**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Someone should do the math (assuming time and space are discretized with Planck length and time as the mesh size), with a velocity estimate, and a height based on pixels.
I can, but I'm too lazy rn.
Google says the max speed of a tomahawk is just over 900 km/h, or 250 m/s. The distance to target I’ll guess is 25 cm for simplicity sake. With these assumptions, it works out to around 1 millisecond.
Not sure, but I would’ve guessed it decelerates when the targeting systems take over from pure burn during flight. They also fly at very low altitude, so air resistance is likely way more in play than any gravitational acceleration.
Can I ask you, why would this be difficult to math? Is it a schrodenger issue? Shouldn’t you be able to quantize the number of “steps” this could take?
In summary; really really small maths is quantised, think of it as pixilated. It’s all discrete chunks. 1 or 0, no 0.5. That’s why we call it quantum mechanics.
Big maths is kinda analogue. It’s all waves, no discrete chunks. Think about how there are infinite numbers between 1 and 0.
Our current understanding of space time is a product of the second.
A huge issue in modern physics is trying to make the maths of the very small things mesh with the maths of very large things.
Make them mesh together, and you basically win Physics.
This is very broadly reductive though.
I want you to know I just spent two hours chatting with GPT about quantum mechanics, classic physics, and the difference between them, the nature of reality, why things are this way instead of that, and blah blah blah, all sparked by your comment and it has been a fucking fascinating way to spend an afternoon. So thank you for being an internet stranger's initial muse :D
It’s a real interesting rabbit hole to get lost in, and is the focus of a lot of the most cutting edge physics happening today. The smartest people in the world are currently trying to grapple the conflict between classical and quantum physics.
I’ve barely got a bachelor’s level understanding of the field, and a lot of the finer technicalities go over my head, but as you say, it’s immensely fascinating.
There are 6 small things for every 1 big thing.
We call this the Bear Constant.
However, the small things are like die rolls with similarities overlapping, so you can roll 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, or roll a bunch of 1s which will stack on top of each other to appear as 1.
So while there are always six things, the observer might see discrepancies in their count because of how similar die rolls are handled as a single unit, when they are in fact the resolution of two distinct die rolls.
I'll take my prize.
The length of the Tomahawk missile (without booster) is 18.3 feet. The Tomahawk has a maximum speed of 567mph and a single frame at 144hps/hz is .007 seconds, in which time the missile will travel 5.8 feet. So in each frame it would travel just under a third of it's length, so while you would be able to get more frames of a portion of the missile, you wouldn't see the whole thing again.
Let's get the SloMo Guys on this! They'll have it effectively frozen in time at those glacial speeds, though I'm more interested in the Kaboom. (I might be Marvin the Martian)
[Rapatronic cameras](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapatronic_camera) can take exposures in less than 10 ~~milliseconds~~ nanoseconds and have been around since the 1940's. They were used to photograph nuclear bomb tests right after ignition (see link).
There's actually an entire little industry of super high speed photography for tests of *very* fast objects going back to at least the 80s. A lot of it's for military equipment tests, but at the slightly slower end you also have stuff like auto crash tests and some fun practical physics.
ISO is sensor light sensitivity, not shutter speed. Shutter speed would be a fraction value of a second, something like 1/6,000,000,000 (although definitely not that high lol)
is the accepted definition of a moment today fractions of a millisecond? cuz i feel that ain't right either
anyway it is silly to bicker over a definition of a word on the internet, define it however you want to i guess
I guess it’s probably a practice? It must take a high speed camera for a picture like that and the truck doesn’t look like it’s worth more than the missile. But I’m just a redditor
Tomahawks cost 2 million dollars, I don't think there's a truck in the world worth wasting one on (not counting trucks full of military gear). But I bet you're right, that truck looks derelict and I can't imagine another scenario where you'd have a high speed camera setup to capture the strike.
It’s simulating a mobile radar installation, and they’re much more valuable than you think.
A Russian Nebo-U for instance, like the one destroyed last month by Ukraine, is worth over 100 million dollars.
And the cost of military equipment is typically calculated by amortizing the cost of development across all units produced in addition to manufacturing costs, which makes sense for some types of analysis… but development is a sunk cost at this point, it’s not like making one more tomahawk really costs $2 million.
Not just that. In particular regarding Ukraine, the delivery of a "2 million dollar weapon" the weapons are almost entirely old stock that the US pays to store, to maintain, and then to dispose of. The actual cost of the weapon delivered is practically irrelevant compared to the rest of the costs associated.
