Ukraine Crisis Fund
We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → [necro] Tensions with Iran
| 155 | 70987 |
The Department of Defense just disclosed that a US drone was fired upon over international waters last week (here). This is considered an act of war under international law. What happens next? Nothing? Tighter sanctions? War? Discuss.
- 155 Replies
half of the wars that happened for the past 5000 years would not have happened *
Missed to say that.
Boom!
Bang!
First one merely says that ity can use GPS way points nothing more about GPS tech.
and second one is a thread on some geeky site.
Give me something solid.
Basic physics and knowledge of what happens to flying-wings when they lose power: they lateral spin. Also known as a Graveyard Dive and Death Spiral.
You talking about this?
I fail to see how this is gonna reduce the impact.
I'd ask if you were a warning shot expert, but the fact that you don't seem to understand that doing so is an act of war would lend itself otherwise.
First of all it has not been agreed wether drone was in Iranian airspace on international.
Now as iranians go, they say it was on their side hence US was committing espionage and (depending on drones type)
was posing a serious threat to Iran.
Hence, even if they had downed it, it would have not been an act of war..
Shooting down an unknown aircraft on not responding and complying to landing orders is allowed.
First one merely says that ity can use GPS way points nothing more about GPS tech.
and second one is a thread on some geeky site.
Why don't you back your end up a bit? I have provided information, and it is common knowledge. Since you are making the claim the drone was hacked, proove it.
I fail to see how this is gonna reduce the impact
Your inability to comprehend changes nothing; Physics is not subject to your understanding of it. This entire principle is exemplified by a maple seed: the seed has a 'wing' appendage, turning the entire structure into a flying wing of sorts. You drop the seed, and it spins. This dissapates the energy and slows the seed down, allowing it to impact with significantly lower speed and thus, damage to the structure.
First of all it has not been agreed wether drone was in Iranian airspace on international.
Now as iranians go, they say it was on their side hence US was committing espionage and (depending on drones type)
was posing a serious threat to Iran.
Hence, even if they had downed it, it would have not been an act of war..
Shooting down an unknown aircraft on not responding and complying to landing orders is allowed.
You're the only one contesting it. Iran has made no me tion of the drone's location, and the US says it was 16 nautical miles out - 12 nautical miles is how far Iran's airspace extends. Unless you're saying Iran can't do math?
And Iran can't hide behind international laws when it has shown it has no qualms about breaking them.
You're the only one contesting it. Iran has made no me tion of the drone's location, and the US says it was 16 nautical miles out - 12 nautical miles is how far Iran's airspace extends. Unless you're saying Iran can't do math?
A wall street journal article
Why don't you back your end up a bit? I have provided information, and it is common knowledge. Since you are making the claim the drone was hacked, proove it.
Link
Your inability to comprehend changes nothing; Physics is not subject to your understanding of it. This entire principle is exemplified by a maple seed: the seed has a 'wing' appendage, turning the entire structure into a flying wing of sorts. You drop the seed, and it spins. This dissapates the energy and slows the seed down, allowing it to impact with significantly lower speed and thus, damage to the structure.
A plane is not a seed.
Back it up with sources
And Iran can't hide behind international laws when it has shown it has no qualms about breaking them
Is this some legal expert's opinion or your own?
A plane is not a seed.
Back it up with sources
Aerodynamics and the Theory of Flight: A Student's Reference. Courtesy of Langley Flying School.
