Put it in a ballistics simulator and try to hit a target at 15 miles with a projectile that is going Mach 7, or 4,500 mph to 5,600, which is what your site quotes. Line of site for a 30ft elevation to each target is 12 miles, so the ground gets in the way.
To do you would have to adjust for windage in hopes of dropping it on top of them, which is about 1100m (15 seconds of freefall) in 24000m (15 miles in meters), or about 1.3 degrees of angle to land where you want it.30 miles and the angle becomes 5.2 degrees at 30 miles. Pretty fine aiming, even for computers. For comparison, the angle for a normal shell is something like 20.2 degrees @15, and could not hit at 30 with a max range of 24. (I have simplified for no air resistance, not a small impact. But it is a comparison, not an actual I-need-to-hit-the-target number)
What it is really good for is reaching out and shooting down nearby missiles/aircraft. Calculating 1 or 2 second intercept is perfect, and you could use fletchettes to get a nice scatter.
See, I have actual naval training in calculating firing solutions, and while it may be a little rusty after 15+ years, I know what I can hit with a gun of a given specification.
That is because IBM has supported Fedora, RedHat and SUSE as a corporate laptop image for many years.
In fact, if I want a laptop refresh, my refresh rate is 5 years for a Windows, 3 years if I use Linux.
I am client facing, and unfortunately they do everything in M$ so I am forced to do the same. But I do maintain a Linux boot partition on a USB hard drive in case my Windows image craps out, which is far too often.
He is going to go after them in civil court for defamation.
What he stopped doing was trying to get them taken out of the process by declaring them without jurisdiction.
It was a good plan. The races were held in France, several of the races were from before the USADA existed so he had expectation that he would win that fight.
Unfortunately, the UCI is bound to accept and enforce the USADA rulings, and unfortunately Lance signed papers giving away his right to take the USADA to court.
Once he lost that fight, he knew it was a Kangaroo court. And sure enough, they slapped the sanctions on since Lance gave up his right to arbitration by going to Fed Court.
Personally, I think he will win in civil court for defamation. He won't get his medals back tho, just compensation for lost earnings from future endorsements.
Everyone that the USADA says will testify against him has a charge against them that the will get mitigation for, or has written a book they made money on.
If they had some hard evidence, and the testimony, fine. Otherwise, it is just a case of rolling lieutenants to get the Capo by making them immune to criminal prosecution.
Let me address the only points in your attempt to Fisk me that were not about my misspelling names.
The Lance Armstrong Performance Program, Chris Carmichael with Lance Armstrong
99 test for cortisone was idiotic because he was cleared by cycling officials to use it, of course it showed up in his urine.
Secondly, those same samples were the source of the EPO testing I detailed:
Even in 1999, the year of his first Tour de France win, there were already objective suggestions that Armstrong's success may not have been entirely on the up and up. That year, his urine sample showed a small trace of a banned steroid used to assist muscle recovery, but he was cleared when his team produced a medical certificate showing that the chemical was present in a cream Armstrong used for "saddle sores." In 2005, a French newspaper reported that Armstrong's 1999 urine samples had retroactively tested positive for the "blood booster" Erythropoietin (EPO), a banned substance that couldn't yet be detected in urine tests in 1999. But because the 2005 urine tests were not conducted according to official standards, the results had no effect on Armstrong's standing.
World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) chief Dick Pound has rejected the independent investigation which cleared Lance Armstrong of doping allegations. Pound said Wada is considering legal action over the verdict into L'Equipe's claims that Armstrong's samples on the 1999 Tour de France tested positive. He said the investigation headed by lawyer Emile Vrijman and the Dutch law firm Scholten "bordered on farcical." Their report exonerated Armstrong and blamed anti-doping authorities. It accused the Wada agency of behaving in ways "completely inconsistent" with testing rules, and determined the testing procedures at the French national doping laboratory LNDD had been insufficient to label the American's sample positive. Vrijman also stated that Wada and the LNDD had effectively pronounced Armstrong guilty of a doping violation without sufficient basis.
In a rebuke considered rare because it involves one of its own members, the International Olympic Committee officially reprimanded Pound for comments that might have damaged the legendary cyclist's reputation. The Los Angeles Times first reported the story on Saturday.
But Pound seemed unfazed by it all. "This has nothing to do with either the IOC ethics commission or the IOC board,'' Pound told The Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "Anything I do or say in relation to doping is done in my capacity with WADA. "I'm responsible to WADA, not the IOC," he added. "Everything I've done has been in accordance with instructions or approval from WADA." Pound also said he will discuss the matter with the IOC. "I'll tell them with the greatest of respect, 'I think you've got it wrong,'" Pound said. "People are going to wonder if the IOC is serious or not." According to the IOC's decision, dated Feb. 2, the organization's ethics commission recommended that Pound had "the obligation to exercise greater prudence consistent with the Olympic spirit when making public pronouncements that may affect the reputation of others."
