Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #100 on: May 28, 2021, 10:44:31 AM »
Action80:

I believe what you call "HIGHLY RELIABLE propagandists" because they are HIGHLY RELIABLE.

I got on an airplane in Sydney AUS and flew to LA USA. The trip time, airliner speed and travel time matched the schedule, my phone gps matched lat/long, google maps distance matches, distance on globe with piece of string, everything matches. It is all HIGHLY RELIABLE. An ocean of things is reliable.

You never answered any of my questions. On FE, if I fly a plane from Tierra Del Fuego and keep the southern cross at 90 degrees from one side, where do I go?

On RE, you would make a circle around the south pole, gps, gyrocompass would all match, it is HIGHLY RELIABLE. You would track the latitude line you were on. Without going there, I can diagram and explain it, and that is all I am asking for from you. Even if it doesn't exist, the geometry still is consistent with itself.

Please lay out on a FE map what happens when a plane takes off from Tierra Del Fuego and keeps the southern cross 90 degrees off one side for 8000 miles. Do you have a HIGHLY RELIABLE map on which you can plot a HIGHLY RELIABLE course?

Please no picking nits on the question or denial because no personal experience. I am asking you for a consistent model of how it could be, not to prove it in person. The question is clear and simple, either you have the geometry or you don't, but somehow, I expect your answer will not be either "here is a diagram" or "I have no idea, no reasonable answer". Answer, please, don't waste time with evasion techniques.
As soon as you learn to stick to one subject at a time, namely, will Kim Jong Un ever be able to fire an ICBM?

LOL!

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #101 on: May 28, 2021, 12:53:21 PM »
Kim Jong Un has fired several ICBMs.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #102 on: May 28, 2021, 01:15:22 PM »
Kim Jong Un has fired several ICBMs.
ICBM's? Really?

Errr...no, he hasn't.

I suggest you reacquaint yourself with a dictionary and post haste.

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #103 on: May 28, 2021, 02:46:16 PM »
Google "Hwasong 14 test July 4 2017".  Then come back and tell the class all about it. 

Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #104 on: May 30, 2021, 02:58:58 AM »
Action80:

Do ICBMs exist?

Do they hit what they aim at?

What map do they use to aim them, FE map (????) or RE globe coordinates?

My point was that an ICBM test is a test of FE/RE. If you fire an ICBM and carefully track where it hits, that track will match either FE or RE. If they know how to accurately aim, they know the actual shape of the earth.

If the earth is flat, and they know how to aim, they have a FE map. Either they know the true shape of the earth, or they don't know how to target, whether FE or RE.

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #105 on: May 30, 2021, 07:46:44 AM »
Not sure he's still here.  He went to Google some stuff on Friday and, well, you know what a distraction the internet is. 

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #106 on: June 01, 2021, 01:02:45 PM »
Google "Hwasong 14 test July 4 2017".  Then come back and tell the class all about it.
Okay.

Reports (if they can be believed) indicate the missile may have traveled 700 miles.

Sorry, not even close to an ICBM.

I regret to inform the class you failed.

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #107 on: June 01, 2021, 01:22:54 PM »
From Wikipedia:

First test flight
The first publicly announced flight test was on 4 July 2017, to coincide with the US Independence Day celebrations. This flight had a claimed range of 933 kilometres (580 mi) eastwards into the Sea of Japan (East Sea of Korea) and reached an altitude of 2,802 kilometres (9,193,000 ft) during a 39-minute flight.[29]

This range was deliberately shortened, to avoid encroaching on other nations' territory, by 'lofting' the missile: firing it on a trajectory that was inefficiently high, rather than optimised for range. This allows the missile's performance to be tested and demonstrated, without requiring a huge test range.[29]

A prediction for the possible range, following an optimum trajectory, has been given at 6,700 kilometres (4,200 mi)[30] or as much as 10,400 kilometres (6,500 mi) not taking into account the Earth’s rotation. If true, then this brings the U.S. states of Alaska and Hawaii within the missile's range.[29]

