11 ms·
The guidance system and computer of the Minuteman III nuclear missile
- kens 2y agoAuthor here if anyone has questions...
- OldSchool 2y agoExcellent presentation, thank you! The machinery is ironically beautiful to look at! How did this compare to its approximate contemporary in the USSR ?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jojobas 2y agoSoviet 70's machines were hand-woven ferrite plate, stacked PCB sandwiches. Not pretty at all.
- metadat 2y agoWhat is the purpose of the window? (As labeled in https://static.righto.com/images/minuteman-mmiii/guidance-labeled.jpg https://static.righto.com/images/minuteman-mmiii/guidance-la...)
- QuinnyPig 2y agoFrom the article: > Also note the window in the side of the missile to allow the light beam from the autocollimator to reflect off the guidance platform for alignment.
- metadat 2y agoThanks, I finished reading the article while in the air and realized my faux pas without any Internet! Cheers. It's labeled in another image towards the end: https://static.righto.com/images/minuteman-mmiii/silo.jpg https://static.righto.com/images/minuteman-mmiii/silo.jpg
- ulnarkressty 2y agoThe article states that the system was cooled using a solution of sodium chromate to inhibit corrosion. However the wiki page of sodium chromate states that it is very corrosive. Is it a typo or something? It's also mentioned that the computer uses one of the first integrated circuits for miniaturization. Do you know if this can be definitely traced to advances in industrial/consumer products? It's a common trope that military research trickles down - so it's a "good" thing. It's not clear if this actually happens or if progress would have been made eventually without the need for these machines.
- philipkglass 2y agoThe article states that the system was cooled using a solution of sodium chromate to inhibit corrosion. However the wiki page of sodium chromate states that it is very corrosive. Is it a typo or something? Chromates are effective corrosion inhibitors for aluminum alloys and some other metals. Here's a brief article about how they work with aluminum: "Inhibition of Aluminum Alloy Corrosion by Chromates" https://www.electrochem.org/dl/interface/wtr/wtr01/IF12-01-Pages34-38.pdf https://www.electrochem.org/dl/interface/wtr/wtr01/IF12-01-P... When the Wikipedia entry's "Safety" section says that sodium chromate is corrosive, in context it means "destructive to human tissue by contact." That is, like sodium hydroxide (lye) and many other chemicals, in concentrated form it can destroy skin and eyes.
- kens 2y agoSodium chromate is highly corrosive to humans (as well as carcinogenic, see the movie Erin Brockovich). However, it inhibits corrosion in metal, acting as a passivating inhibitor, forming some sort of protective oxide. I've been doing a lot of research on the impact of Minuteman and Apollo on the IC industry (which led to the current post). The Air Force likes to take credit for the IC industry, as does NASA, but the actual influence is debatable. My take is that both projects had a large impact on the IC industry, more from Minuteman. However, even in the absence of both projects, there was a lot of interest and demand for ICs. If I had to take a quantitative guess, I'd say that those projects advanced ICs by maybe a year, but the basic trajectory would have remained the same.
- 2y ago
- izacus 2y agoHow does a 1-bit serial computer actually work? E.g. how does an ADD operation look like? It's a bit hard to picture.
- kens 2y agoIn a serial computer, you have a 1-bit ALU, say an full adder that generate a sum and carry. Each clock cycle you read two bits and feed them into the adder, and then you write back the sum. You hold the carry in a flip-flop to use in the next clock cycle. It's just like doing a binary addition with pencil and paper, one bit at a time. Note that you need to start with the lowest bit with a serial computer, which explains why x86 is little-endian. It goes back to the Datapoint 2200, a desktop computer made from TTL chips and running serially. The Intel 8008 processor was a copy of the Datapoint 2200 (as was the Texas Instruments TMX 1795). Although the 8008 was parallel, it copied the little-endian architecture of the Datapoint 2200.
- izacus 2y agoHmm, I see - how do the opcodes work and jumping then? Do you also read them bit-by-bit and reconfigure the ALU / codepaths? Is addressing also single-bit?
