Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cjbgkagh 354 days ago
You can calculate these things based on wing size and airspeed and neither are hard to figure out, it’s clearly subsonic and it’s been seen in public.

While skunkworks are certainly a thing they’re not hiding some Star Trek antigravity device, physics is still physics and physical limits are physical limits. Look at the Otto Celera 500L if you want to see what attacking physical limits looks like. It’s an engineering problem and the fundamentals are well understood. The real magic is in creating the money to pay for it.
1 comments
kcplate 354 days ago
> You can calculate these things based on wing size and airspeed

If you can calculate the depth and damage those bombs did based on wing size and airspeed (which technically is another parameter you really don’t know, but are relying on what you are told) you ought to be working for the government.

link
cjbgkagh 354 days ago
The US military isn't the only entity making airplanes and bunker busters. We don’t need to rely on their figures to know a great deal about what happened. You are assuming they have some order of magnitude hidden capacity which would break the laws of physics, and I’m very confident that they didn’t do that.
link
kcplate 354 days ago
Gotcha. So your perspective is there are other entities making airplanes with the capabilities of the B-2 and a bunker buster bomb equivalent to the GBU-57 so much so that you can reliably determine capabilities of those weapon systems…as a layman with just a hand calculator?

That is a $2B aircraft and a $20M ordinance (each). You want to tell us exactly what entity has anything even remotely equivalent? No one else but the US could bear to afford it. Maybe China…but if they have it’s not common knowledge.

I think you have pretty much dug yourself a hole here on your knowledge and capabilities…you have landed into silliness now. (That pun was definitely intended)

link
cjbgkagh 354 days ago
No amount of money enables an aircraft to violate the laws of physics. Clearly your knowledge on aircraft is limited otherwise we would have a shared understanding of the physics involved and wouldn’t even be having this argument.
link
kcplate 354 days ago
Who is arguing that? I’m not. The only argument I have made is that you do not have all the values you need to plug into your “calculator” to make a BDA.

But perhaps you can figure all of those values you need by just knowing the wingspan and airspeed of the aircraft delivering the payload, if so…I defer to you and this amazing deductive knowledge that you possess.

link