I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

  • 11802 Replies
  • 582279 Views
*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11490 on: January 18, 2020, 06:50:30 PM »

Well, just show how to go to the Moon.
Already done numerous time but you invariably claim it's "fake news" so it seems as though Yes hit the nail squarely on the head!

Yes, I know. A rocket with a manned spacecraft was 1969 fired into the sky and disappeared and a couple of days later the spacecraft had landed on the Moon, so the crew could piss on it, was shown on TV. Then the spacecraft was fired into space again from the Moon and a couple of days later it dropped into the Pacific Ocean as shown on TV. The crew could piss on Earth again.
Great show! Quite funny!
But Fake News as usual.
Only complete twerps believe such nonsense.
Yes, that's exactly what rabinoz predicted that you would say and the very reason why your "challenges" are Fake Challenges.
Please, my challenges are real and solid and have been discussed here for years to eliminate old US made, stupid Fake News about humans in space, nuclear weapons, 911 Arabs, etc. I am quite happy that my challenges are so popular.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38885
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11491 on: January 18, 2020, 07:40:12 PM »
Please, my challenges are real and solid and have been discussed here for years to eliminate old US made, stupid Fake News about humans in space, nuclear weapons, 911 Arabs, etc. I am quite happy that my challenges are so popular.
No, your "challenges" are fake because there is no possible way to win any of them.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17838
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11492 on: January 18, 2020, 08:30:09 PM »
I predict someone will the challenge on or before a Thursday afternoon.
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11493 on: January 19, 2020, 02:48:40 AM »
I predict someone will the challenge on or before a Thursday afternoon.
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11494 on: January 19, 2020, 04:08:17 PM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11495 on: January 19, 2020, 04:08:57 PM »
I predict someone will the challenge on or before a Thursday afternoon.
Which century?

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11496 on: January 20, 2020, 12:10:03 AM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

*

Stash

  • 3700
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11497 on: January 20, 2020, 01:49:29 AM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Where's the mystery? A quick search reveals this from NASA:


https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-23a_Launch_Vehicle_Propellant_Use.htm

And there's a whole lot more where that came from. What's missing in your mind? And be very, very, very specific as you seem to suspiciously slide the goalposts around as needed. We are talking a million Euros, right?
No. That sudden lurch forwards is the atmospheric slosh effect.

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11498 on: January 20, 2020, 03:45:49 AM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Where's the mystery? A quick search reveals this from NASA:


https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-23a_Launch_Vehicle_Propellant_Use.htm

And there's a whole lot more where that came from. What's missing in your mind? And be very, very, very specific as you seem to suspiciously slide the goalposts around as needed. We are talking a million Euros, right?
Thanks, but to get all that propellant with you into space you need a big rocket to get going ... . Anyway, the problem remains in space when, where, how, in what direction you use it. You are at high speed going somewhere, etc. Your location, direction, speed, etc. change all the time. If you are too late at the wrong location going off in a stupid direction to move on, you fly into eternity.
It is nothing. DEATH!
Not very funny.
So try to win my Challenge instead! More fun. It keeps you alive.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11499 on: January 20, 2020, 04:19:48 AM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Where's the mystery? A quick search reveals this from NASA:


https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-23a_Launch_Vehicle_Propellant_Use.htm

And there's a whole lot more where that came from. What's missing in your mind? And be very, very, very specific as you seem to suspiciously slide the goalposts around as needed. We are talking a million Euros, right?
Thanks, but to get all that propellant with you into space you need a big rocket to get going ... .
The Saturn V is a very very BIG Rocket with its 5 engines producing about 3,400 tonnes.force of thrust.

Quote from: Heiwa
Anyway, the problem remains in space when, where, how, in what direction you use it.
All that information is available from the same source!

Quote from: Heiwa
You are at high speed going somewhere, etc. Your location, direction, speed, etc. change all the time.
So?
As you've been told dozens of times, there was a world-wide tracking network with precision Doppler radar that could determine velocity, distance and direction.
And the Apollo CM could also determine direction from star sightings.