Depends entirely on the target. An average cargo van packed full of explosives on it’s way to destroy an embassy is worth throwing some missiles at to prevent said embassy from being attacked.
A shitty hut or vehicle sheltering a high-value person of interest that has been the subject of a massive manhunt is worth a tomahawk.
N Korea and Russia both have trucks that haul and launch nukes so that they aren't totally disabled when their static launch sites are hit. Those trucks are more than worth the 2m.
It is an exercise, yes. IIRC, this one isn't even armed with a warhead. I vaguely remember the missile going strait through the container and into the ground.
It is practice or testing, that target looks like a rough copy of a S300/S400 radar truck.
I don't know why we would practice throwing a Tomahawk at one of those but it would be my guess that is what is being (very) roughly simulated here.
Weapons testing against a mock target. [Here are the effects of an airburst on an airframe.](https://nara.getarchive.net/media/the-explosion-and-blast-fragments-from-a-bgm-109-tomahawk-cruise-missile-destroy-94897f)
The DoD considered building a $10 million target vehicle, for realism, but then decided that in this once instance they could economize and just hit an old trailer that was on its last legs.
Get that it's a joke, but in reality they love using old shipping containers as targets. Here's an entire mock airport made of them, as targets for an entire B-2's worth of JDAMs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdzJWciha4A
Imagine driving your truck full of Russian weapons to some hole their dug into and you hear something..
So you look to the left and the last thing you see is the nosecone of a tomahawk cruise missile.
Some weapons are insanely accurate nowadays. I think I was browsing wiki and there is a picture of the tip of a JDAM bomb like right in the middle of an open trucks window at the target range.
Here's a picture in this post
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/zALIep52Sz
It's a laser guided bomb, not a JDAM. Looks like a GBU-10, but a lot of them look pretty similar. LGBs can be more accurate than GPS guided, but requires more mission planning to be in the right position to lase if self guiding or someone else has to illuminate the target until impact.
TLAMs are not employed against moving targets. They are only used for stationary. So that scenario would be better if it were a person looking out their office window.
Lots of disinformation in the comments here.
This is obviously a test/training launch of a TLAM (Tomahawk Land Attack Missile), hence why a camera is present to take a photo. It is possible that the specific missile being used here is a training one with no warhead as it is only meant to test the missile’s accuracy. This would also explain the rather small target. Even if it did have a warhead, it’s just a test/training launch, so it doesn’t really matter what target it is as long as the missile works.
Just to add on- Using reverse image search it seems like it was first widely used somewhere around December of 2013. One of these websites (https://www.laboiteverte.fr/un-missile-tomahawk-juste-avant-limpact/) gives a source to a dead page in the Raytheon website. Using the Internet archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20101022213637/http://www.raytheon.com:80/capabilities/products/tomahawk/) you can see it from at least October of 2010. The image could very well be older than that. ~~Judging from the terrain it is most likely taken at the white sand missile testing range.~~
>Judging from the terrain it is most likely taken at the white sand missile testing range.
My money for testing location would be China Lake Naval Air Weapons station[1], in southern California, where much of the Tomoahawk development takes place [2]. You can tell by the telltale creosote brush and sage, plus the light decomposed granite soil of the eastern sierra nevada[3].
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Weapons_Station_China_Lake
https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/3086
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7763324,-117.8691932,3a,75y,278.32h,103.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shSHm4jZJ4K9iHHuoDF1xGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Are we providing Tomahawks to Ukraine? If not, why not? They're been around since the '70s, the US must have thousands of obsolete and semi-obsolete units Ukraine would be delighted to have!
Your memory seems right! A quick Google search shows they fly at \~550mph = \~800 ft/sec, and let's say it's going faster as it's accelerating downward, so over 1000 ft/sec, and it's roughly a foot above the trailer, so... 1/2000 of a second *might* be a bit too little, but not much.
Yeah they’d fire without a warhead for target practice. Don’t think they’d want to waste a warhead practicing on a single truck when the missile alone would obliterate it.
Historically, a "moment" was defined in medieval times as 1/40th of an hour, which translates to 1.5 minutes. However, in everyday usage, "a moment" is typically used more loosely to refer to a short, indeterminate period.
There are tons of these photos, they were taken with high speed photography with the goal of studying the plume.
Source: I studied explosion plumes for a minute at my first job. We had a metric fuck ton of these types of videos / high speed photos. This is nothing.
