|
#12
●
03-02-2015, 10:50 PM
| ||||||||
 Fiscally Irresponsible Poster Rank:103 Male Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 15,944
Contributions: 1
Mentioned: 49 Post(s) Quoted: 6753 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
Altitude is the distance between the Airplane and the surface of the earth. Attitude is the relation of the plane to the horizon. Meaning is the plane nose even with the horizon, therefor maintaining level flight, or high on the horizon therefor gaining ALTITUDE, of is the nose below the horizon therefore decreasing ALTITUDE.
|
|
#14
●
03-03-2015, 01:14 AM
| ||||||||
| So Fucking Banned Poster Rank:452 male Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 2,435 Mentioned: 7 Post(s) Quoted: 462 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
Very peculiar theyre not so worried about its loss. Regardless its been up there for awhile. Probably due for decommission relatively soon. |
|
#15
●
03-03-2015, 01:47 AM
| ||||||||
| So Fucking Banned Poster Rank:174 Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 8,808 Mentioned: 30 Post(s) Quoted: 5360 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
yes. aircraft attitude English Noun (aviation) The orientation of an aircraft with respect to the horizon. |
|
#16
●
03-03-2015, 01:52 AM
| ||||||||
| So Fucking Banned Poster Rank:174 Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 8,808 Mentioned: 30 Post(s) Quoted: 5360 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
and BTW, there is no laser technology even close to being capable of destroying satellites from 500 miles away
|
|
#19
●
03-03-2015, 06:46 AM
| ||||||||
 His Royal Highness Poster Rank:51 man up bitches Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 30,153
Contributions: 1
Mentioned: 87 Post(s) Quoted: 11929 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
I have an attitude problem aswel....
|
|
#20
●
03-03-2015, 07:29 AM
| ||||||||
| Fiscally Irresponsible Poster Rank:103 Male Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 15,944
Contributions: 1
Mentioned: 49 Post(s) Quoted: 6753 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Friggin Laser Takes Out US Military Satellite
Two points: 1. It need not be from 500 miles. (Already in orbit perhaps). 2. The US already disabled satellites 10 years ago from Earth via lasers - granted not blew up but 10 years is a long time in the technology field (The 1998 Report to Congress "Future Military Capabilities and Strategy of the People's Republic of China", states "China already may possess the capability to damage, under specific conditions, optical sensors on satellites that are very vulnerable to damage by lasers. However, given China's current interest in laser technology, it is reasonable to assume that Beijing would develop a weapon that could destroy satellites in the future.") and for kicks. 3. I used 'friggin' to indicate I was being a little factious. |