- howerj 2y agoHere's a 16-bit bit-serial computer I made and tested on an FGPA https://github.com/howerj/bit-serial https://github.com/howerj/bit-serial. If you look at `bit.c` it looks like an ordinary 16-bit Accumulator based Virtual Machine with a few odd instructions that make more sense when you know how a bit serial CPU works, nothing special about it. However the VHDL in `bit.vhd` shows how all those instructions are processed in a bit serial fashion, how data is fetched and stored in shift registers, etcetera. The bit serial CPU in `bit.vhd` is actually customizable, you can make a 32-bit, a 14-bit, or a 27-bit CPU if you want from that VHDL quite easily.
- seoulbigchris 2y agoI've often wondered if serial computers could have a useful role again. At very high clock speeds and wide data paths, you hear about trouble controlling signal skews. In contrast, imagine a serial computer clocking data around at 8 GHz vs. an 8-bit computer clocking data at 1 GHz. You have to deal with faster speeds, but no skew, and it seems like a 1-bit ALU might be simpler (and faster) than a 64-bit one.
- bloopernova 2y agoDo you have any plans to write about World War 2 era mechanical firing computers? I searched your blog but didn't see anything. Or maybe early RADAR systems of 1942 and later? (been reading about WW2 Pacific naval/air wars, and I am curious about these new-at-the-time technologies)
- kens 2y agoI planned to write about the electromechanical Torpedo Data Computer used in WWII, but I got distracted.
- nullhole 2y agoAny opinion on the book 'Inventing Accuracy'? It covers the Minuteman guidance system for a few chapters.
- kens 2y agoI've got the book on my desk right now :-) It's a bit of an unusual book because it is full of technical details but it also has a fair bit of sociological content like "the construction of technical facts", "technological determinism", and "sociology of technological knowledge". This is in contrast to, say, "Minuteman: A Technical History", which is strictly facts and details. They are both good books, but it is interesting how they have completely different styles and focuses.
- nullhole 2y agoI agree with your observations about "Inventing Accuracy". Personally I found the sociology focus a bit unexpected, and maybe a little too strong in some chapters, but still a worthwhile point of view. I will definitely be taking a look at "Minuteman: A Technical History". Books dealing at least in part with the history of IMUs are few and far between.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bun_terminator 2y agoI have a morbid curiosity to know how much of all that old tech would actually work in a full scale nuclear war, launching all missiles. Seems so well thought-out, but also incredibly hard to test. Really fascinating article!
- akira2501 2y agoWhy would it be hard to test? We have our own anti-missile technology, so it's ostensibly as simple as not putting a payload on the missile, then launching it at your own test range.
- dumah 2y agoThe physical environment these weapons were designed for is extreme and only possible to simulate piecemeal. Each stage needs to function in the presence of nearby nuclear detonations, resulting from both adversary and friendly weapons. These detonations are expected to cause severe shock, thermal, radiation, and electromagnetic transients. In the case of the most important targets, it is guaranteed that numerous detonations near the target, from ABM systems and friendly impacts, will occur, and these systems have been engineered and are expected to perform reliably under such conditions.
- akira2501 2y agoThis weapon is an ICBM. The payloads are delivered to orbit then launched at the target from there. You're already facing severe shock, thermal, radiation and EM transients just to get to orbit. Once there, you're ultimately dropping MIRVs, the design of which is considerably simpler. The delivery vehicle and the reentry/payload vehicle have entirely different life cycles and deployment concerns.
- nradov 2y agoThe weapons technically never enter orbit; they follow a sub-orbital trajectory.
- Ringz 2y agoImpressive work and very interesting! Since I was instantly interested in the tiny „window“ and its purpose I found a little error: „Aligning the missile was a tedious process that used the North Star*t* to determine North.„
- kens 2y agoThanks! I fixed that.