Quote from: Heiwa
If you are too late at the wrong location going off in a stupid direction to move on, you fly into eternity.
So NASA made certain that they were not "at the wrong location going off in a stupid direction"!

All that would be obvious to anyone with a trace of common sense, something that you seem to totally lack.

You've had these things explained over and over again. I must assume have dementia if you've forgotten all that.

Though it's more likely that you don't know these things because you do not want to know them.
If you did know you would have to admit that your silly website is packed full of misinformation and other garbage.
I must assume then that your problem is delusion caused by cognitive dissonance.


*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 5415
  • I trigger wise
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11500 on: January 20, 2020, 07:23:35 AM »
I predict someone will the challenge on or before a Thursday afternoon.

I already have with video evidence (Gravity Building Demolition/Collapse).  It's back a ton of pages.  Pretty sure I posted it on a Wednesday.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38885
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11501 on: January 20, 2020, 10:41:51 AM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Have you ever heard of inertial guidance?
The IMU was gimbaled on three axes. The innermost part, the stable member (SM), was a 6-inch beryllium cube, with three gyroscopes and three accelerometers mounted in it. Feedback loops used signals from the gyroscopes by way of the resolvers to control motors at each axis. This servo system kept the stable member fixed with respect to inertial space. Signals from the accelerometers were then integrated to keep track of the spacecraft's velocity and position. The IMU was derived from the guidance system developed by Draper for the Polaris missile.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11502 on: January 20, 2020, 09:14:17 PM »
Whatever, my challenge is still on! Win €1M! Just visit post #1, etc. and the money is with you ....
You've been told "how to" and "propellant used" dozens of times but if you won't believe the experts, NASA you won't believe anybody!
So you know what you can do with your Fake Challenge don't you? It's not crewed and interplanetary space flight that's fake - it's you!

But keep chattering to yourself over here. It's not the company I'd chose but I guess you have no choice.
Well, the propellant - the fuel - must be used at the right location and time in the trajectory of the trip to the target and the resulting force of the rocket engine must then be applied in the right direction ... and NASA cannot provide further details. They just say that all was done ... but how? No answers! Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Have you ever heard of inertial guidance?
The IMU was gimbaled on three axes. The innermost part, the stable member (SM), was a 6-inch beryllium cube, with three gyroscopes and three accelerometers mounted in it. Feedback loops used signals from the gyroscopes by way of the resolvers to control motors at each axis. This servo system kept the stable member fixed with respect to inertial space. Signals from the accelerometers were then integrated to keep track of the spacecraft's velocity and position. The IMU was derived from the guidance system developed by Draper for the Polaris missile.
Intertial guidance!
So does it establish your location, speed and direction in your orbit around Earth in 3D vacuum space (or atmosphere if a Polaris missile)?
Of course not! Fake News as usual! But topic is my Challenge! Try to focus!

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11503 on: January 20, 2020, 09:17:11 PM »
I predict someone will the challenge on or before a Thursday afternoon.

I already have with video evidence (Gravity Building Demolition/Collapse).  It's back a ton of pages.  Pretty sure I posted it on a Wednesday.
I remember. Controlled demolition of buildings by contractors using outside forces/energy. Old stuff. You don't win any of my Challenges with it.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11504 on: January 20, 2020, 10:36:42 PM »
Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.

Have you ever heard of inertial guidance?