From the article:
Spinning is defined as autorotation that develops after an asymmetrical or aggravated stall (a wing dropping during a stall)â"the downward moving wing has a higher angle of attack and more induced drag than the upward moving wing and therefore acquires a greater stalled condition. Spinning involves simultaneous roll, yaw, and pitch as it develops a helical or corkscrew path nose down. An incipient spin is the autorotation prior to a vertical descent path, while a fully developed spin begins once the vertical path is achieved
So, when power is lost to the RQ-170 Sentinel (IE, through the failure of its sole engine), the foward thrust is decreased to zero, while verical lift is reduced to near zero. This will result in a spin, because the RQ-170 is a bat-wing design flying wing, and thus lacks a fuselage. Due to autorotation the craft will spin around its center of gravity, rather than a fixed point. The center of gravity of the aircraft render it parallel to the horizon as it spun, and as this article states here, energy would be lost as it spun:
For a given moment of momentum H, the highest energy state is spin about the âAâ axis (the blue line). Let us suppose that we spin the body about axis âAâ. It is possible to envisage that as energy is lost within a spinning body (due to internal friction, say) then the trajectory will gradually âspiralâ around the surface of the ellipsoid, all the while conserving angular momentum H but losing energy T.
The opposing force of air resistance will also be acting upon the RQ-170 as it falls, further slowing the aircraft down as it approaches the ground, meaning it is very likely that it will be able to survive an impact in relatively good condition.
Is this some legal expert's opinion or your own?
Does it matter? Might makes right. You can learn your place in the world and be content, or watch your country burn after you dared to raise your voice against the most powerful nation in the entire history of man kind.
Sure you should
but
Families of 6637 soldiers
and
73901 soldiers themselves
will disagree with you.
please explain, i dont know what your talking about, you keep posting things you think to be true while not really saying were they came from.
ps enigmaX well played bro XD
watch your country burn after you dared to raise your voice against the most powerful nation in the entire history of man kind.
most powerful nation but scared of china and russia.
your not so powerful as your propaganda makes you think.
i raise my voice against the usa all the time. but there is no way the usa is
ever going to attack my little country. we are much to importend for the global economy. billions of people will get angry if you attack us. while only 16 million actually lives here.
hack we even provide more jobs in the usa then people live in our own nation. you don't want to lose 20 million jobs do you? (including shell, so your oil whit get more expensive aswell )
beter yet, i dare you to attack us. it will give us a reason to unite and attack the usa. the world will be better of whitout that useless country of yours.
Does it matter? Might makes right. You can learn your place in the world and be content, or watch your country burn after you dared to raise your voice against the most powerful nation in the entire history of man kind.
You made me laugh. No offense but you sounded like a 10 year old. learn our places? Do you think anyone but USA is a bunch of animals? Watch our countries burn after we raised our voice? I am raising my voice, I would like to see your all powerful country burn a population with 5-6 million people. I highly doubt that they will even fire a single shot in this country. And since when was USA the most powerful nation in mankind's history. Your nation is nothing but one big debt.
most powerful nation but scared of china and russia.
Scared of two nations who lack the capabilities to project their power outside of their region? Yeah, right.
raise my voice against the usa all the time. but there is no way the usa is
ever going to attack my little country. we are much to importend for the global economy. billions of people will get angry if you attack us. while only 16 million actually lives here.
hack we even provide more jobs in the usa then people live in our own nation. you don't want to lose 20 million jobs do you? (including shell, so your oil whit get more expensive aswell )
Sorry. I lost interest after the phrase "little country."
beter yet, i dare you to attack us. it will give us a reason to unite and attack the usa. the world will be better of whitout that useless country of yours.
And after you wipe us off the map, what then? How will you fill the gaping black hole that occurs when 24% of the world's GDP is gone? How will you feed the third world bread basket cases without the US' grain? How will you keep the trade routes open without the commanding presence of the US Navy? If you should somehow destroy our "worthless nation" you'd be signing your own death sentence in the same stroke.
And since when was USA the most powerful nation in mankind's history. Your nation is nothing but one big debt
I'm laughing now. The US has been the most powerful nation in the world since WWII, when it showed that it could successfully fight a multifront total war, while maintaining a stable economy. Furthermore, the capabilities of the armed forces and sheer unadulterated power of our arsenal render any resistance futile. In short, you sound like a lunatic denying reality.
