• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The launch platform can aim it and use math to account for gravity, the atmosphere and all that jazz to hit the target at least close enough. Just like we already do to safely crash/burn up space debris.

    • Patches
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      at least close enough

      To whose standards exactly? Dick Cheney’s?

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, they can’t. The atmosphere is an unknown state, different temperatures, different densities, different wind directions, none of which can be known ahead of time. That’s why weather forecasting is always approximate. You get a percentage chance that it’ll rain. You don’t get a definite time stamp with 100% accuracy.

      We cannot predict atmospheric disturbances to the level necessary to make this a practical system. When they burn up space debris they do it “somewhere over the middle bit of the Atlantic” That’s about the level of definition you get. It’s not accurate at all.

    • Spaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone (veritasium?) Already did an episode on this and concluded even at like 500 feet up from ground, without an active guidance system, it’s up to luck to hit within a reasonable distance, IIRC.

      • Taringano@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol you can’t compare a youtuber 500ft up throwing weights with a full military and scientific effort.