• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
mlooney

Things that go bang

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Are you sure that was a Russian missile?  

I recall seeing somthing like that from Australia

Fairly sure.  It's been all over the military parts of Discord and online news.  First entry for 'Russian Missile return' on Google gives this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10949493/Return-sender-Russian-missile-U-turns-smashes-troops-fired-malfunction.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the article, it looks like they won't have a repeat of that incident from that particular launcher. "Launched by Russian separatists" maybe says not well trained on the device - not regular troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still some what confused why surface to air missile would do a controlled 180.  Their radars only point forward.  What I suspect is that one of the control systems wires were reversed and when told to go left it went right, and the feed back curve made it turn around.  I don't think it was the troops training level that did it, it was a failure of the missile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mlooney said:

I'm still some what confused why surface to air missile would do a controlled 180.  Their radars only point forward.  What I suspect is that one of the control systems wires were reversed and when told to go left it went right, and the feed back curve made it turn around.  I don't think it was the troops training level that did it, it was a failure of the missile.

Hmm. Reversed wires seems to say that it had been worked on or possibly sabotaged.

My theory was there is a 'target location' that needs to be entered, and the default is the origin. That would be bad design, because - evident from the video, but I've seen worse, albeit not in a weapon system. I think your theory makes more sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

My theory was there is a 'target location' that needs to be entered, and the default is the origin.

Problem with that is that's a surface to air missile.  Target is moving so you can't enter its location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Anti-aircraft missiles identify their targets via radar, laser, lidar, or tracking radio or infrared emissions. Since the target is moving in a hard-to-predict manner, the guidance computer needs to know “what” the target is, rather than simply going on a set-before-launch course.

As for reversed wires being sabotage, it’s quite likely that it was simple incompetence—somebody carelessly installed something backwards. The original statement that led to the coining of Murphy’s Law was in reference to technicians installing a set of accelerometers backwards in a rocket sled experiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ijuin said:

The original statement that led to the coining of Murphy’s Law was in reference to technicians installing a set of accelerometers backwards in a rocket sled experiment.

In theory, a scientific experiment can never fail. Either you get more support for your theory, which is good; or you learn something new, which is even better.

In practice, sometimes the new thing you learn is that the equipment setup was effed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now