Patchesagain:


So.... now we get to my point.

[size=16pt]The only evidence of a Roland being able to engage a falling bomb is from Wikipedia[/size]

[size=16pt] Strong enough evidence for you to have edited and deleted it off Wikipedia

The original source is actually Janes Defence world respected military source, and the Wikipedia quote had an approved citation of source....citation #12....Janes Defence publication of Falkland war history.

All evidence posted below, @Pateches is beaten up blue black again [/size]

Patchesagain:


[size=16pt]Come now post the citation... I dare you![/size]
.

[size=16pt]Next time, don't you ever dare the truth, eat the humble pie
[/size]
.

agaugust:


[size=16pt]Strong enough evidence for you to have edited and deleted it off Wikipedia [/size]

AND IN SO DOING PROVE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS A COMPLETELY UNRELIABLE SOURCE

So, now that we have removed your ability to claim that a Roland somehow shot down a bomb, please read the following:


- targeting altitude. The AN/AAQ-28(V) LITENING targeting pod which we use is also used on B52 Stratofortresses that operate at... you guessed it... 50 000 ft.

Conclusion: Your equipment can be targetted from complete safety of your air-defence network.

- Bombs fall at 150kph. False. According to this manual, bombs fall at speeds up to (dependant on weight and speed of the plane that drops it) 550 to 650 m.p.h or, 1029.98 km/h
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

- SANDF SAM. We have the starstreak, which is the perfect VSHORAD system and the best MANPAD in the world. This is supplimented by a brand new advanced CRAM system with AHEAD ammunition. Your antiquated platforms arent even in the same century as ours.

And, while I am on the topic, you also have no way to defend against saturation attack.

- Show us the source for these claims about a single roland shooting down bombs and defending an airbase

- You claims that you can defend against the SANDF with your current air defence platforms. Nope, ancient SPAAG without radars, obsolete Rolands and pathetic little electro optically driven guns (o wow, reflex sights, so impressive) have no way of defending against modern air-attack from stand off munitions. Just like Iraq, just like Libya and just like Syria, who all had better air-defence systems than you

I look forward to your overly emotional troll response.

Again I ask, what is the purpose of this thread? Besides attracting page-views for the webmaster which he/she may then leverage for advertising revenue. It shames me to see people who engage intelligently elsewhere on these pages falling for this scam. The original question - Who Has The Strongest Army? - is analogous to that other non-question: "when did you stop beating your wife?".

Google "complex question fallacy" FFS!

frumentius:
Again I ask, what is the purpose of this thread? Besides attracting page-views for the webmaster which he/she may then leverage for advertising revenue. It shames me to see people who engage intelligently elsewhere on these pages falling for this scam. The original question - Who Has The Strongest Army? - is analogous to that other non-question: "when did you stop beating your wife?".

Google "complex question fallacy" FFS!

I've learnt and still learning from the discussions that go on in this thread on a daily basis, now if you're not into defense and sh-t, go get a life!

frumentius:
Again I ask, what is the purpose of this thread? Besides attracting page-views for the webmaster which he/she may then leverage for advertising revenue. It shames me to see people who engage intelligently elsewhere on these pages falling for this scam. The original question - Who Has The Strongest Army? - is analogous to that other non-question: "when did you stop beating your wife?".

Google "complex question fallacy" FFS!

This thread is a mix of information, entertainment, history, technology, etc.

You just failed to personally figure out all that value from the longest known internet forum thread in Africa.

Sorry dude, we learn and have fun at the same time on this thread 'Who Has The Strongest Military In Africa?'
.

[size=13pt]

Patchesagain:


....THAT WIKIPEDIA....

So, now that we have removed your ability to claim that a Roland somehow shot down a bomb, please read the following:

So you admit that you deliberately committed an act of fraud by deleting world recorded war history from Wikipedia to mislead the world and win yourself a false victory in an argument ?

Shame on South Africa as a nation, shame !