- firesteelrain 2y agoYour article on the guidance system reminds me of this https://youtu.be/bZe5J8SVCYQ?si=LuVwiZ7NEI21czoH https://youtu.be/bZe5J8SVCYQ?si=LuVwiZ7NEI21czoH
- kens 2y agoI refrained from including that link :-)
- beerandt 2y agoEven as someone who's actually done the math that video is trying to explain(in an actual class covering missile geodesy), it's still so absurd. But honestly only about half as crazy as GPS would sound if you tried to put it in similar terms. And that's before considering the signal itself is way below the noise floor. As much as I love these technical writeups, I wish more people who understand the slightly expanded bigger picture/ implications of the missile technologies would write what they know before the generation goes extinct. There's so many dots that are easily connected from articles like these... but I suspect some level of classification prevents those in the know from being able to publish. The bulletin of atomic scientists is the only non-fringe source that ever comes close. (Their article on the new generation of warhead fuses is a great resource for those wanting to go down the rabbit hole. Even it now seems to have been scrubbed from their site. [0]) [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20170307194641/https://thebulletin.org/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-undermining-strategic-stability-burst-height-compensating-super10578/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170307194641/https://thebullet... Eta working bulletin link: [1]https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/ https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-moderni...
- mananaysiempre 2y agoLooks like thyey just didn’t care enough to do a redirect: https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/ https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-moderni...
- benjam47 2y agoI live several miles from a Minuteman silo in Montana, maintained by Malmstrom Air Force Base. The underground cabling between sites is also an interesting read (https://minutemanmissile.com/hics.html https://minutemanmissile.com/hics.html). Anytime I want to dig on my property, I have to make sure it won't interfere with their pressurized cables. I have heard a story from someone that did accidentally cut a cable, and Malmstrom AFB was able to locate the break and respond rapidly. I am a volunteer firefighter, and our station has a VHS tape and a paper guide titled "Incident Guide for Missile Field Fire Response" provided to us by the DoD regarding our role in responding to fiře incidents near or at a silo. A year or so ago, we did respond to a fire near a silo, but it occurred entirely outside the security fencing. My understanding is that the personnel at the silos also have their own ability to respond to fires.
- nonethewiser 2y ago> Anytime I want to dig on my property, I have to make sure it won't interfere with their pressurized cables. Sounds like a serious weak point
- cpgxiii 2y agoThe missile silos and control facilities are connected in a sort of semi-mesh topology, so any one cable break is unlikely to cause a communications failure. There are backup launch control interfaces available via airborne platforms (specifically the E-6 today) as well. Digging into one of the cables is going to get you a prompt and unpleasant visit from base security.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- toomuchtodo 2y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41019604 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41019604 https://computer.rip/2024-07-20-minuteman-missile-communications.html https://computer.rip/2024-07-20-minuteman-missile-communicat...
- minkles 2y agoJust a bit of additional trivia. Jim Williams (somewhat famous EE at Linear) had a minuteman computer on his living room wall known as "the tapestry": https://www.eetimes.com/photo-gallery-remembering-jim-williams/ https://www.eetimes.com/photo-gallery-remembering-jim-willia... (last picture in particle). Not sure what revision.
- blantonl 2y agoThese systems are so vastly complicated, old, and rarely if ever launched. These aren't like data center generators which have testing schedules etc, and STILL there are failure points. I really wonder what the failure rate would be if they were all actually launched today. And I mean failure, from not lifting off, to failure in flight, to misguided warheads etc.
- minkles 2y agoThey have operational models with statistical failures included so they understand what the interception and failure probabilities likely are for each item at component level. You can design that into a system and test for it. Obviously you can't factor in unknown problems but that's what drills and test flights are for.
- krisoft 2y agoBut they do have testing schedules. They certainly tests the electronics regularly. And every so often they randomly pick a missile and launch them from Vandenberg. https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3796566/minuteman-iii-test-launch-showcases-readiness-of-us-nuclear-forces-safe-effecti/ https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3796... > I really wonder what the failure rate would be if they were all actually launched today I hope we will never find out. But certainly there would be many duds. But this is calculated into the effectiveness of the system by simply having more missiles. That is how it achieves its goal of dettering a would be attacker. (Not even talking about how there are two other totaly separate legs of the nuclear triad with dissimilar personel and technical solutions.)
- m_mueller 2y ago> randomly pick a missile and launch them from Vandenberg Jeff! Did you remember to take out the warheads? Jeff?!
- mrguyorama 2y agoSomewhat soberingly, earlier in the war with Ukraine, Russia managed to launch a ballistic missile with a concrete "Warhead simulator" installed, literally a mass designed to test the launch vehicle without using a nuclear device. If that was an accident, that means they didn't properly know which warheads are where. That's.... upsetting.
