this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
102 points (96.4% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6681 readers
663 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Now someone much smarter than I can do the math, but over a long enough distance with a shallow enough incline on a ramp I dont see why it couldnt be done.

The math might mean the scale of the ramp makes the idea completely unrealistic to build. But I dont see why it wouldnt work.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

What does that even mean? Yes, this is a question of physics.

[–] Gullible 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

8 gs is enough to cause most to pass out. 40 gs is usually going to cause permanent injury. Accelerating on a ramp at less than 40 gs would take a while if you want to reach escape velocity which is like Mach 25. Just mental mathing poorly, it’d be like a mile or two of railgun. Iunno, someone sober do the math.

[–] snugglesthefalse 2 points 6 months ago

Well yeah a lot of the concepts for magnetic accelerators for orbital launches in the past 50 odd years have required 2+ km of ramps to work well

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Mathematically it's possible, like you mentioned. But due to physical restrictions of our planet it might not be feasible

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The shallower your incline is, the more air you have to fight through post-launch to get to orbit, during which you're losing velocity. And to get into low-earth orbit you have to reach 28000 kph (17000 mph) because it's not so much about going up as it is about going really fast.

So you need to leave the end of the gun going fast enough to lose speed to air resistance and still reach and maintain orbit. I haven't attempted the math, but it seems like your vehicle would burst into flame going that speed in the atmosphere.

[–] starman2112 1 points 6 months ago

Assuming you don't want to exceed 10 gs, it takes 77ish seconds to accelerate to 7.6 km/s (the orbital velocity of the ISS). It would necessitate a nearly 300 km long railgun. Hypotheoretically it could work, though my gut instinct is that it would require fictionally strong materials to build