Second test flight
Preparations for a second test flight were detected by US intelligence as early as 20 July.[28] On 28 July, the missile was fired at 11:41 p.m local time, the first time which a night time launch was carried out.[31][32] The missile was fired at a lofted trajectory with apogee of 3,700 km (2,300 mi), landing 998 km (620 mi) away with a total flight time of approximately 47 minutes. Based on the data from the test flight, if the missile were fired at the optimal efficient trajectory, it is predicted that the maximum effective range would exceed 10,000 km (6,200 mi). If factoring in the rotation of the Earth, which may provide a range boost when travelling eastward, the Hwasong-14’s coverage area would include the US West Coast, Chicago, and possibly even New York,[16] but only with a substantially reduced payload.[33]


In other words, the missiles were deliberately launched in an unusually high trajectory in order to reduce the effective range, in order to not encroach on neighboring territories, and to keep the missile within DPRK's telemetry range.  Do you understand the part where it says it could reach Alaska, Hawaii, and the continental US West Coast?  And New York with a reduced payload?  Does this count as an ICBM in your dictionary? 

The "claims" were made by DPRK's own KCNA news agency, and confirmed by US, Japanese and ROK trackers. 

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #108 on: June 02, 2021, 10:14:16 AM »
From Wikipedia:

First test flight
The first publicly announced flight test was on 4 July 2017, to coincide with the US Independence Day celebrations. This flight had a claimed range of 933 kilometres (580 mi) eastwards into the Sea of Japan (East Sea of Korea) and reached an altitude of 2,802 kilometres (9,193,000 ft) during a 39-minute flight.[29]

This range was deliberately shortened, to avoid encroaching on other nations' territory, by 'lofting' the missile: firing it on a trajectory that was inefficiently high, rather than optimised for range. This allows the missile's performance to be tested and demonstrated, without requiring a huge test range.[29]

A prediction for the possible range, following an optimum trajectory, has been given at 6,700 kilometres (4,200 mi)[30] or as much as 10,400 kilometres (6,500 mi) not taking into account the Earth’s rotation. If true, then this brings the U.S. states of Alaska and Hawaii within the missile's range.[29]

Second test flight
Preparations for a second test flight were detected by US intelligence as early as 20 July.[28] On 28 July, the missile was fired at 11:41 p.m local time, the first time which a night time launch was carried out.[31][32] The missile was fired at a lofted trajectory with apogee of 3,700 km (2,300 mi), landing 998 km (620 mi) away with a total flight time of approximately 47 minutes. Based on the data from the test flight, if the missile were fired at the optimal efficient trajectory, it is predicted that the maximum effective range would exceed 10,000 km (6,200 mi). If factoring in the rotation of the Earth, which may provide a range boost when travelling eastward, the Hwasong-14’s coverage area would include the US West Coast, Chicago, and possibly even New York,[16] but only with a substantially reduced payload.[33]


In other words, the missiles were deliberately launched in an unusually high trajectory in order to reduce the effective range, in order to not encroach on neighboring territories, and to keep the missile within DPRK's telemetry range.  Do you understand the part where it says it could reach Alaska, Hawaii, and the continental US West Coast?  And New York with a reduced payload?  Does this count as an ICBM in your dictionary? 

The "claims" were made by DPRK's own KCNA news agency, and confirmed by US, Japanese and ROK trackers.
No, it does not qualify as an ICBM.

Like I wrote earlier, you and the rest wish to cosign for proven liars.

Simply contribute to the fear-mongering, terroristic warlords who lie on a daily basis in order to justify a perpetual state of war.

People who perpetuate lies in order to maintain control should be ashamed.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 10:18:21 AM by Action80 »

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #109 on: June 02, 2021, 11:06:25 AM »
So Japan, USA, ROK and North Korea agreed to tell the same lie?  Love to be a fly on the wall at that meeting. 

Seriously, if all references we make are "liars", we can probably agree that any further discussion of any topic is pointless.  Bye.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #110 on: June 02, 2021, 11:36:26 AM »
So Japan, USA, ROK and North Korea agreed to tell the same lie?  Love to be a fly on the wall at that meeting. 

Seriously, if all references we make are "liars", we can probably agree that any further discussion of any topic is pointless.  Bye.
Yeah, you are right. World governments have never actually had any meetings in order to push any plans involving any sort of subterfuge and duplicity on the world populace.