The IMU was gimbaled on three axes. The innermost part, the stable member (SM), was a 6-inch beryllium cube, with three gyroscopes and three accelerometers mounted in it. Feedback loops used signals from the gyroscopes by way of the resolvers to control motors at each axis. This servo system kept the stable member fixed with respect to inertial space. Signals from the accelerometers were then integrated to keep track of the spacecraft's velocity and position. The IMU was derived from the guidance system developed by Draper for the Polaris missile.
Intertial guidance!
So does it establish your location, speed and direction in your orbit around Earth in 3D vacuum space (or atmosphere if a Polaris missile)?
More ignorant trash!
Quote
Polaris A1
UGM-27A.
Payload: 500 kg (1,100 lb).
Thrust: 289.20 kN (65,015 lbf).
Gross mass: 12,700 kg (27,900 lb).
Height: 8.54 m (28.01 ft).
Diameter: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Span: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Apogee: 500 km
. . . . . . . .
The Polaris A-1 was powered by a two-stage solid-propellant rocket motor by Aerojet General, both stages using four nozzles with thrust-vectoring for flight control. Its inertial navigation system (designed by MIT, manufactured by General Electric and Hughes) guided the missile to an accuracy of about 900 m (3000 ft) CEP at a maximum range of 2200 km (1200 nm).
An apogee of 500 km is far up into space.

Quote from: Heiwa
Of course not! Fake News as usual! But topic is my Challenge! Try to focus! << Fake claim ignored >>
In your pathetic ignorance, you claim that:
Actually, there is no way to navigate in 3D space. Spacecrafts (and ICBMs) can only be put into one-way orbits around Earth ... and that's it.
Either you are outright lying or have dementia and can't remember anything from one month to the next. So, which is it?
  • Are you a liar?
  • Do you have dementia? or
  • Do you have another excuse?
Read this again!
Have you ever heard of inertial guidance?
The IMU was gimbaled on three axes. The innermost part, the stable member (SM), was a 6-inch beryllium cube, with three gyroscopes and three accelerometers mounted in it. Feedback loops used signals from the gyroscopes by way of the resolvers to control motors at each axis. This servo system kept the stable member fixed with respect to inertial space. Signals from the accelerometers were then integrated to keep track of the spacecraft's velocity and position. The IMU was derived from the guidance system developed by Draper for the Polaris missile.

As you've been told dozens of times,
there was a world-wide tracking network with precision Doppler radar that could determine velocity, distance and direction.
And the Apollo CM could also determine direction from star sightings.
The Inertial Measurement Unit is initialise on the ground and can be corrected for any drift in the gyroscopes from the information gained from tracking system and star sights.

On top of all of this, the spacecraft trajectory is computed on the ground slightly ahead of real time so that any deviation from the predicted trajectory can be noted and corrected.

Why are you so helpless when in comes to learning this information?

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11505 on: January 21, 2020, 04:05:15 AM »

More ignorant trash!
Quote
Polaris A1
UGM-27A.
Payload: 500 kg (1,100 lb).
Thrust: 289.20 kN (65,015 lbf).
Gross mass: 12,700 kg (27,900 lb).
Height: 8.54 m (28.01 ft).
Diameter: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Span: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Apogee: 500 km
. . . . . . . .
The Polaris A-1 was powered by a two-stage solid-propellant rocket motor by Aerojet General, both stages using four nozzles with thrust-vectoring for flight control. Its inertial navigation system (designed by MIT, manufactured by General Electric and Hughes) guided the missile to an accuracy of about 900 m (3000 ft) CEP at a maximum range of 2200 km (1200 nm).
An apogee of 500 km is far up into space.
There is no evidence that a Polaris 1 missile in the 1960's could hit anything except military garbage that it worked. Imagine sending a rocket 500 km up and then allow it to drop down to hit the enemy from above at high speed. Ridiculous.
But US military idiots 60 years ago thought it was fantastic. The people at Moscow had a good laugh.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11506 on: January 21, 2020, 04:30:47 AM »
More ignorant trash!
Quote
Polaris A1
UGM-27A.
Payload: 500 kg (1,100 lb).
Thrust: 289.20 kN (65,015 lbf).
Gross mass: 12,700 kg (27,900 lb).
Height: 8.54 m (28.01 ft).
Diameter: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Span: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Apogee: 500 km
. . . . . . . .
The Polaris A-1 was powered by a two-stage solid-propellant rocket motor by Aerojet General, both stages using four nozzles with thrust-vectoring for flight control. Its inertial navigation system (designed by MIT, manufactured by General Electric and Hughes) guided the missile to an accuracy of about 900 m (3000 ft) CEP at a maximum range of 2200 km (1200 nm).
An apogee of 500 km is far up into space.
There is no evidence that a Polaris 1 missile in the 1960's could hit anything except military garbage that it worked. Imagine sending a rocket 500 km up and then allow it to drop down to hit the enemy from above at high speed. Ridiculous.
But US military idiots 60 years ago thought it was fantastic. The people at Moscow had a good laugh.
<< Irrelevant trash ignored >>
The only thing I was pointing out was that you claimed that Polaris's trajectory was in the atmosphere when it climbed to 500 km!
I claimed nothing about its effectiveness or accuracy so your crap is just a waste of time.