Oh, and one last thing: How does an organization keep a guy like Dick Pound around with quotes like this:
In January 2007, Pound responded to Floyd Landis' testosterone test following stage 17 of the Tour of France, an event (and a stage) which Landis initially won, but of which he was stripped after failing a dope case and losing at arbitration. Pound declared "I mean, it was 11 to 1!" referring to the tes
I hope Gregg Lamond does the right thing and turns his in too in support, same with Mercx and Indurain.
Cycling has never been lower since Tom Simpson died on the side of the road from an overdose.
The evidence consists of not one hard fact or test.
This whole thing goes back to a kerfuffle of three International sports groups and a urine test for EPO in 1999 that came positive, then could not be duplicated in later tests.
The 1999 test was thrown out at the time because of an independent panel set up by the UCI (Cycling Federation) at the demands of the WADA (World Anti-Doping) and the IOC (Olympics) finding a lack of scientific rigor on the part of the French Lab.
The WADA, the International parent of the US-ADA, threw that panels findings out because it did not like the results.
The IOC censured the WADA, and WADA is still butt-hurt. They could not touch him, so they sent the USADA after him.
It is all eye witnesses. Eye witnesses that are getting a break on their own charges, or people who wrote books and made money on the deal.
He was tested randomly year round. He was tested after every stage win, or top 10 placement. He was tested every day he wore the Yellow in the TDF. He wears freaking makeup on his arms to cover the tracks he has from being stuck so many times.
Not one positive.
Not one.
Armstrong’s secret is that he trained harder and more effectively than anyone else. He and his trainer Chris Carmichael re-wrote the book on training and nutrition. This in a time that his primary rival, Jan Ulrich still drank heavy cream to put on fat in the off season and then trained to get rid of it, thinking it turned into muscle!
They refined the “dancing on the pedals” style of 6 time champion Indurian and perfected it, allowing him to beat the more powerful Ulirch and the superlight weight Marco Pantini in the hills.
Slashdot Mirror
But if you cut the speed by X, you drop the kinetic energy.
So for a 100kg projectile:
Full speed: 312500000 joules
Half speed: 78125000 joules
From the Navy.mil site:
The kinetic energy warhead eliminates the hazards of high explosives in the ship and unexploded ordnance on the battlefield.
and if you read the PDF at that link, direct fire is 6 miles or less, "Horizon in 6 seconds"
Indirect fire is listed as "Long Range Fires" which is I am guessing the 50 to 100 mile range.
So you have a blind spot on the surface from 6 miles to where indirect fire is practical at 50+ miles
And the earth has a horizon to deal with.
Your link confirms what I said.
Put it in a ballistics simulator and try to hit a target at 15 miles with a projectile that is going Mach 7, or 4,500 mph to 5,600, which is what your site quotes. Line of site for a 30ft elevation to each target is 12 miles, so the ground gets in the way.
To do you would have to adjust for windage in hopes of dropping it on top of them, which is about 1100m (15 seconds of freefall) in 24000m (15 miles in meters), or about 1.3 degrees of angle to land where you want it.30 miles and the angle becomes 5.2 degrees at 30 miles. Pretty fine aiming, even for computers. For comparison, the angle for a normal shell is something like 20.2 degrees @15, and could not hit at 30 with a max range of 24. (I have simplified for no air resistance, not a small impact. But it is a comparison, not an actual I-need-to-hit-the-target number)
What it is really good for is reaching out and shooting down nearby missiles/aircraft. Calculating 1 or 2 second intercept is perfect, and you could use fletchettes to get a nice scatter.
See, I have actual naval training in calculating firing solutions, and while it may be a little rusty after 15+ years, I know what I can hit with a gun of a given specification.
Here is the gotcha:
Railguns are line of sight.
The railgun specified at the Fox News link is 4500 to 5000 mph/7000 fps, or they cover a mile in a second.
Meaning any object more than about 5 miles away is over the horizon, and the tragetory is too flat to hit it.
So instead of a 35 mile range by lobbing it at about 38 degrees, you now have a 5 mile range.
Way too close for comfort.
It's been done, it was called WWII.
And the deciding factor was who's carriers got caught with their pants down.
That explains the smell.
Or
Two Minutes to Midnight
So much misinformation...
Royal/Olevetti still make manual typewriters. They suck. They are also damn expensive compared to a tablet, $150
Manual typewriters use a lever system with one lever per uppercase/lowercase character, IBM Selectrics are a ball typewriter.
Power requirements are significant, based on the heat they gave off, at least 60w, probably more.
They are still in demand, so a working one is around $350 and up. Way more than a tablet.
Wow, being an evolutionary dead end sure is a bitter lifestyle.
If you fill it with beer, it is a schooner!
Well, sure, you can do all that with Newegg available parts.
Would I?
Depends. If I can scale horizontally, sure. Downsize the spec and built 4 or 5 in case one fails and I wait days for a replacement part.
If I have a vertical architecture, then I want a box I can get someone onsite in 4hrs or less.
And that ain't Newegg, that is an Dell or HP sized company.
And it is not organic!