- jonathanyc 2y ago> The new guidance platform also added a gyrocompass under the alignment block, a special compass that could precisely align itself to North by precessing against the Earth's rotation. At first, the gyrocompass was used as a backup check against the autocollimator, but eventually the gyrocompass became the primary alignment. For calibration, the alignment block also includes electrolytic bubble levels to position the stable platform in known orientations with respect to local gravity. Had never heard of gyrocompasses before. I worked on a small robot in the past and remember having to calibrate the magnetic compass, which was not very accurate (similar to smartphone compasses). I never thought about how they’d get super precise headings for ICBMs. The Encyclopedia Britannica article on gyrocompasses is really good. Here it explains why you can’t use a gyrocompass on a vehicle on fast aircraft (and I guess small robots that are jostled around a lot): > A major contribution by Schuler was the discovery that, when the period of oscillation is 2π√(Earth radius/gravity), the heading precession of the gyroscope spin-axis due to acceleration is exactly the rate of change of the angle between the apparent and true meridians seen on a moving vehicle. The gyrocompass will then read true north at all times if its indicating reference is offset by the angle between these two meridians. The angle, at ship speeds, is a direct function of the north-south speed and is easily set into the system. The need for accurate speed measurement for this offset is the main reason why a gyrocompass is not practical for use in aircraft. https://www.britannica.com/technology/gyrocompass https://www.britannica.com/technology/gyrocompass Love this article!
- maxglute 2y agoWhat's the actual color of the yellow paint? Goldish like first pic of lemonish like latter pics. Contrast/aesthetics of the gold is just chefs kiss. There's something about American MIC pallette that rarely miss.
- ornateelephant 2y agoIt's the corrosion protective primer, usually containing zinc chromate. Colours may vary slightly but they are usually some shade of yellowy green. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/49961/why-are-aircraft-coloured-in-yellow-during-construction-repair-or-overhaul https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/49961/why-are-a...
- tempaway4575144 2y agoThe idea behind inertial navigation is to keep track of the missile's position by constantly measuring its acceleration. By integrating the acceleration, you get the velocity. And by integrating the velocity, you get the position. This sounds like it couldn't possibly work (surely all the little errors compound?) but apparently it's how Apollo navigated https://wehackthemoon.com/tech/inertial-measurement-unit-mechanical-engineering-wizardry https://wehackthemoon.com/tech/inertial-measurement-unit-mec...
- Zircom 2y agoI mean it's a nuclear missile, millimeter accuracy isn't really necessary. Somewhere in the general vicinity is good enough for it's purpose of going boom.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nox101 2y agoshooting something 12000 miles away, 0.1% off is 12 miles. That's missing the target and will not destroy whatever you were trying to destroy
- lazide 2y agoIn the early days, that’s why nukes went into the megaton range. Because then 12 miles will still destroy your target. Then they got a lot more accurate than .1%
- kens 2y agoWell, accuracy makes a big difference if you're trying to hit a hardened target like a missile silo. Missile guidance has been a constant effort to squeeze out more and more accuracy. Minuteman I started with an accuracy of 2 km, but now Minuteman III is said to have an accuracy of 120 meters. The Peacekeeper (MX) missile, no longer in service, is said to have an accuracy of 40 meters. You can use a much, much smaller warhead if you're 40 meters away compared to 2 kilometers.
- spoonfeeder006 2y agoInteresting tech and all, but ultimately efforts like this are a waste. If we humans could instead get over our self-perceived need to engage in warfare for childish reasons then we could dedicate such efforts to more productive things like helping homeless people get housing and skills, or developing better psychological sciences to help drug addicts get free from their disease of addiction, you name it > O SON OF SPIRIT! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes. > > ~ Baha'i Teaching
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- CamperBob2 2y agoIt would be great if we could all share that sentiment. But ask the Ukrainians how unilateral disarmament worked out for them. Unfortunately, it seems that this particular waste of resources and intellect is still necessary.
