The wobble would only 'scan' a limited field of view, so only if the sun was in that view
Also wouldn't it only work for aircraft that are flying away from the launcher? IR & light signatures are much weaker from the front. At best I think this guidance system would only be economical for ground-based launchers, as the cost of aircraft and their limited payloads mean you want the most effective weapons onboard, not the cheapest. Annoyingly, I can't find any information online about such a simple guidance…
> Also wouldn't it only work for aircraft that are flying away from the launcher?
Yes, pretty much all early guided missiles of the sort were what's called "rear-aspect".
I am completely against the US-Israeli war on Iran. That said, they are not carpet-bombing Iran. That is, they appear to be selecting individual targets rather than engaging in carpet bombing entire areas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombing The choice of targets is not legally legitimate (and the entire campaign is illegal AFAICT), and sometimes they used old/invalid intel, like what happened with that girl…
They are using white phosphorus on populated areas in South Lebanon. That's as vile as one can get.
With a 3D printer and some 'ordinary household chemicals' to quote a certain movie you can do pretty scary stuff.
People can do very scary things with a knife, a car, or petrol+matches. We don't try to regulate those things out of existence like we do with new technology (drones and now 3D printers) Kind of ridiculous that a country with more guns than people and 45k firearms deaths per year wants to regulate 3D printed plastic. Yet collecting and shooting actual guns is still an acceptable hobby in many states.
The same states that want to regulate 3d printers and force you to register them and install only software that will prevent you from printing anything that even looks like a gun part are also the same states that have been trying (or succeeding) in enforcing those same sorts of broad and dubious regulations on firearms too. When you think of states whose legislatures think collecting and shooting guns is an acceptable hobby, California and New York don’t exactly top the list.
I remember an anecdote our robotics lecturer told our university class in 1995, which was about how in the west we try to make expensive things that are the absolute best of technology and how the other side didn't have that luxury and relied on ingenuity. He described a cold war Russian missile they had somehow obtained and were tasked with trying to reverse engineer. Ostensibly, it was thought to be a heat seeking…
This sounds like the early Sidewinder or other 1940's/1950's attempts at infrared homing missiles.
This is bonkers. Video on GitHub: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDO2EvXyncE I'm impressed by the kid's engineering and gumption, but I think he's a bit.. misguided, if you'll pardon the pun. The video ends with shots of Russian drone war, and, bizarrely, photos of David Koresh. I don't think this ends well.
The fact that Koresh and his group held off Federal officers who stormed their building with simple guns that anyone can buy, is likely the point. Out of five and a half minutes of video, David Koresh appears for perhaps three seconds. It does put a new twist on the recent controversy about 3d printers needing to be licensed, however.
I think this is within the intent of the 2nd amendment. Having groups of citizens check the power of their government by being armed comes with the the downside of abusive types forming cults. I think this tradeoff is worth it. Mass shooting evens and cults harming people are obviously terrible. But, I prefer living with some of that knowing that it provides recourse for becoming like the majority of Iranians that are so helpless that at least 10s of thousands were slaughtered in daylight by their government merely for protesting. It’s easy to discount the possibility of becoming an oppressed citizenry if you grew up in the US where the worst you’ve heard about is maybe Kent state or early 2026 ice murdering unarmed citizens. Armed citizens are not a guarantee from oppression, but I think it’s important insurance.
You have a point - cheap drones have changed warfare - but you might be simplifying the issue. As some warfare experts online have discussed, it isn't that cheap drones are the only weapon that is used in Ukraine (or warfare in general), it is one option in vast array of options based on the situation (although, agreed, it is taking on a much bigger significance). Look at the war in Iran. They did a pretty standard p…
It's fairly important to distinguish what kind of drones are we talking about [1]. Iran's using Group 3 drones. The GP is confusing Iran's neighbours not being ready to counter group 3 drones with the drones being inevitably effective. These drones are by necessity large and slow, because they need a lot of energy and aerodynamic efficiency to get their range. That means that they are vulnerable to cheap counters, wh…
> Iran's neighbours would need to intercept only a handful of drones, which is hardly an insurmountable challenge.
It's a big challenge when you run out of interceptors...
Who are the "right" people to kill? What happens when govt decides to aim your weapons at the "wrong" people?
the people who are invading another country in a war of conquest, for instance you seem to believe we live in a world where there no longer are such wars of single-handed aggression we don't live in that world
Right. Not knowing human nature doesn’t mean you won’t be affected by it in ways that you just haven’t thought of or don’t believe could happen to you.