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/06/lie-after-lie-what-colin-powell-knew-about-iraq-fifteen-years-ago-and-what-he-told-the-un/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chilcot-report-iraq-war-inquiry-tony-blair-george-bush-us-uk-what-happened-a7119761.html

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8919
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #111 on: June 02, 2021, 11:49:42 AM »
It is generally accepted that Russia did fake a lot of stuff during the Cold War to pretend that they had more technological prowess than they did. During the Cold War, Russia went around parading fake ICBMs for decades:

Quote from: AP News
Moscow paraded dummy missiles

MANY OF the huge strategic missiles displayed in Red Square parades during the Soviet era were only dummies, but they scared the West into an expensive response, a Russian magazine reported yesterday.

One such fake, GR-1, an acronym for Global Missile, showed during a parade in 1965, prompted the United States to build an anti- missile defence system worth billions of dollars, said the weekly Vlast (Power). In fact, the Soviets had abandoned the GR-1 project long before the parade.

Another two mobile ballistic missiles shown in the same parade were also fakes, their test launches having been a failure, the magazine said. "Foreign military attaches were scared to death, triggering panic in Nato headquarters," it said. "A huge international uproar followed, and only those who prepared this demonstration knew they were dummies." One of the authors of the Vlast report worked as a missile engineer and said he had worked on a support system for one of the fake missiles to prevent it from bouncing on the stone-paved Red Square in Moscow. The magazine said the Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev first bluffed the West with the legend of powerful Russian missiles, saying the Soviet Union was making them "like sausage". "Such comparison sounded ambiguous for the Soviet people, because the sausage was in deficit, but it duly impressed foreigners," it said. At the time of Krushchev's comment, the Soviets had only four intercontinental ballistic missiles on duty, while the United States had 60. "The myth about the Soviet missile superiority was convenient for both the Soviet leadership and the American military industrial complex, which was getting huge contracts," the magazine said.

There is also a book about Russian Cold War fakery; Russia and the Big Red Lie.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 12:00:41 PM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #112 on: June 02, 2021, 01:42:24 PM »
As provided by Wikipedia:
"...If factoring in the rotation of the Earth, which may provide a range boost when travelling eastward, the Hwasong-14’s coverage area would include the US West Coast, Chicago, and possibly even New York,[16] but only with a substantially reduced payload.[33]
I found this part to be especially rich in asshattedness.

The fine globularists wish us to believe the rotation of the earth would not affect the positioning of a helicopter that is choosing to hover over a specific spot on the ground, but will impact the landing site of a missile that is above the earth in the same air.

What a bunch of freaking liars!

You guys really need to get a grip on all the BS.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 02:02:16 PM by Action80 »

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #113 on: June 02, 2021, 02:46:50 PM »
A helicopter is in the atmospheric boundary layer of Earth.   An ICBM is in space. 

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #114 on: June 02, 2021, 03:18:10 PM »
A helicopter is in the atmospheric boundary layer of Earth.   An ICBM is in space.
LOL!

The moon is in space too, in case you forgot.

You do not even know what an ICBM is and are going to presume to now lecture about where things move and how/why the mythical G is going to affect things?

I don't think so.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 03:21:50 PM by Action80 »

Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #115 on: June 02, 2021, 03:20:27 PM »
It is generally accepted that Russia did fake a lot of stuff during the Cold War to pretend that they had more technological prowess than they did. During the Cold War, Russia went around parading fake ICBMs for decades:

Quote from: AP News
Moscow paraded dummy missiles

MANY OF the huge strategic missiles displayed in Red Square parades during the Soviet era were only dummies, but they scared the West into an expensive response, a Russian magazine reported yesterday.

One such fake, GR-1, an acronym for Global Missile, showed during a parade in 1965, prompted the United States to build an anti- missile defence system worth billions of dollars, said the weekly Vlast (Power). In fact, the Soviets had abandoned the GR-1 project long before the parade.

Another two mobile ballistic missiles shown in the same parade were also fakes, their test launches having been a failure, the magazine said. "Foreign military attaches were scared to death, triggering panic in Nato headquarters," it said. "A huge international uproar followed, and only those who prepared this demonstration knew they were dummies." One of the authors of the Vlast report worked as a missile engineer and said he had worked on a support system for one of the fake missiles to prevent it from bouncing on the stone-paved Red Square in Moscow. The magazine said the Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev first bluffed the West with the legend of powerful Russian missiles, saying the Soviet Union was making them "like sausage". "Such comparison sounded ambiguous for the Soviet people, because the sausage was in deficit, but it duly impressed foreigners," it said. At the time of Krushchev's comment, the Soviets had only four intercontinental ballistic missiles on duty, while the United States had 60. "The myth about the Soviet missile superiority was convenient for both the Soviet leadership and the American military industrial complex, which was getting huge contracts," the magazine said.

