collapse

Author Topic: rods from god.maybe  (Read 2780 times)

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #1 on: December 17, 2016, 04:35:04 am »
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftDisplay.do?id=1967-064A

i may have found them.lol.
6000 lbs is a shitload of weight for a camera.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #2 on: December 17, 2016, 06:17:37 am »
6000 lbs is a poopload of weight for a camera.
Do you think they sent just a camera?

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #3 on: December 17, 2016, 08:27:51 am »
not in robos mind,no i dont,by 1960ish,the ja0s had small cameras and the swiss had watches of fine quality,even usa nukes have swiss style mechanical operations.
it makes sense something this heavy would have launch failures.multiple 20 ft long rods in multiple sats,i just linked to one sat,there was like 5+sats.
next im gonna find there com frequencies.lol.and locations.as the softwareprograms in the machines will be very low kilobytes.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #4 on: December 17, 2016, 09:02:56 am »
The cameras may be small, but if you don't have a huge lens you aren't getting any good images with the camera.

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2016, 09:12:57 am »
telescopes do pretty good to look at a moon 2 million miles away.im sure a 100 miles is no problem.and telescopes havent changed much in 50 years.size of my arm and ones back then maybe 10 lbs.so that leaves 5990 lbs to do what with?if i was really armap picky i would say 6590 lbs.lol.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #6 on: December 17, 2016, 09:30:06 am »
probably the same 8 zero code string like the nukes.maybe with an analog component also.if i built a cheap array and amped it with an analog on/off and a 8x10 digit binary  counter,i bet i could launch them all.my guess is they are on a form of carousel launch,where one launches,then a small timer then anothers is ready,maybe five seconds between each launch,or maybe an on off pulse to activate.to prevent all launching at once.probably a real primitive targetting system.like an old analog tv with a bomb site.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #7 on: December 17, 2016, 09:50:48 am »
telescopes do pretty good to look at a moon 2 million miles away.im sure a 100 miles is no problem.and telescopes havent changed much in 50 years.size of my arm and ones back then maybe 10 lbs.so that leaves 5990 lbs to do what with?
That depends on what they to do with the camera. If they want to get good photos then a telescope like those you buy on any shop isn't going to be good enough, the worst thing you can have on a camera is the lens, as a bad lens ruins a good camera.

Also, if it's a satellite then it needs power for the electronics, and fuel to keep on orbit, but I suppose those small details can be ignored when looking for a good conspiracy.

Quote
if i was really armap picky i would say 6590 lbs.lol.
If you were ArMaP picky you would look for real data instead of letting your imagination take control. 
Oh, and you would use kg instead of pounds. ;)

PS: how thick would those 20 ft rods need to be to be useful as a weapon?

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #8 on: December 17, 2016, 10:09:58 am »
around 1.5 inches diameter, from what many sites are saying,the rest is kinetic energy.
the lense would only need to be about 12 inches in diameter at most.fuel would probably be hydrazine and some batteries.my guess,1000lbs tops for the complete camera setup.
but hell yea i like to have a good imagination,it keeps life from being boring.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #9 on: December 17, 2016, 10:37:27 am »
around 1.5 inches diameter, from what many sites are saying,the rest is kinetic energy.
I don't think a 127 kg rod would have much of a destructive power on a wide area, only on a small one.

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #10 on: December 17, 2016, 10:43:20 am »
6 chinese blocks from link above.traveling at 8km a second.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #11 on: December 17, 2016, 11:38:44 am »
If my calculations are right that would result in an explosion equivalent to 1 megaton of TNT, so I suppose that velocity is wrong.

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #12 on: December 17, 2016, 02:11:35 pm »
show me your calcs,i understand kenetic energy equations.
im going off wiki specs.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline robomont

  • Inventor's Group
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • Gold 215
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #13 on: December 17, 2016, 02:17:08 pm »
i suspect the speed is right but the mass is speculative.tungsten or du would be my guess,most stories say tungsten but du would be the way i would go.heck put a little lithium as core.may make it thump better.lol.
ive never been much for rules.
being me has its priviledges.

Dumbledore

Offline ArMaP

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13171
  • Gold 770
Re: rods from god.maybe
« Reply #14 on: December 17, 2016, 02:34:16 pm »
show me your calcs,i understand kenetic energy equations.
My calculations were wrong, I used too many zeros for the velocity. :)

With the correct numbers the energy would be something like a kiloton, the kind of energy that could make that damage.

 


Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC
affiliate_link
Free Click Tracking
Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC

* Recent Posts

Re: kits to feed your family for a year by Shasta56
[March 17, 2024, 12:40:48 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by space otter
[March 16, 2024, 08:45:27 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by Shasta56
[March 16, 2024, 07:24:38 pm]


Re: kits to feed your family for a year by space otter
[March 16, 2024, 10:41:21 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 12, 2024, 07:22:56 pm]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 03:25:56 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 02:33:38 am]


Re: Music You Love by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 01:10:22 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 12:14:14 am]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 09, 2024, 12:08:46 am]


Re: A peculiar stone in DeForest by Canine
[March 03, 2024, 11:54:22 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:30:06 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:21:15 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 03, 2024, 11:16:05 am]


Re: Music You Love by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:58:09 pm]


Re: Full Interview - Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt (1997) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:50:59 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:43:03 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by RUSSO
[March 02, 2024, 07:41:30 pm]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 01, 2024, 11:54:23 am]


Re: The Man Who Built UFOs For The CIA (Not Bob Lazar!) by kevin
[March 01, 2024, 11:34:15 am]

affiliate_link