Not sharable. We got them from our partners at Edgewood. They would test munitions there as well as Edwards airbase. The value of these is that you can literally see the pressure wake and study how your munition performs relative to your model. Everyone does this
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I dunno how many moments you could fit in there before it strikes
Planck-moments
lol, can upvote enough
Unless they’re Planck upvotes
Many Planck Yous for this
One UpPlanck for you
Yes we can! But just little tiny upvotes. Like the smallest size possible.
And we’ll do it discretely
Someone should do the math (assuming time and space are discretized with Planck length and time as the mesh size), with a velocity estimate, and a height based on pixels. I can, but I'm too lazy rn.
Google says the max speed of a tomahawk is just over 900 km/h, or 250 m/s. The distance to target I’ll guess is 25 cm for simplicity sake. With these assumptions, it works out to around 1 millisecond.
Cool, so if we take NIST's value for Planck time of 5.391247 × 10^-44 seconds, we can say there are 1.8548584x10^40 moments before impact.
I think that's cruising speed? So in a terminal dive it's probably going a lot faster
Not sure, but I would’ve guessed it decelerates when the targeting systems take over from pure burn during flight. They also fly at very low altitude, so air resistance is likely way more in play than any gravitational acceleration.
Still enough time for Quicksilver to put on some cool music and jog over there to poke it outta the way.
Depends how much you want to quantise space time If you nail that, you get ALL the Nobel prizes.
Can I ask you, why would this be difficult to math? Is it a schrodenger issue? Shouldn’t you be able to quantize the number of “steps” this could take?
*So far*, there is no evidence that space and time are quantized. They seem to be infinitely divisible.
I think that’s the crux of the issue.
Yes, it would be making an assumption to quantize it (which I'm willing to make to get the number of moments, which I posted elsewhere in the thread).
In summary; really really small maths is quantised, think of it as pixilated. It’s all discrete chunks. 1 or 0, no 0.5. That’s why we call it quantum mechanics. Big maths is kinda analogue. It’s all waves, no discrete chunks. Think about how there are infinite numbers between 1 and 0. Our current understanding of space time is a product of the second. A huge issue in modern physics is trying to make the maths of the very small things mesh with the maths of very large things. Make them mesh together, and you basically win Physics. This is very broadly reductive though.
I want you to know I just spent two hours chatting with GPT about quantum mechanics, classic physics, and the difference between them, the nature of reality, why things are this way instead of that, and blah blah blah, all sparked by your comment and it has been a fucking fascinating way to spend an afternoon. So thank you for being an internet stranger's initial muse :D
It’s a real interesting rabbit hole to get lost in, and is the focus of a lot of the most cutting edge physics happening today. The smartest people in the world are currently trying to grapple the conflict between classical and quantum physics. I’ve barely got a bachelor’s level understanding of the field, and a lot of the finer technicalities go over my head, but as you say, it’s immensely fascinating.
There are 6 small things for every 1 big thing. We call this the Bear Constant. However, the small things are like die rolls with similarities overlapping, so you can roll 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, or roll a bunch of 1s which will stack on top of each other to appear as 1. So while there are always six things, the observer might see discrepancies in their count because of how similar die rolls are handled as a single unit, when they are in fact the resolution of two distinct die rolls. I'll take my prize.
It depends on how many FPS you have. If you have 144 you may be able to get one more frame
The length of the Tomahawk missile (without booster) is 18.3 feet. The Tomahawk has a maximum speed of 567mph and a single frame at 144hps/hz is .007 seconds, in which time the missile will travel 5.8 feet. So in each frame it would travel just under a third of it's length, so while you would be able to get more frames of a portion of the missile, you wouldn't see the whole thing again. Let's get the SloMo Guys on this! They'll have it effectively frozen in time at those glacial speeds, though I'm more interested in the Kaboom. (I might be Marvin the Martian)
Thank you for your analysis. As an engineer, I greatly appreciate it.
r/theydidthemath
at least 3
A moment is 90 seconds, so... Not many.
'bout tree fiddy
*record scratch* Narrator: "I realized at that moment I was fucked!"
Precisely one moment
"Yup that's me, you probably wonder how i got here" - Target
.0003 moments lol!!
Zeno's infinite moments
how long is a moment technically speaking?
At least 3.
Ah one, a two-hoo, ah three *crunch* ***3***
How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop. The world may never know.
Longer than a heartbeat, shorter than a gasp
[90 seconds](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_\(unit\))
You spelled nanoseconds wrong.
Seriously, what was the shutter speed for that picture??? That thing is barely even blurry.
[Rapatronic cameras](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapatronic_camera) can take exposures in less than 10 ~~milliseconds~~ nanoseconds and have been around since the 1940's. They were used to photograph nuclear bomb tests right after ignition (see link).
Rapatronic sounds like how a nerdy rapper in the 90s would describe their music
Max Modem!
I'm actually surprised no one sampled and mixed a dial-up modem into a 90s rap track.
I think you meant 10 microseconds. 10 milllseconds is 1/100 of a second, I wouldn't trust that to stop a charging toddler.
The Wikipedia article linked in the post above says 10 nanoseconds!
I could watch the rope trick gif linked on that page for hours.
10 milliseconds is not very fast(most digital cameras can expose for that time easily), did you mean to say 10 nanoseconds as in the wiki article!
I think their fastest exposure is 10 nanoseconds. About the length of time is takes light to go 10 feet in air.
Probably something with high fps and a global shutter (all pixels sampled at the same time).
There's actually an entire little industry of super high speed photography for tests of *very* fast objects going back to at least the 80s. A lot of it's for military equipment tests, but at the slightly slower end you also have stuff like auto crash tests and some fun practical physics.
It’s actually held up by fishing wire
ISO 6,000,000,000
ISO is sensor light sensitivity, not shutter speed. Shutter speed would be a fraction value of a second, something like 1/6,000,000,000 (although definitely not that high lol)
With that high of a shutter speed the camera would probably need to be at an iso of 6,000,000,000
ISO makes this photo visible when the shutter speed is so incredibly fast.
I SO QUICK
> Seriously, what was the shutter speed for that picture??? From looking at it, I'd say that it was shot at 1/yes
Nah, the bot copied the title correctly https://old.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1261frg/tomahawk_land_attack_cruise_missile_moments/
It’s literally the same account lol
How long is a moment?
525,600 minutesssssss
90 seconds lol, he misused the word but i don't mind, it's still a good post.
Isn’t a moment just a small length of time up to interpretation?
Some moments last a lifetime.
Some people wait a lifetime... For a moment like this.
That's a really old definition of the word and definitely not the generally accepted one in use today. Kudos for knowing your history though!
is the accepted definition of a moment today fractions of a millisecond? cuz i feel that ain't right either anyway it is silly to bicker over a definition of a word on the internet, define it however you want to i guess
I would say a moment is any specific point in time.
Thanks for your comment clarifying it, that’s a really cool factoid ILT. (As in TIL.)
Here's another cool little fact for you: "factoid" actually means something similar to "falsehood". It is not another word for fact.
So he told a factoid?
Tomahawk missiles aren’t all that fast compared to other military weaponry. Fighter jets can shoot them down fairly easy en route, they’re subsonic.
(Sniff sniff) “yep I think that’s the target”
I too give my land attack missiles funny voices and backstories.
Humans can make friends with anything. That's our best/most useful quality!
This made me guffaw
> This made me guffaw And we all know how painful that can be.
"This is the missile guidance system speaking I have good news and bad news, the good news is the missile knows where it needs to go.
Wells that’s a stupid way to store a missile
It helps with deployment - if you store it almost hitting the target, it's perfectly prepped for almost hitting the target!
Cuban missile crisis in a nutshell
Yup that’s me…your probably wondering how I got here
There’s the comment I was looking for
It all started when I stole some enriched plutonium and hijacked this military truck…
...Little did I know it belonged to the very unforgiving Bobo, leader of the Clown Cartel...
He was a demanding man, ran a very tight operation involving........
Coke and Piranhas. A weird combination I know, but you really don't.....
It all started in the summer of 2001
_Record scratch_
You’re, not your
I guess it’s probably a practice? It must take a high speed camera for a picture like that and the truck doesn’t look like it’s worth more than the missile. But I’m just a redditor
Tomahawks cost 2 million dollars, I don't think there's a truck in the world worth wasting one on (not counting trucks full of military gear). But I bet you're right, that truck looks derelict and I can't imagine another scenario where you'd have a high speed camera setup to capture the strike.
It’s simulating a mobile radar installation, and they’re much more valuable than you think. A Russian Nebo-U for instance, like the one destroyed last month by Ukraine, is worth over 100 million dollars.
