DeathInFire

I mainly talk about the consequences of reusable rocketry on warfare

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@Robotbeat @newscientist Vacuum will probably get better results

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@RSE_VB Hypersonic munitions will sink any ship fairly quickly in a few hits.
A ballistic hit will detonate on the deck, releasing fragments capable of piercing the ship all the way.
You probably only need 10-20 hits to guarantee a kill

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@teortaxesTex One of their best tools, thr Royal Navy, is in a really bad shape

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@teortaxesTex @Truthful_ast Yeah the BF-20 stats look solid, hopefully they can build it cheaply and fast

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@Tygget This kind of hype is great for spaceX, they are raising a ton of money.
Even if some of it is wasted it doesn't matter

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

I was considering launching munitions in a 20m grid and that basically guarantees 40 hits on a carrier, they are so fat

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

I have been going back to projectile designs, fixing it and simplifying it.
I finally did the math on stability and I understood why MIRVs have a conical shape, it's the easiest one to achieve passive stability at hypersonic speeds.

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

It's fun to consider how to design and use these munitions, especially against moving ships, it resembles a lot WW2 gunnery engagements.
And carriers and battleships (lol) are huge targets

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@extradeadjcb I might need to stalk him on social media to plan my revenge

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@JScoreForever @NotWoofers The only thing you MIGHT be able to do if you are lucky is make a target survive for a couple more hours or so.
That's a really poor return on investment compared to spending the same response passive defenses like decoys, camouflage and bunkers

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@JScoreForever @NotWoofers Spending billions on an assumption on Chinese targeting priority is dumb.
What's actually going to happen is that China has a target list, and will build enough missile to hit those targets. If Japan builds interceptors, China will buy more missiles

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@teortaxesTex Trump is a HOI4 map painter. He wants the US color on Greenland, that was always the only real goal.
I really don't think Trump cares all that much about bases, it's people in the administration rationalizing

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@SpaceKoala This is something DARPA should have funded. Infinite military applications

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@NotWoofers US ABM doctrine in the middle east isn't applicable to Japan.
China can build a lot more missiles and launchers than Japan can possibly defend against, even short term.

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@NotWoofers I'm afraid you are the one who hasn't spent the time to think this through.
The point is that Japan just isn't going to be able to protect its infrastructure and assets. Ballistic missiles are going to hit their targets in the first hours no matter how many resources are spent

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@NotWoofers Why? Ballistic missile interception only makes sense where the defender is vastly richer than the attacker.
Better to invest in decoys and other passive defenses.
China can just build more ballistic missiles in response to any interceptor production, at lower cost

[DeathInFire @Death1nFire]

@teortaxesTex Seawolf is probably optimistic, early Virginia is doable though.
Later refinements will close the gap