The rocket launched Monday suffered a similar fate. "Rocket booster re-entry, landing burn & leg deploy were good, but lost hull integrity right after splashdown (aka kaboom)," Musk wrote on Twitter.
The failure may have been a bit on the energetic side; trying for a soft touch down with enough rocket fuel ant oxidiser to do a soft touch down is always potentially exciting.
What I've pieced together is it's a 50 cal smooth-bore discarding sabot system, the round is aerodynamically stable with the center of gravity ahead of the aerodynamic center and is fin stabilized. The round has no inertial guidance so I assume that it wouldn't be able to use nutating scanning techniques and any spin would be unnecessary complication.
Cryptographic modulation, more likely none in the first interation, then a very profitable MWO to add a simple coherency signal adapted by reading a barcode on the round as it's loaded.
An obvious countermeasure would be to have the laser turn on only when the trigger is pulled. With a velocity of about a km per sec, the bullet won't give you much time to "remove yourself from the area".
So it'll be easy to recognise the important bad-guy because he'll be the one wearing the MILES gear, a second doesn't give you enough time to vacate the area, but you only have to move farther that the bullet has time to correct.
The likely target of this weapon is going to be some impoverished kid wiring up a dud mortar round as an IED by the side of the road.
Yeah right, the chain of command is going to authorize shooting a $50K bullet at a kid; also if somebody has to paint the target, then only a few dollars more gets you a live video feed so command can watch and control any engagements. I see this as being a replacement for the AGM-114, Hellfire missile on Predator and Reaper drones against soft, point targets. One problem we're having now is the bad-guys is using tactics that maximise collateral damage. these bullets will counter those tactics and give our drones he ability to engage many more targets.
It's called the 80-20 rule or the Pareto principal 20% of the people produce 80% of the wealth and it nothing new. If 80% is produced by 20%, then it follows that 64% is produced by 4% and 51% by 1%!
They better, Asia is the contenent that's the greatest net emmiter of CO2 in the world, after them it's Africa, then Europe, then North America; Antartica is at breakeven, South America is a net sequesterer and surprisingly Australian is the biggest land CO2 sink.
" The GCMs really do not seem to work."
why do you think that? they work very well. They have even lead us to make new discoveries about the climate.
" They clearly run way too hot. "
no, they doi not. Another baseless statement I suspect you have no clue how models work. in general, much less in any specific field.
When I keep seeing graphics like this and and this which all show the majority of computer climate models over-prediction the current temperatures.
I'm going to ask you a question. If you can not answer it, then you need to STFU and learn some science.
My turn, What is Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity and how much is it? for extra point don't WattsUpWithThis, Skeptical Science or Wikipedia.
This might be an interesting concept, a combined land/water speed record where the land speed is made with the boat trailered, then the boat's speed on water is added to that, of course the boat would have to be launched from the trailer and tow vehicle. That would be right up Top Gear's alley.
There's going 300MPH and there's going 275MPH with a four man crew and 14 grunts onboard, a Bugatti Veyron can go 254MPH but you can't tow a boat with it.
The LLNL-led research shows that climate models can and do simulate short, 10- to 12-year "hiatus periods" with minimal warming, even when the models are run with historical increases in greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosol particles. They find that tropospheric temperature records must be at least 17 years long to discriminate between internal climate noise and the signal of human-caused changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere.
...
The research team is made up of Santer and Livermore colleagues Charles Doutriaux, Peter Caldwell, Peter Gleckler, Detelina Ivanova, and Karl Taylor, and includes collaborators from Remote Sensing Systems, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, the University of Colorado, the Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.K. Meteorology Office Hadley Centre, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.More Information
"Separating signal and noise in atmospheric temperature changes:The Importance of Time Scale,"Journal of Geophysical Research, Atmospheres, Nov. 18, 2011Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
"Climate models confirm more moisture in atmosphere attributed to humans," LLNL news release, Aug. 10, 2009
"Tropopause height becomes another climate-change 'fingerprint,' " Science & Technology Review, March 2004
"Livermore Researchers Discover Uncertainties in Climate Satellite Data Hamper Detection of Global Warming," LLNL news release, May 1, 2003
Separating signal and noise in climate warming
Of the 7 sources 7 were flat or possible cooling while the CO2 line still trended up, and the 17 years wasn't just cherry picked, although I can't find the actual quatation, I believe Hanson said if there were no warming for 15 years that global warming would be falsified, then as 15 years passed, some else said 17 years would be the falsification point. So now we're just months shy of 18 years, the expected El Nino is turning mild, and this solar cycle is looking mild as well the prospects of some warming in the near future is unlikely so for the climate to reproduce the temperatures predicted by the models for this century is going to take some real hell fire to get there.
GISTEMP has been modified, adjusted, had so many unreliable stations that it's laughable; USCRN is the only ground based network that is reliable but woodfortrees doesn't have it, but they do has satelite data, but RSS data strongly implies a cooling trend.
Your right as far as you went, but you forgot to mention that there has been no warming for almost 18 years anyways; Oh wait no citation, Here is one.
My Dad's water well had methane, not the "chemical analysis report" kind of methane but the water fizzed like soda pop kind of methane. There were no oil or gas well, nor were there any coal mines, just an oil seep down by the river. We pretty much avoided glass water glasses because pressure surges from the methane would knock the glass out of our hands.
Powerline Electricity has a wavelength of 6000 Km, which means that it's highly likely that even without loads connected to the grid, the constructive and destructive interferences of the different generators which is very likely to be analysable to produce a geographic area within a knowable error radius. Start adding in unique charecteristics like dead-spots in the generator's comutators, odd harmonics caused by the unique differences in how the stators are wound and even the number of stators used, and we're getting to the question of whether is works in reality or just in theory, and if it does, does it work better and easier than other methods.
GPS chips provide a pretty solid time signal.
Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.
