it's cheap&numbers-based it's a drone, if it's expensive&precise it's a missile. A ballistic missile with MIRVs is not cheap and it's not really saturation based even if it has decoys (it's a strategic weapon). But a drone costs a few hundred k at most and can be sent in numbers to saturate defenses of some tactical target.
 
polakrobak99 said:
Drones are not launched from space
Click to expand...
We have air, ground, sea, undersea, and probably underground drones too by now, I don't see how space is any different. In fact, considering X-37, I'd say space is perfect for drones.

This just doesn't seem any less arbitrary than anything else.
 
VF-1J Armored Valkyrie said:
We have air, ground, sea, undersea, and probably underground drones too by now, I don't see how space is any different. In fact, considering X-37, I'd say space is perfect for drones.

This just doesn't seem any less arbitrary than anything else.
Click to expand...
Again, you're either ragebaiting or retarded: the way the term drone is currently being used is about the price — everything in space is 100x more expensive so you won't have space-based drones, and if you, it's going to be named something else. Yes, in the past everything unmanned was called a drone, but now we're going to get unmanned fighters, bombers, ships, etc. — so a distinction will develop, in fact it already has started developing, where cheap/throwaway/saturation weapons are being called drones, and actual high-tech weapons like semi-intelligent cruise missiles, unmanned vehicles, will get their own names.

>arbitrary
Terminology is necessarily arbitrary. There are no exceptions to this.
 
polakrobak99 said:
the way the term drone is currently being used is about the price
Click to expand...
Price is also relative you dipshit. If one piece of autonomous space equipment is 10x more expensive than the other then why is the cheaper one not a "space drone"? Unless there's a concrete monetary value that serves as the cutoff point, in which case you better state that number right now.
 
polakrobak99 said:
Again, you're either ragebaiting or retarded:
Click to expand...
Haha, no, you. You can't decide whether you want your terms to be prescriptive or descriptive; is there an actual concrete basis for a definition, or are you simply leaning on how the linguistic hive-mind of the industry is using the term this week? If we're going based a value philosophy of cost vs attrition like you say, new middle-of-the-road offerings like Barracuda and Wolf Pack are already really stressing that logic. If we are admitting that the meaning of 'drone' is arbitrarily determined by what the industry decides to slap it onto, which would be terminology being necessarily arbitrary as you also paradoxically describe, then an ultra-expensive SR-72 concept can be a drone and this rubric of cost vs attrition is meaningless.

Pick a fucking lane.
 
donksmanSupreme42 said:
how tf, it's just a lawnmower with wings and a bomb strapped to it, it probably only costs at most 5000$ to make
Click to expand...
I think the most expensive part of it is the guidance stuff. It has to get it's info somewhere and it has to be sturdy enough to handle basic jamming measures.
 
donksmanSupreme42 said:
how tf, it's just a lawnmower with wings and a bomb strapped to it, it probably only costs at most 5000$ to make
Click to expand...
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
How the fuck are you a kike and you don't understand kikery?
Click to expand...
If fellow tribesmen are in the room, this is a great time to bring up how even before Iran took down that RQ-170, Israel was setting up our current timeline by selling Harpy drones to China so that it could eventually trickle downward into the Shaheds we see today.
 
Yeah you two nigger-brained imbeciles are getting blocked. Go fly your ballistic missile hypersonic nuclear reentry vehicle/cold war era mach 3 spy plane """drone""" or something and stop wasting my time.

donksmanSupreme42 said:
how tf, it's just a lawnmower with wings and a bomb strapped to it, it probably only costs at most 5000$ to make
Click to expand...
The missile must know where it is, and turns out, it's really hard to figure where you are when you are being blasted with radioelectronic noise from all around you. You need jam-resistant phased array antennas for GPS, multimodal redundant INS with ultra-low drift, a powerful processor to synthesize nav data from various sensors and try to figure out what's jamming and what's not, etc, etc.

Leylon Sneed said:
Iran manufactures that locally, the part they've had to import has been the aluminum engine. It was German last I checked.
Click to expand...
The only thing Iran can manufacture is the consent for getting fucked in the ass with a bunker buster. That thing is made in CHAYNA
 
The Grognard said:
I think the most expensive part of it is the guidance stuff. It has to get it's info somewhere and it has to be sturdy enough to handle basic jamming measures.
Click to expand...
believe me, it can't handle any jamming lmao

polakrobak99 said:
You need jam-resistant phased array antennas for GPS, multimodal redundant INS with ultra-low drift, a powerful processor to synthesize nav data from various sensors and try to figure out what's jamming and what's not, etc, etc.
Click to expand...
thats not what's in a shahed lol, these things really are lawnmowers with wings, a cheap GPS reciever, khamenei's shittiest inertial navigation system and a bomb

VF-1J Armored Valkyrie said:
If fellow tribesmen are in the room, this is a great time to bring up how even before Iran took down that RQ-170, Israel was setting up our current timeline by selling Harpy drones to China so that it could eventually trickle downward into the Shaheds we see today.
Click to expand...
yeah, t'was a mistake in the long run, but we used to be neutral to china, they also weren't yet seen as an existential threat by the US
 
polakrobak99 said:
The only thing Iran can manufacture is the consent for getting fucked in the ass with a bunker buster. That thing is made in CHAYNA
Click to expand...
I don't know if you're actually retarded, or just pretending. Iran manufactures ballistic missiles, they have domestic F4 and F5 variants, they make a MBT. The reason we knew they were even developing the Shahid was because of the bulk order of engines, which for all I know they have figured out manufacturing for by now. The inertial guidance in Shahids is the same they use in their BMs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom