4 ms·
Agreed with the sentiment that modern companies are capable, but disagreed on the rocket comparison -- the comparison is difficult at best. One is travelling a
by ISL 6y ago
Agreed with the sentiment that modern companies are capable, but disagreed on the rocket comparison -- the comparison is difficult at best.
One is travelling at tremendous speed (Mach 5 or something?) and has milliseconds for course-corrections, the aspires to come to a gentle halt and can close some feedback loops over and over again for thousands of milliseconds.
Edit: If you wish to make a weapons comparison, one might note that SpaceX can launch the mother of all MIRVs over and over again. The lower cost-to-orbit changes the economic calculus of rods-from-god, opening a possibility of a conventional-weapons bombardment from the other side of the planet for the first time.
- jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago> One is travelling at tremendous speed (Mach 5 or something?) Much higher, about mach 20 to 25. They are moving seriously fast.
- ISL 6y agoOh, you're right -- it has been ages since I've read about things like ABM intercept problems. That does a great job of placing the accuracy problem in context: That's ~7 km/second, or perhaps a mile per eyeblink.
- jabl 6y agoICBM's also can't use GPS or equivalent navigation satellites, as those will likely be the first to be taken out in a nuclear exchange. They use inertial guidance (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30254/this-isnt-a-sci-fi-prop-its-a-doomsday-navigator-for-americas-biggest-cold-war-icbm https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30254/this-isnt-a-sci-... ) maybe together with some star navigation system for mid-course guidance.