- spoonfeeder006 2y agoSorry, I don't mean anything against legitimate self defense, I'm talking rather about "self-perceived need to engage in warfare for childish reasons" Examples of that would include ego, greed, petty revenge, etc... But I guess the way I said it did come across that way, so yeah, my bad I'm just saying that if we could evolve past such petty ego-based sentiments in the world, then wouldn't such pressure to develop weaponry in such massive amounts, and hence we could focus on actually making a functioning society
- shiroiushi 2y ago>I'm just saying that if we could evolve past such petty ego-based sentiments in the world That would be nice, but it seems that would make people no longer human. Happily following a petty ego-based Dear Leader's orders into warfare seems to be the norm for much of the human population, looking at history, so this tendency appears to be deeply-rooted into the human psyche.
- ThinkBeat 2y agoHow did you reprogram the destination on the missiles?
- kens 2y agoIt depends. For Minuteman I, the missile needed to be physically rotated in the silo to be aligned with the target. Then the "Targeting Van" connected to the missile, downloaded the new targeting data to the disk, and checked that the guidance system was aligned. As for the targeting data, it was generated by a mainframe that determined the right trajectory and produced the optimized navigation polynomials that the targeting algorithm used. It was something like 740 words of data per target so only two targets could fit in the computer. Minuteman III used a smarter targeting algorithm that only needed 70 words of data per target, so the missile could support something like 8 targets at once, selected by a knob on the launch console. (The launch officers didn't know what the targets were; they were just told to use target #3 for example.) The targeting data was read off punched tape for Minuteman II and a magnetic tape cartridge for Minuteman III.
- beerandt 2y agoIt was organized primarily via wargame scenarios, such that one target group comprised targets for a given scenario. Simplified launch orders via the football, etc. One group scenario might have been silo coordinates for an offensive first-strike. One group city coordinates for launch on warning strategic counter-strike, etc. Each missile got a target from each scenario list programmed into a 'memory slot' with some overlap. The organization/ optimization is mind-boggling. But few understand that this is WHY the wargames and strikes had to be pre-planned ahead of time. It wasn't political hubris, but a technical requirement due to memory allocation.
- krisoft 2y ago> It wasn't political hubris, but a technical requirement due to memory allocation. I don’t understand why it would be “political hubris”. Proper targeting is hard work. You need to map your enemy territory to make optimal choices. Not just in a geographical “what are the coordinates” sense, but also in a “what are the important nodes to get the coordinates for” sense. At the same time your enemy doesn’t want to be mapped and resists your efforts. Doing this properly takes time. On the order of months. But once you are under attack you don’t have that time. So you have to select your targets ahead of time. It is not because the missiles have limited memory. If they would have needed more memory they would have added more memory. It is because the President doesn’t have time once under attack to name each enemy railway depot one by one and decide which ones are important, and which ones are better left unharmed. Instead what they have is a menu of options. Something like option 1 destroy all red military ports, military airports and military bases; option 2 destroy major military installations plus main industrial centers; option 3 destroy main population centers. Thinking that the memory allocation is why it is the way it is is super tech centered and quite frankly putting the cart before the horse.
- ThinkBeat 2y agoOne of the great things about chemical propulsion rockets is that they can take off with little to no prep at all. Ready to go at the press of a button. The scary thing is that, when left alone for a long time, and these rockets have been, "the plates" keeping the chemicals from meeting each other ahead of schedule, corrodes, just a tiny bit at a time. each time raising the possibility of premature ejaculation just a tiny little fraction.
- kens 2y agoI think you're talking about the Titan missiles, which use hypergolic propellants. The Minuteman missiles are solid fuel, so there are no separated chemicals.