There is also a book about Russian Cold War fakery; Russia and the Big Red Lie.


So ICBMs exist.  Can you confirm to @Action80 please.


Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #116 on: June 02, 2021, 03:22:35 PM »
A helicopter is in the atmospheric boundary layer of Earth.   An ICBM is in space.
LOL!

The moon is in space too, in case you forgot.


And? 

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #117 on: June 02, 2021, 03:23:09 PM »
It is generally accepted that Russia did fake a lot of stuff during the Cold War to pretend that they had more technological prowess than they did. During the Cold War, Russia went around parading fake ICBMs for decades:

Quote from: AP News
Moscow paraded dummy missiles

MANY OF the huge strategic missiles displayed in Red Square parades during the Soviet era were only dummies, but they scared the West into an expensive response, a Russian magazine reported yesterday.

One such fake, GR-1, an acronym for Global Missile, showed during a parade in 1965, prompted the United States to build an anti- missile defence system worth billions of dollars, said the weekly Vlast (Power). In fact, the Soviets had abandoned the GR-1 project long before the parade.

Another two mobile ballistic missiles shown in the same parade were also fakes, their test launches having been a failure, the magazine said. "Foreign military attaches were scared to death, triggering panic in Nato headquarters," it said. "A huge international uproar followed, and only those who prepared this demonstration knew they were dummies." One of the authors of the Vlast report worked as a missile engineer and said he had worked on a support system for one of the fake missiles to prevent it from bouncing on the stone-paved Red Square in Moscow. The magazine said the Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev first bluffed the West with the legend of powerful Russian missiles, saying the Soviet Union was making them "like sausage". "Such comparison sounded ambiguous for the Soviet people, because the sausage was in deficit, but it duly impressed foreigners," it said. At the time of Krushchev's comment, the Soviets had only four intercontinental ballistic missiles on duty, while the United States had 60. "The myth about the Soviet missile superiority was convenient for both the Soviet leadership and the American military industrial complex, which was getting huge contracts," the magazine said.

There is also a book about Russian Cold War fakery; Russia and the Big Red Lie.


So ICBMs exist.  Can you confirm to @Action80 please.
I think the larger point Tom was making is that ICBM's do not actually exist.

Pity that went over your head or through your ears.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 939
    • View Profile
Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #118 on: June 02, 2021, 03:28:29 PM »
A helicopter is in the atmospheric boundary layer of Earth.   An ICBM is in space.
LOL!

The moon is in space too, in case you forgot.


And?
And what?

According to you fine globularists, the moon is tidally locked.

Due to gravity.

Just give it up already.

According to your mythology, you wouldn't need to program New York as a target.

Just plot a distance say 300 miles short and let the earth do the rest.

Just sheer stupidity that allows for claims like that.

Not to mention, you are just demonstrating "I believe, I believe, I believe," on a scale not exhibited since Natalie Wood in a Miracle on 34th Street.


Re: FE and ICBMs
« Reply #119 on: June 02, 2021, 03:43:55 PM »
A helicopter is in the atmospheric boundary layer of Earth.   An ICBM is in space.
LOL!

The moon is in space too, in case you forgot.

You do not even know what an ICBM is and are going to presume to now lecture about where things move and how/why the mythical G is going to affect things?

I don't think so.


ICBM;

M = Missile; a projectile.
B = Ballistic; not reliant on aerodynamics for its trajectory.
IC = Inter Continental; having a range typical of the distances between continents. 

The same sources which told you that the initial test of Hwasong-14 had a range of 700 miles, and you trust, also say it reached an altitude of 1750 miles.  Apparently, this gives it the range to hit Alaska and Hawaii.  (I'm not the rocket scientist here, but you have the quadratic equations, so you do the math).  Note that this was the very first test of the Hwasong 14, subsequent development and tests have improved the performance. 

And you will do the math for us?