The US debt was at 125% to its GDP after WWII, provided steps are take to reduce the debt in the future, there is nothing to fear.
I'm laughing now.
keep laughing, it good for the health.
The US has been the most powerful nation in the world since WWII,
Last time I checked, Russia was at least as powerful back then. Another proof you are just a kid who watched to many tv-shows. And before you use superman as proof of your superiority, then I will highlight you for the reality and tell you he isn't real.
when it showed that it could successfully fight a multifront total war, while maintaining a stable economy.
you couldn't even fight people from Vietnam who is halve the size of an average american. You had even superior weapons and yet your super USA lose to them.
Furthermore, the capabilities of the armed forces and sheer unadulterated power of our arsenal render any resistance futile.
Just another proof how weak USA are. Even with such superior weapons you cant even defeat some guerrilla fighters.
you sound like a lunatic denying reality.
coming from a kid, it not even insulting.
there is nothing to fear.
Beside your insane fellow americans with guns. you cant even go to a movie in peace or to school for that matter. USA is a richer version of Afghanistan. At least in Afghanistan it not allowed for civilians to have guns. Even a war torn country like Afghanistan is better then USA.
How will you fill the gaping black hole that occurs when 24% of the world's GDP is gone?
the biggest over spenders are gone aswell.
you people still have more import then export. stop spending money that you did not earn.
How will you feed the third world bread basket cases without the US' grain?
whit all the money that we do not have to spend on usa anymore we can build greenhouses in said countries. give them work, money and food.
How will you keep the trade routes open without the commanding presence of the US Navy?
who said we need you? we are experts of it comes to water. most water projects are done by a dutch companies because we are the experts.
If you should somehow destroy our "worthless nation" you'd be signing your own death sentence in the same stroke.
maybe from laughing.
Sorry. I lost interest after the phrase "little country."
a real american ignores all thats outside his own nation.
close minded, nationalistic and arrogant.
you fit the american stereotype perfectly. (no it's not something to be proud of)
From the article:
Spinning is defined as autorotation that develops after an asymmetrical or aggravated stall (a wing dropping during a stall)�"the downward moving wing has a higher angle of attack and more induced drag than the upward moving wing and therefore acquires a greater stalled condition. Spinning involves simultaneous roll, yaw, and pitch as it develops a helical or corkscrew path nose down. An incipient spin is the autorotation prior to a vertical descent path, while a fully developed spin begins once the vertical path is achieved
So, when power is lost to the RQ-170 Sentinel (IE, through the failure of its sole engine), the foward thrust is decreased to zero, while verical lift is reduced to near zero. This will result in a spin, because the RQ-170 is a bat-wing design flying wing, and thus lacks a fuselage. Due to autorotation the craft will spin around its center of gravity, rather than a fixed point. The center of gravity of the aircraft render it parallel to the horizon as it spun, and as this article states here, energy would be lost as it spun:
For a given moment of momentum H, the highest energy state is spin about the âAâ axis (the blue line). Let us suppose that we spin the body about axis âAâ. It is possible to envisage that as energy is lost within a spinning body (due to internal friction, say) then the trajectory will gradually âspiralâ around the surface of the ellipsoid, all the while conserving angular momentum H but losing energy T.
The opposing force of air resistance will also be acting upon the RQ-170 as it falls, further slowing the aircraft down as it approaches the ground, meaning it is very likely that it will be able to survive an impact in relatively good condition.
OK
But tell me, does it loses enough energy to prevent its major damage?
If some credible source, a physics proffessor or otherwise has said it then it holds some weight other wise, you are talking from your hand
Does it matter? Might makes right. You can learn your place in the world and be content, or watch your country burn after you dared to raise your voice against the most powerful nation in the entire history of man kind.
Yes legal opinion does matter, we are not in 1400, we are in 21st century.
As for the rest, others have answered you better
please explain, i dont know what your talking about, you keep posting things you think to be true while not really saying were they came from.
I am talking about this and this
Thread is locked!