.[/size]

One of the numerous communication centres installed by boko haram
[COURTESY: Beegeagles Blog]

Patchesagain:


AND IN SO DOING PROVE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS A COMPLETELY UNRELIABLE SOURCE

So, now that we have removed your ability to claim that a Roland somehow shot down a bomb, please read the following:


- targeting altitude. The AN/AAQ-28(V) LITENING targeting pod which we use is also used on B52 Stratofortresses that operate at... you guessed it... 50 000 ft.

Conclusion: Your equipment can be targetted from complete safety of your air-defence network.

- Bombs fall at 150kph. False. According to this manual, bombs fall at speeds up to (dependant on weight and speed of the plane that drops it)

550 to 650 m.p.h or, 1029.98 km/h


http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

- SANDF SAM. We have the starstreak, which is the perfect VSHORAD system and the best MANPAD in the world. This is supplimented by a brand new advanced CRAM system with AHEAD ammunition. Your antiquated platforms arent even in the same century as ours.

And, while I am on the topic, you also have no way to defend against saturation attack.

- Show us the source for these claims about a single roland shooting down bombs and defending an airbase

- You claims that you can defend against the SANDF with your current air defence platforms. Nope, ancient SPAAG without radars, obsolete Rolands and pathetic little electro optically driven guns (o wow, reflex sights, so impressive) have no way of defending against modern air-attack from stand off munitions. Just like Iraq, just like Libya and just like Syria, who all had better air-defence systems than you

I look forward to your overly emotional troll response.

[size=13pt]Bwahahahaha

@Patches failed basic science in school like all South Africans do fail

Read your own source, it actually posted data for free fall bomb in a vacuum where there is no air existing leading to assumption of zero air resistance to slow down a normal falling objects !

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft. in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr "

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

LOL....so no air exists in this world where you fly your SAAF jet aircraft ? Hilarious !

Patches has k.illed h.imself with his own source, he flies Gripen and Hawk jets dropping guided bombs in the world that has no air existing...a perfect vacuum....how does he even get oxygen to breath and stay alive ?

Fact is that in real life, your Soweto guided bomb max speed is about 150 km/hr .

All South Africans are the dullest 50 million people in the world....ZERO maths ZERO science

South Africa's best universities in Africa are producing the worst brains in Africa

.[/size]

agaugust:


[size=16pt] Strong enough evidence for you to have edited and deleted it off Wikipedia

The original source is actually Janes Defence world respected military source, and the Wikipedia quote had an approved citation of source....citation #12....Janes Defence publication of Falkland war history.

All evidence posted below, @Pateches is beaten up blue black again [/size]



[size=16pt]Next time, don't you ever dare the truth, eat the humble pie
[/size]
.

Yes, except there is no citation.

If you had a tertiary education you would know that they provide a completely invalid citation.

So, show us accessible information that states that the roland shot down a falling bomb

agaugust:
[size=13pt]



So you admit that you deliberately committed an act of fraud by deleting world recorded war history from Wikipedia to mislead the world and win yourself a false victory in an argument ?

Shame on South Africa as a nation, shame !

.[/size]

Nope.

I removed misleading information

agaugust:


[size=13pt]Bwahahahaha

@Patches failed basic science in school like all South Africans do fail

Read your own source, it actually posted data for free fall bomb in a vacuum where there is no air existing leading to assumption of zero air resistance to slow down a normal falling objects !

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft. in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr "

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

[s]LOL....so no air exists in this world where you fly your SAAF jet aircraft ? Hilarious !

Patches has k.illed h.imself with his own source, he flies Gripen and Hawk jets dropping guided bombs in the world that has no air existing...a perfect vacuum....how does he even get oxygen to breath and stay alive ?

Fact is that in real life, your Soweto guided bomb max speed is about 150 km/hr .

All South Africans are the dullest 50 million people in the world....ZERO maths ZERO science

South Africa's best universities in Africa are producing the worst brains in Africa [/s]

.[/size]

I said 550-650 mph not 773. If you were literate you would know this.

[size=16pt]I also like how you fraudulently miss-quoted the artical in pathetic and childish attempt to try win an argument[/size]

As is supported by their calculations which include considerations of air resistance


[size=16pt]The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft. in a vacuum would be the tremendousvalue of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h.—and would probably penetrate it.