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11507 on: January 21, 2020, 12:02:04 PM »
More ignorant trash!
Quote
Polaris A1
UGM-27A.
Payload: 500 kg (1,100 lb).
Thrust: 289.20 kN (65,015 lbf).
Gross mass: 12,700 kg (27,900 lb).
Height: 8.54 m (28.01 ft).
Diameter: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Span: 1.37 m (4.49 ft).
Apogee: 500 km
. . . . . . . .
The Polaris A-1 was powered by a two-stage solid-propellant rocket motor by Aerojet General, both stages using four nozzles with thrust-vectoring for flight control. Its inertial navigation system (designed by MIT, manufactured by General Electric and Hughes) guided the missile to an accuracy of about 900 m (3000 ft) CEP at a maximum range of 2200 km (1200 nm).
An apogee of 500 km is far up into space.
There is no evidence that a Polaris 1 missile in the 1960's could hit anything except military garbage that it worked. Imagine sending a rocket 500 km up and then allow it to drop down to hit the enemy from above at high speed. Ridiculous.
But US military idiots 60 years ago thought it was fantastic. The people at Moscow had a good laugh.
<< Irrelevant trash ignored >>
The only thing I was pointing out was that you claimed that Polaris's trajectory was in the atmosphere when it climbed to 500 km!
I claimed nothing about its effectiveness or accuracy so your crap is just a waste of time.
Thanks. Any spacecraft or US military missile leaving Earth starts in the atmosphere. After a while going up assisted by a rocket, it is in space - no atmosphere - and problems start. Of course no such US missile can hit any enemy target below. All such missiles just burn up an evaporate into gas on the way back.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11508 on: January 21, 2020, 03:06:16 PM »
Thanks. Any spacecraft or US military missile leaving Earth starts in the atmosphere. After a while going up assisted by a rocket, it is in space - no atmosphere - and problems start.
No they don't - except to ignorants who can't understand atmospheric re-entry.

Quote from: Heiwa
Of course no such US missile can hit any enemy target below. All such missiles just burn up an evaporate into gas on the way back.
They worked that out long ago!
You might read: Reentry Vehicle Development Leading to the Minuteman Avco Mark 5 and 11 by David K. Stumpf. Of course, you might have to buy it or login to Jstor.
Here is a re-entry vehicle (not from a Polaris) after it been recovered:

It obviously doesn't "just burn up and evaporate into gas on the way back" - stop being so ignorant.

Get up to date Mr Anders Bjφrkman. ROSCOSMOS do it regularly and both the SpaceX Crew Dragon and the Boeing CST-100 Starliner have re-entered successfully!

SpaceX Crew Dragon Returns from Space Station
                                                           NASA Video
           
Starliner landing by SciNews
Enjoy :D!
You really are an ignorant troll aren't you?

*

Yes

  • 564
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11509 on: January 21, 2020, 03:51:00 PM »
All such missiles just burn up an evaporate into gas on the way back.
I would like to know, where do you get this information from?
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11510 on: January 21, 2020, 04:25:41 PM »
All such missiles just burn up an evaporate into gas on the way back.
I would like to know, where do you get this information from?
A similar source to Sceppy's fantastic hypotheses ??? I suspect.