Won't go near that DHMO shit...
(explains why hippies are smelly, does it not?)
Parts per trillion puts you in the Homeopathic range... It should make you feel better!
I know, the results could just be dead cat bounce.
Only because the prototype looks like a cigar.
This is why you should not let Lusers near the servers, they are made of hydrocarbons too.
It only boots if you don't observe it.
Because with 1.5gb of ram, 4200rpm drive and a 1 core CPU, it runs like crap.
The T60 was not the cutting edge when I was issued it.
That is because IBM has supported Fedora, RedHat and SUSE as a corporate laptop image for many years.
In fact, if I want a laptop refresh, my refresh rate is 5 years for a Windows, 3 years if I use Linux.
I am client facing, and unfortunately they do everything in M$ so I am forced to do the same. But I do maintain a Linux boot partition on a USB hard drive in case my Windows image craps out, which is far too often.
But... imagine what a Beowulf cluster of these could do!
He is going to go after them in civil court for defamation.
What he stopped doing was trying to get them taken out of the process by declaring them without jurisdiction.
It was a good plan. The races were held in France, several of the races were from before the USADA existed so he had expectation that he would win that fight.
Unfortunately, the UCI is bound to accept and enforce the USADA rulings, and unfortunately Lance signed papers giving away his right to take the USADA to court.
Once he lost that fight, he knew it was a Kangaroo court. And sure enough, they slapped the sanctions on since Lance gave up his right to arbitration by going to Fed Court.
Personally, I think he will win in civil court for defamation. He won't get his medals back tho, just compensation for lost earnings from future endorsements.
Your kidding right? You don't know who Alex Zülle, Jan Ullric (2ns place to Lance THREE times), Joseba Beloki , Andreas Klöden and Ivan Basso are?
Cycling fans do, that is for sure.
I had to look up the spellings, but I know all those guys and would kill to meet any of them.
Oh, and all of them were busted at one point or other for doping, in the Festina Raid, Operación Puerto, or other tests.
You cheat, you test positive or get caught in a raid with your name on a bag of blood for doping.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/08/24/lance_armstrong_doping_scandal_everyone_was_chating_from_1999_to_2005_.html
Everyone that the USADA says will testify against him has a charge against them that the will get mitigation for, or has written a book they made money on.
If they had some hard evidence, and the testimony, fine. Otherwise, it is just a case of rolling lieutenants to get the Capo by making them immune to criminal prosecution.
Apparently you are unfamiliar with the concept of war.
In my opinion, since OBL declared war on us before the attacks on 9/11, in August 1996, the tower attack was not a criminal act, but an act of war.
There is no chain of evidence, or hearsay, or courtrooms on the battlefield.
Rather, "War is Diplomacy by other means" - Clauzwitz
He said nothing about Justice.
Please, he did publish a statement denying it:
"Lord as my witness, I only suck Nazi dick." - Surt
The circle is complete... now I am the Master.
Let me address the only points in your attempt to Fisk me that were not about my misspelling names.
The Lance Armstrong Performance Program, Chris Carmichael with Lance Armstrong
99 test for cortisone was idiotic because he was cleared by cycling officials to use it, of course it showed up in his urine.
Secondly, those same samples were the source of the EPO testing I detailed:
http://news.yahoo.com/did-armstrong-busted-212732618.html
As for the "Cool story bro"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/5043260.stm
Oh, and one last thing: How does an organization keep a guy like Dick Pound around with quotes like this:
I hope Gregg Lamond does the right thing and turns his in too in support, same with Mercx and Indurain.
Cycling has never been lower since Tom Simpson died on the side of the road from an overdose.
The evidence consists of not one hard fact or test.
This whole thing goes back to a kerfuffle of three International sports groups and a urine test for EPO in 1999 that came positive, then could not be duplicated in later tests.
The 1999 test was thrown out at the time because of an independent panel set up by the UCI (Cycling Federation) at the demands of the WADA (World Anti-Doping) and the IOC (Olympics) finding a lack of scientific rigor on the part of the French Lab.
The WADA, the International parent of the US-ADA, threw that panels findings out because it did not like the results.
The IOC censured the WADA, and WADA is still butt-hurt. They could not touch him, so they sent the USADA after him.
It is all eye witnesses. Eye witnesses that are getting a break on their own charges, or people who wrote books and made money on the deal.
He was tested randomly year round. He was tested after every stage win, or top 10 placement. He was tested every day he wore the Yellow in the TDF. He wears freaking makeup on his arms to cover the tracks he has from being stuck so many times.
Not one positive.
Not one.
Armstrong’s secret is that he trained harder and more effectively than anyone else. He and his trainer Chris Carmichael re-wrote the book on training and nutrition.
This in a time that his primary rival, Jan Ulrich still drank heavy cream to put on fat in the off season and then trained to get rid of it, thinking it turned into muscle!
They refined the “dancing on the pedals” style of 6 time champion Indurian and perfected it, allowing him to beat the more powerful Ulirch and the superlight weight Marco Pantini in the hills.