- beerandt 2y agoThere are separated chemicals, the hypergolic means no ignition source required. Which to his point would be even more scary, but just isn't the actual real world risk with the way the things were designed. Plus hypergolics are usually toxic on their own, even without mixing and/or booming, in a quieter, more-deadly-to-technicians way. Spills and defueling and meeting well-intentioned but bad safety guidelines that require abundant fiddling were the real source of danger. More fiddling == bad. Iirc, the fuels/oxidizers/reagents/ whatever-liquids mainly behaved like aluminum oxidizing, such that reaction with the tanks components actually created an increased buffer layer of oxidation/ protection. Tank corrosion wasn't high on the list of risks after it was figured out on a per-chemical basis. I think it's one of the aspects covered fairly well in (the great, often posted) Ignition! [0] [0]https://archive.org/details/ignition_201612 https://archive.org/details/ignition_201612
- krisoft 2y agoThere is a bit of a misunderstanding here. The minuteman missiles are solid fueled. There are no liquids and no hypergolics involved in the stages which loft it towards the enemy. Structurally it is more similar to a candle than a fuel tank. There are no spills or defueling with this system. This is a fact. In this system you won’t find a separate oxidiser/fuel. The two components are mixed together and they form a kind of rubber like cylinder with a hole in the middle. The hole is shaped appropriately so the rocket engine burns at the right rates. There are hypergolic fuels at the very end of the rocket in the payload. They are used for deorbiting and to control the return vehicles. But it is a much smaller part of the whole missile. (Both by mass, and by encapsulated energy.)
- ThinkBeat 2y agoA cheerful thought is that according to atomic scientists the world is closer to nuclear holocaust now, than we have ever been. The future so bright, I gotta wear shades. https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/ https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/
- IamTC 2y agoI believe parts of the subsea industry uses a similar concept, i.e., gyroscope based for inertial navigation. Obtaining position & veocity: I think it even more interesting when one compares the difficulties of getting these fundamental navigation data in an aerial, ground and undersea platforms.
- aussieguy1234 2y agoSo. The world could be blown up with just 8kb of memory. No need for a killer AI with hundreds of GB's of vram.
- artemonster 2y agoA testament to human ingenuity and genius, work of art even. The machined parts, the crude electronics, all of it
- LarsDu88 2y agoSo much discrete circuitry and now any bum can get the same performance from a 15 year arduino
- N_A_T_E 2y agoWow, so this thing needs to be pointed directly at the target 8,000 miles away and will miss the target by the amount of error in aim. "To target a Minuteman I missile, the missile had to be physically rotated in the silo to be aligned with the target, an angle called the launch azimuth. This angle had to be extremely precise, since even a tiny angle error will be greatly magnified over the missile's journey. " ... "The guidance platform was completely redesigned for Minuteman II and III, eliminating the time-consuming alignment that Minuteman I required. The new platform had an alignment block with rotating mirrors. Instead of rotating the missile, the autocollimator remained fixed in the East position and the mirror (and thus the stable platform) was rotated to the desired launch azimuth. "
- ianbicking 2y agoI noticed that too. That seemed odd at first read... after all, it has a guidance system, it's not relying on exact aim. I'm assuming it's more that its guidance system can only has so much fuel at its disposal and ability to correct errors, and if it's aimed incorrectly it would exhaust its fuel before it corrects its trajectory.
- ethbr1 2y agoSometimes it's less work to engineer a hard problem into an easy one, than to solve the hard problem. Most of the tech for the Minuteman I was developed in the mid-1950s. With that level of processing, would you rather solve a 2d problem by precisely orienting the missile before launch? Or a 3d one by requiring it to orient during flight? Keep in mind: any equipment to self-orient in-flight also needs to be carried on the missile itself, while being tolerant of launch, acceleration, and reentry forces. Any precision machinery at the launch site has no such requirements.
- aeonik 2y agoThis doesn't make sense to me. I would assume the engines starting by themselves would introduce enough error to throw the entire system off. Let alone natural seismic events in the ground, plus wind. I would guess you must solve the 3D problem at least to some degree.
- datavirtue 2y agoPurely a deterrent. No one in their right mind would try to launch these expecting them to hit their target.
- somat 2y agoThere is a well written video essay on the inner workings of the d-17 computer used on the minuteman 1 Minuteman D-17b: The Desktop Computer Was Born in an ICBM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJPnZzZtswc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJPnZzZtswc (Alexander the ok)
- mrguyorama 2y agoThis is Youtuber has had several very well researched and thorough videos about topics that readers of Ken would enjoy, including Buran, the F-14 Air data computer, Elite, and the birth of Digital fly by wire out of the Apollo program. Check him out and give him slack for his vocal fry. It's mildly annoying but the content is just so good.