*

Yes

  • 564
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11511 on: January 21, 2020, 05:12:38 PM »
Ah, that right.  I've read about it on Wikipedia: the Grand Unified Missile-Sponge Hypothesis.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

boydster

  • Planar Moderator
  • 13499
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11512 on: January 21, 2020, 05:51:23 PM »
Did Heiwa ever by Moose a ticket to go visit him yet?

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11513 on: January 21, 2020, 06:48:20 PM »
Did Heiwa ever by Moose a ticket to go visit him yet?
I doubt that there's any correlation between what Heiwa says and what Heiwa does.

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17838
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11514 on: January 21, 2020, 07:04:33 PM »
Did Heiwa ever by Moose a ticket to go visit him yet?

Nope, and I'm about ready to unpack my suitcase. 
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38885
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11515 on: January 21, 2020, 08:03:23 PM »
Intertial guidance!
So does it establish your location, speed and direction in your orbit around Earth in 3D vacuum space (or atmosphere if a Polaris missile)?
Of course not! Fake News as usual! But topic is my Challenge! Try to focus!
Inertial guidance is fake news? ???  I would think that a self-proclaimed expert on safety at sea would be familiar with marine inertial navigation systems like this one:
https://www.raytheon-anschuetz.com/products-systems/product-range/marine-inertial-navigation-system-mins/

Of course, let's not forget that inertial navigation systems are still widely used in commercial aircraft.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6522
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11516 on: January 21, 2020, 09:35:43 PM »
Did Heiwa ever by Moose a ticket to go visit him yet?

Nope, and I'm about ready to unpack my suitcase.
Should we mount another campaign? One last ditch effort? Or nah?

*

Heiwa

  • 7784
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11517 on: January 21, 2020, 11:56:09 PM »
Intertial guidance!
So does it establish your location, speed and direction in your orbit around Earth in 3D vacuum space (or atmosphere if a Polaris missile)?
Of course not! Fake News as usual! But topic is my Challenge! Try to focus!
Inertial guidance is fake news? ???  I would think that a self-proclaimed expert on safety at sea would be familiar with marine inertial navigation systems like this one:
https://www.raytheon-anschuetz.com/products-systems/product-range/marine-inertial-navigation-system-mins/

Of course, let's not forget that inertial navigation systems are still widely used in commercial aircraft.
Pls quote me correctly. Inertial navigation systems are good for ships (and air crafts) moving around on planet Earth but normal GPS is better. Inertial navigation systems are useless in 3D space for crafts in orbits and for fast going missiles going up 500 kms and then dropping down again to wipe out the enemy. But thanks for your interest in topic - my Challenge.

*

Stash

  • 3700
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11518 on: January 22, 2020, 12:12:06 AM »
Intertial guidance!
So does it establish your location, speed and direction in your orbit around Earth in 3D vacuum space (or atmosphere if a Polaris missile)?
Of course not! Fake News as usual! But topic is my Challenge! Try to focus!
Inertial guidance is fake news? ???  I would think that a self-proclaimed expert on safety at sea would be familiar with marine inertial navigation systems like this one:
https://www.raytheon-anschuetz.com/products-systems/product-range/marine-inertial-navigation-system-mins/

Of course, let's not forget that inertial navigation systems are still widely used in commercial aircraft.
Inertial navigation systems are useless in 3D space for crafts in orbits and for fast going missiles going up 500 kms and then dropping down again to wipe out the enemy.

Why and why is the 500 kms barrier you mention relevant? 499 kms INS missiles are ok? 500+ not?
No. That sudden lurch forwards is the atmospheric slosh effect.

*

rabinoz

  • 24223
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #11519 on: January 22, 2020, 12:34:47 AM »
Inertial navigation systems are useless in 3D space for crafts in orbits and for fast going missiles going up 500 kms.
Why?