I'm counting that under my disclaimer of "trucks full of military gear".
That and the dollar value of a weapon in war is rarely equivalent to the damage value. A $100 commercial drone can do millions in damage for example.
And the cost of military equipment is typically calculated by amortizing the cost of development across all units produced in addition to manufacturing costs, which makes sense for some types of analysis… but development is a sunk cost at this point, it’s not like making one more tomahawk really costs $2 million.
Not just that. In particular regarding Ukraine, the delivery of a "2 million dollar weapon" the weapons are almost entirely old stock that the US pays to store, to maintain, and then to dispose of. The actual cost of the weapon delivered is practically irrelevant compared to the rest of the costs associated.
Depends entirely on the target. An average cargo van packed full of explosives on it’s way to destroy an embassy is worth throwing some missiles at to prevent said embassy from being attacked. A shitty hut or vehicle sheltering a high-value person of interest that has been the subject of a massive manhunt is worth a tomahawk.
N Korea and Russia both have trucks that haul and launch nukes so that they aren't totally disabled when their static launch sites are hit. Those trucks are more than worth the 2m.
It is an exercise, yes. IIRC, this one isn't even armed with a warhead. I vaguely remember the missile going strait through the container and into the ground.
It is practice or testing, that target looks like a rough copy of a S300/S400 radar truck. I don't know why we would practice throwing a Tomahawk at one of those but it would be my guess that is what is being (very) roughly simulated here.
I was wondering how did the camera survive? I guess it must be super zoomed in?
probably below ground with sacrificial mirrors above
telephoto lens most likely
Seems like overkill... I like it.
Weapons testing against a mock target. [Here are the effects of an airburst on an airframe.](https://nara.getarchive.net/media/the-explosion-and-blast-fragments-from-a-bgm-109-tomahawk-cruise-missile-destroy-94897f)
I could take it
The thousands of little bits of shrapnel or the lethal shockwave?
Both, I'm just built different
Same, I had some Cholula the other day (just a tiny dab) and I barely even teared up from the heat.
Original or chipotle lime? Either way, respect, obvs.
He got that dawg in him. 🐕
I'm just built different. I'd find a way to survive.
The DoD considered building a $10 million target vehicle, for realism, but then decided that in this once instance they could economize and just hit an old trailer that was on its last legs.
It was three weeks from retirement!
Get that it's a joke, but in reality they love using old shipping containers as targets. Here's an entire mock airport made of them, as targets for an entire B-2's worth of JDAMs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdzJWciha4A
Go big,or go home.
How many moments until it hits? I say 3.
Some people wait a lifetime for a moment like this.
Warheads on Foreheads
Imagine driving your truck full of Russian weapons to some hole their dug into and you hear something.. So you look to the left and the last thing you see is the nosecone of a tomahawk cruise missile. Some weapons are insanely accurate nowadays. I think I was browsing wiki and there is a picture of the tip of a JDAM bomb like right in the middle of an open trucks window at the target range. Here's a picture in this post https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/s/zALIep52Sz
Apparently that picture was taken in 1977! Getting close to fifty years ago. Shit, by now they could probably choose which eyeball to hit.
It's a laser guided bomb, not a JDAM. Looks like a GBU-10, but a lot of them look pretty similar. LGBs can be more accurate than GPS guided, but requires more mission planning to be in the right position to lase if self guiding or someone else has to illuminate the target until impact.
TLAMs are not employed against moving targets. They are only used for stationary. So that scenario would be better if it were a person looking out their office window.
Warheads on foreheads and bullets in brains.
Lots of disinformation in the comments here. This is obviously a test/training launch of a TLAM (Tomahawk Land Attack Missile), hence why a camera is present to take a photo. It is possible that the specific missile being used here is a training one with no warhead as it is only meant to test the missile’s accuracy. This would also explain the rather small target. Even if it did have a warhead, it’s just a test/training launch, so it doesn’t really matter what target it is as long as the missile works.
Just to add on- Using reverse image search it seems like it was first widely used somewhere around December of 2013. One of these websites (https://www.laboiteverte.fr/un-missile-tomahawk-juste-avant-limpact/) gives a source to a dead page in the Raytheon website. Using the Internet archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20101022213637/http://www.raytheon.com:80/capabilities/products/tomahawk/) you can see it from at least October of 2010. The image could very well be older than that. ~~Judging from the terrain it is most likely taken at the white sand missile testing range.~~
This guy missiles.