We approached question from the other way, we know that the terminal velocity of a streamlined modern monoplane is something like 500 or 600 m.p.h. Its shape corresponds somewhat to a bomb with wings, so it is likely that the terminal velocity of the bomb, having no wings, will be somewhat higher. It must be remembered, however, that the surface roughness of the bomb is greater than that of the aeroplane, and this will cause considerable resistance at high speed. So it is likely that the T.V. of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html


There you have it, bombs fall at speeds approaching 1046.07km/h

Once and for all the matter is now beyond argument.

And since you mis-read my first post, and then couldent understand the citation, and since you thought that air-gets denser at altitude, I am forced to correct your earlier statement with:

All Nigerians are the dullest 150 million people in the world....ZERO maths ZERO science ZERO reading ability!!

[/size]

Patchesagain:


I said 550-650 mph not 773. If you were literate you would know this.

[size=16pt]I also like how you fraudulently miss-quoted the artical in pathetic and childish attempt to try win an argument[/size]

As is supported by their calculations which include considerations of air resistance


[size=16pt]

The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendousvalue of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h.—and would probably penetrate it.

We approached question from the other way, we know that the terminal velocity of a streamlined modern monoplane is something like 500 or 600 m.p.h. Its shape corresponds somewhat to a bomb with wings, so it is likely that the terminal velocity of the bomb, having no wings, will be somewhat higher. It must be remembered, however, that the surface roughness of the bomb is greater than that of the aeroplane, and this will cause considerable resistance at high speed.

So it is likely that the T.V. of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html


There you have it, bombs fall at speeds approaching 1046.07km/h

Once and for all the matter is now beyond argument.

And since you mis-read my first post, and then couldent understand the citation, and since you thought that air-gets denser at altitude, I am forced to correct your earlier statement with:

All Nigerians are the dullest 150 million people in the world....ZERO maths ZERO science ZERO reading ability!!

[/size]

[size=20pt]

LOL....LOLZ...LOLLY LOL....

You are still repeating the same suicidal quote again to w.reck yourself publicly, see the bolded part of your above quote in green font....bomb dropped in a vacuum....no air for the pilot to even breathe, no air for the jet engine to do fuel combustion and fly

Your whole argument is d.estroyed by the fact that the speed of 550 mph, 650 mph, or 773 mph, all over 1,000 km/hr, is achieved by dropping that bomb inside a perfect vacuum where no air exists, so you have to suck out all the air on planet earth to achieve your 1,000 km/hr speed according to your own source evidence :

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr ."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Your poor South African education has k.illed Patches & Co in self-suicide

The fear of Nigeria is the beginning of common sense.

Top 10 ranked South African education is worse than that of Congo DRC.

Bwahahaahaha ! Patches has been e-slaughtered on internet today again o !

H.is bruised and battered body has been dropped inside a vacuum

.[/size]

agaugust:



[size=20pt]

LOL....LOLZ...LOLLY LOL....

You are still repeating the same suicidal quote again to w.reck yourself publicly, see the bolded part of your above quote in green font....bomb dropped in a vacuum....no air for the pilot to even breathe, no air for the jet engine to do fuel combustion and fly

Your whole argument is d.estroyed by the fact that the speed of 550 mph, 650 mph, or 773 mph, all over 1,000 km/hr, is achieved by dropping that bomb inside a perfect vacuum where no air exists, so you have to suck out all the air on planet earth to achieve your 1,000 km/hr speed according to your own source evidence :

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft. in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr ."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Your poor South African education has k.illed Patches & Co in self-suicide

The fear of Nigeria is the beginning of common sense !

Top 10 ranked South African education is worse than that of Congo DRC !

Bwahahaahaha ! Patches has been e-slaughtered on internet today again o !

.[/size]

[size=20pt]

Augustus, you dont know what terminal velocity is!?

Your poor education has let him down again!!


So it is likely that the T.V (terminal velocity) of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Go google terminal velocity and see why you are a fool

(Hint: There is no terminal velocity in a vacuum)

[/size]

Patchesagain:

[size=20pt]

Augustus, you dont know what terminal velocity is!?

Your poor education has let him down again!!


