With the casual change from "34-35 degrees" to "lets draw a line at 34 degrees" followed by the "and this is where the press release was" I got the vibe that this was parallel construction. Still some good sleuthing, don't get me wrong, but still.
If they flew one to some air base outside DC for the roll out the author would be shooting from the hip and who knows what facility he'd have zero'd in on. Sure it might have been the same one because "the same facility as the B2" is an easy just-so story but you don't really know with any certainty.
I wonder if it’s made out of proper material and not just some clay concept
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/new-russian-submarine-s...
Even if only 10% of Russia's strategic nuclear weapons work correctly that can still make for a really bad day.
(Cannot remember if I saw this procedure on a film narrated by von Braun himself, but I doubt it; I think I saw him in a Disney)
Some modern ICBMs might also have some limited terminal guidance capacity but there's not much public information on that subject.
This was useful because inertial navigation in the submarines was imperfect, but having a precise location fix for the submarine was important if you wanted to shoot at things precisely. Of course with ICBMs launched from fixed silos, the origin point was precisely known from the onset.
And yet the war is ~8 months long and counting. "The other guy's military is trash." propaganda happens in every war, and on both sides, if you've studied even a few. We just cleared the sale of 116 Abrams tanks to Poland: https://www.defensenews.com/land/2022/12/07/us-state-dept-cl...
From the article:
>Polish defense officials have said the acquisition will enable the country’s military to counter Russia’s flagship T-14 Armata tank. The procurement will also allow Warsaw to replace its outdated Soviet-designed T-72 and PT-91 tanks with a new tracked vehicle platform.
The people on the ground conducting the war don't seem to think they've been "effectively demilitarized".
“Drones” covers a wide range of things, from a Tu-141 to a Shahed-136 to a improvised grenade-dropping quadcopter to the MQ-1/9/20 Predator/Reaper/Avenger series to tbe X-47B and the (maybe soon) unmanned operation capacity of the B-21.
Some capability sets are widely enough available to be seen as commodities, some are available on the export market, but from a narrow range of suppliers who provide them very selectively, and some represent unique capacities.
!!!
That's the point! There are a hell of a lot of "unhardened" targets and using a full scale aircraft as a drone is missing the point about cost. I mean, there's not just the news from Ukraine, but also this:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/08/us/power-outage-moore-county-...
...and it looks like a classic case of "disruptive technology" syndrome, where the incumbents dismiss the upstart as inadequate for their sophisticated customers - justifiably as far as it goes - until all of a sudden the tsunami arrives because the new tech has been iterating until it can address the high end.
I read the original book defining the phenomenon in my university library around the time it came out, and it's interesting how describing the problem manifestly hasn't created a solution:
Camera: Nikon D5 F-stop: f/2.8 Exposure time: 5 sec. Focal length: 28mm Max aperture: 3
I don't think it's a safe assumption that there is a linear relationship between the angles. Like, two pairs of objects in the image, in which the angles subtended by each pair relative to the viewer are the same in real life, may not be separated by the same number of pixels in image space depending on the lens used.
Furthermore, this could be thrown off by even a small hill or mountain obscuring the astronomical horizon.
So any view of the sky is an approximation, and will introduce subtle errors that make it harder to pin down an exact location.
They probably won't be huge areas, but this would be a harder problem if the time and longitude had to be exact with no existing guesses.