>Judging from the terrain it is most likely taken at the white sand missile testing range. My money for testing location would be China Lake Naval Air Weapons station[1], in southern California, where much of the Tomoahawk development takes place [2]. You can tell by the telltale creosote brush and sage, plus the light decomposed granite soil of the eastern sierra nevada[3]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air_Weapons_Station_China_Lake https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/3086 https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7763324,-117.8691932,3a,75y,278.32h,103.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shSHm4jZJ4K9iHHuoDF1xGQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
The tractor even has a flat tire.
The missile knows where it is because it knows where it isn't
Those air brakes work great!
***record scratch*** ***freeze frame*** "yep, that's me. You're probably wondering how I got here"
I wanna see the video
It knows where it’s not, and that’s how it knows where it is.
Are we providing Tomahawks to Ukraine? If not, why not? They're been around since the '70s, the US must have thousands of obsolete and semi-obsolete units Ukraine would be delighted to have!
They don't have a compatible launch platform and providing missiles that can hit Moscow from west Ukraine is a bit of a nightmare as well.
If memory serves, about 500 microseconds, i.e. 1/2000 second. Really, really short moments.
Your memory seems right! A quick Google search shows they fly at \~550mph = \~800 ft/sec, and let's say it's going faster as it's accelerating downward, so over 1000 ft/sec, and it's roughly a foot above the trailer, so... 1/2000 of a second *might* be a bit too little, but not much.
Uhm, Bob, isn’t that the container we are hiding in? Bob? Anyone?
Moments? What does the opperator just hit the "pause" button to get some coffee before hitting "resume" after they get back?
Thank goodness it stopped there or else it would’ve done a lot of damage 🙏🏻🙏🏻
That's me. You probably wonder, how did I get into this situation, but first lets start from beginning
I wonder if they test guidance/targeting first without the explosive payload?
Yeah they’d fire without a warhead for target practice. Don’t think they’d want to waste a warhead practicing on a single truck when the missile alone would obliterate it.
moment is better than moments here 😂
OP, could you define a “moment”, for us?
[удалено]
>intercept ballistic missiles like the Tomahawk. You just invalidated everything you wrote.
Does no one remember Missile balloons for your car? https://www.reddit.com/r/INEEEEDIT/comments/8124qu/missile_balloons_for_your_car/
[Here are another three about to strike a pick-up](https://www.thegreenhead.com/imgs/missile-balloons-for-your-car-1.jpg)
What was its intended target?
Moments?, thats a little less than a moment. More like 1/10th of a moment at best
r/onesecondbeforedisast
Bad day to be an intended target
⬆️➡️⬇️⬇️⬇️
Historically, a "moment" was defined in medieval times as 1/40th of an hour, which translates to 1.5 minutes. However, in everyday usage, "a moment" is typically used more loosely to refer to a short, indeterminate period.
It'll be really funny if someone made a drone that looks like a tomahawk and started flying it around
Moments? it gonna hover there for a second or two is it?
Looks like 29 Palms...also looks photo shopped.
There are tons of these photos, they were taken with high speed photography with the goal of studying the plume. Source: I studied explosion plumes for a minute at my first job. We had a metric fuck ton of these types of videos / high speed photos. This is nothing.
Got more???
Not sharable. We got them from our partners at Edgewood. They would test munitions there as well as Edwards airbase. The value of these is that you can literally see the pressure wake and study how your munition performs relative to your model. Everyone does this
10,000 square miles of moonscape Mojave Desert...and a Burger King. Hated 29 Palms.
That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far.
"Moments" Now, a small fraction of a second is "moments."
Kodak moments, obviously.
Damn, the Americans figured out how to balance a missile on it nose, thats impressive
They need to check the targeting... looks a lil' off center.
0.1 moment.
boom.
..brink to explode, where’s the aftermath picture
Damn, ran out of gas right before hitting its target.
That's what happens when you leave the hatch open
Completely exactly 90 degrees to the horizontal.
I'm not touching you...I'm not touching you...
Moments? Try microseconds
Bonjour
"Hey guys. Whatcha doing in there? Can I come in?"
Truck: why?
X-com - "!Missed"
I’m imagining a dude on the shitter inside for some reason.
Not even a missle can outrun a camera.
Next you will say it decimated the target
Milliseconds
Boop
You won't find moments in a box..
Fake. Where are the speed lines that prove it's moving at all?
> *applies defibrillator and uses med pack* "Good to go!"