So it is likely that the T.V (terminal velocity) of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Go google terminal velocity and see why you are a fool

(Hint: There is no terminal velocity in a vacuum)[/size]

[size=20pt]The bomb was dropped inside a vacuum....so your whole argument is destroyed by your own source.

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft. in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr ."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

.

[/size]

agaugust:



[size=20pt]The bomb was dropped inside a vacuum....so your whole argument is destroyed by your own source.

[/size]

[size=20pt]

Ok, so you are too dense to use google.

Let me explain: Terminal Velocity is based on drag. Drag does not exist in a vacuum.

Their calculation of 650 m.p.h takes into account wind resistance

So it is likely that the T.V (terminal velocity) of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html


In future, I recommend you read the WHOLE CITATION before you start arguing. I know reading is hard for you, but if you just keep practicing, you will get better. Dont give up.

[/size]

Patchesagain:



[size=20pt]

Ok, so you are too dense to use google.

Let me explain: Terminal Velocity is based on drag. Drag does not exist in a vacuum.

[/size]

[size=20pt]Post for us to see, a chart or source for the speed of a bomb dropped inside real air, your current story is about a bomb dropped inside a vacuum.

Listen to a wise man I quote below :

"Depends on drop method, air resistance, and drop altitude. A bomb from a dive bomber would be much faster since it is "launched" at the diving aircraft's speed. Dropped from a conventional bomber, at some speed, air resistance will balance acceleration and the bomb will reach terminal velocity. This will take much longer to happen with a bomb from a dive bomber. In either case, the bomb must be released high enough to allow time to reach terminal velocity.
Sorry I can't give you actual numbers."

Show us the one that is dropped in normal air and tell us the speed, we are tired of your brain vacuum theory fraud

( HINT : HAVE YOU EVER SEEN MANUFACTURE SPECS DATA SHEET QUOTING SPEED FOR GUIDED BOMBS ? FOOL ! )

Case Closed In A Vacuum box.
.[/size]

agaugust:


[size=20pt]Post for us to see, a chart or source for the speed of a bomb dropped inside real air, your current story is about a bomb dropped inside a vacuum.

Show us the one that is dropped in normal air and tell us the speed, we are tired of your brain vacuum theory
.[/size]

[size=20pt]Augustus.

I dont have to show you anything.

The citation clearly lays out the fall speed of a bomb with wind resistance.

Terminal velocity is only achievable with resistance, and the terminal velocity of a bomb is 550-650 mph. This is clearly different to the figure of 773 mph that a bomb can achieve in a vacuum.

There is no argument, it is as clear as the light of day.

If you are lonely and need someone to talk to, go to the relationships section of nairaland. I am not going to waste my time entertaining you.

If you are embarrassed because you were unable to read and understand the citation, or because we have exposed another hole in your education, then I recommend you be a man and deal with it.

Either way stop pulling this thread into the gutter. [/size]

Patchesagain:


[size=20pt]Augustus.

I dont have to show you anything. [/size]

.

[size=20pt]No proof ! So nice to see you surrender openly
[/size]
.

agaugust:

.

[size=20pt]No proof ! So nice to see you surrender openly
[/size]
.

[size=20pt]Proof has been posted. And quite clearly says that max fall speed is around 1000km/h[/size]

agaugust:



[size=20pt]

LOL....LOLZ...LOLLY LOL....

You are still repeating the same suicidal quote again to w.reck yourself publicly, see the bolded part of your above quote in green font....bomb dropped in a vacuum....no air for the pilot to even breathe, no air for the jet engine to do fuel combustion and fly

Your whole argument is d.estroyed by the fact that the speed of 550 mph, 650 mph, or 773 mph, all over 1,000 km/hr, is achieved by dropping that bomb inside a perfect vacuum where no air exists, so you have to suck out all the air on planet earth to achieve your 1,000 km/hr speed according to your own source evidence :

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr ."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Your poor South African education has k.illed Patches & Co in self-suicide

The fear of Nigeria is the beginning of common sense.

Top 10 ranked South African education is worse than that of Congo DRC.

Bwahahaahaha ! Patches has been e-slaughtered on internet today again o !

