Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DinoNavarre who wrote (691197)	9/18/2019 5:38:01 AM
From: FJB	5 Recommendations Recommended By D. Long DinoNavarre Paul Smith Thehammer Whitebeard Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794338

NY TIMES HAS ZERO CREDIBILITY LEFT 'This time in the Atlantic. "Witnesses Defended Kavanaugh. NYT Authors Falsely Claimed Silence"' Good grief. Is there no end to this shoddy reporting? https://t.co/0ElPBcmAMz — Brit Hume (@brithume) September 17, 2019

To: DinoNavarre who wrote (691197)	9/18/2019 6:09:43 AM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Recommended By DinoNavarre Hoa Hao Thehammer Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794338

INTERESTING

To: DinoNavarre who wrote (691197)	9/19/2019 12:20:36 AM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794338

That article is from... November 2004 ? That's 15 years ago. But, but, but... the media says that we're still years and years behind the Russians in hypersonic weapons technology development ? Although that nuclear powered delivery system Putin said they had... still a really stupid idea which we quit even thinking about screwing around with back in the 60's... just blew up on the launchpad in testing... making yet another Chernobyl-like smoking hole in the middle of Russia. But there are conflicting reports. It seems it might have been sort of like a new concept in a Russian version of a nuclear powered Ford Pinto... like the Pinto making you sorry you ever bought one... even though in this case it proved hypersonic only with the rapid unscheduled disassembly mode occurring, which this link says not during a failed test, but during the failed recovery effort from a previously failed test ? In any case... blowing up nuclear reactors is a bad idea. At the current pace of Russian weapons technology development... there won't be any non-mutant non-zombie Russians left for us to worry about in a couple of years time... Maybe Greenpeace should try to do something about that... ? Anyway, that 15 year old article might help explain why the years long development process mentioned here, in August 2018, with a first flight test of a new weapon system planned for 2021... The B-52 Looks Set To Become The USAF's Hypersonic Weapons Truck Of Choice Took like 10 months ... New B-52 Missile Conducts First Hypersonic Test Well, I saw it "flying" under a wing... I didn't see them shoot the thing off making it fly at hypersonic speeds... so its probably just a captive carry of a mock up or a dummy shape... them proving it won't tear the wing off. I'll continue to be hugely skeptical of all the drum beats (and spending) tied to the hypersonic weapons... The speeds involved do impose really enormous stresses on the vehicles... very challenging in terms of materials and engineering even in terms of looking at uniform ballistic trajectories... with a more dynamic maneuvering requirement in that regime being insanely difficult... which will be making them always at risk of having critical systems and materials failures occurring just because you're flying them that way in that regime... and, that's always going to be putting them at risk of failure... even because they hit a bug or a bit of turbulence... well before you start working to defend against them by causing problems for them that will make them fail. Making them fail will be a whole lot easier than making them work... which defines a few limits. The dynamics vs. Q in the hypersonic regime with varying altitude mean that its like shooting at us with really fast weapons... made out of egg shells. Eggs are really strong... hard to break if you try to squeeze one in your hand... not so much if you drop it... or hit it with a bullet. There's already enough potential energy involved in the mass and the motion in the hypersonic regime to destroy the thing... all you need to do is find a way to initiate the rapid unscheduled disassembly... which didn't prove all that hard in the case of the space shuttles. The biggest risk factors from them are probably in the risks that are realized, as happened in Russia, when they fail... which in itself is an additional risk factor that intrinsically requires making a pretty good effort in targeting them early enough... that they will fail somewhere else. The Russians were very foolish for pushing this forward...