H.is bruised and battered body has been dropped inside a vacuum

.[/size]

Listen to this fake military researcher who has clearly never touched a calculator or attended any physics class. The source cleary says anything dropped in a vacuum from 20 000 feet (feather, bomb, laptop, tank) would hit the ground at 773 mph. Not faster, not slower. 773 mph. There is no range "550-773 mph" for items falling in a vacuum you basic, tree educated, fo.ol. They accelerate at the same speed, and would hit the ground at the same speed from 20 000 feet. 773 mph. Basic physics.


The only way for any piece of matter to hit the ground at a speed less than 773 mph from 20 000 feet is if it's dropped in normal, standard air altitude. 550 - 650 mph is the terminal velocity range. Terminal velocity is a direct function of drag co-efficient. Drag only exists in normal air, not in a vacuum you fo.ol. Those bombs fall between 550-650 mph in standard air.

It's embarrassing that you typed this in big bold letters, when it's clear to everyone that you dont even know what terminal velocity is .

I asked you, how can a skydiver with a higher drag coefficient than a streamlined bomb fall at a terminal velocity of 200km/h? But you claim Umbani only falls at 150km/h? Im sure your brain exploded when you saw that question.

You are a fake. Utter, complete fake. Security guard who wishes he was a military researcher who "works with ex fighter pilots". Utter fake.

saengine:


Listen to this fake military researcher who has clearly never touched a calculator or attended any pshysics class. The source cleary says anything dropped in a vacuum from 20 000 feet (feather, bomb, laptop, tank) would hit the ground at 773 mph. Not faster, not slower. 773 mph. There is no range "550-773 mph" for items falling in a vacuum you basic, tree educated, fo.ol. They accelerate at the same speed, and would hit the ground at the same speed from 20 000 feet. 773 mph. Basic physics.


The only way for any piece of matter to hit the ground at a speed less than 773 mph from 20 000 feet is if it's dropped in normal, standard air altitude. 550 - 650 mph is the terminal velocity range. Terminal velocity is a direct function of drag co-efficient. Drag only exists in normal air, not in a vacuum you fo.ol. Those bombs fall between 550-650 mph in standard air.

It's embarrassing that you typed this in big bold letters, when it's clear to everyone that you dont even know what terminal velocity is .

I asked you, how can a skydiver with a higher drag coefficient than a streamlined bomb fall at a terminal velocity of 200km/h? But you claim Umbani only falls at 150km/h? I sure your brain exploded when you saw that question.

You are a fake. Utter, complete fake. Security guard who wishes he was a military researcher who "works with ex fighter pilots". Utter fake.

Listen to a wise man, quoted below :

"Depends on drop method, air resistance, weight, and drop altitude. A bomb from a dive bomber would be much faster since it is "launched" at the diving aircraft's speed. Dropped from a conventional bomber, at some speed, air resistance will balance acceleration and the bomb will reach terminal velocity. This will take much longer to happen with a bomb from a dive bomber. In either case, the bomb must be released high enough to allow time to reach terminal velocity. Sorry I can't give you actual numbers."

See how you Southies contradict yourselves, Saengine says 200 km/hr, Patches says 1,000 km/hr

Now, you two fools, show us manufacturers specifications datasheet showing the speed of a guided bomb in this world

Soweto fools, na inside vacuum una go sink today
.

Patchesagain:


[size=20pt]Proof has been posted. And quite clearly says that max fall speed is around 1000km/h[/size]

[size=20pt].....inside a vacuum.

The ONLY experiment done was inside a vacuum where no air exists, is that a normal world?

Fool

No experiment was done in real air, show us a real air test dude !
.[/size]

agaugust:



Listen to a wise man, quoted below :

"Depends on drop method, air resistance, weight, and drop altitude. A bomb from a dive bomber would be much faster since it is "launched" at the diving aircraft's speed. Dropped from a conventional bomber, at some speed, air resistance will balance acceleration and the bomb will reach terminal velocity. This will take much longer to happen with a bomb from a dive bomber. In either case, the bomb must be released high enough to allow time to reach terminal velocity. Sorry I can't give you actual numbers."

See how you Southies contradict yourselves, Saengine says 200 km/hr, Patches says 1,000 km/hr

Now, you two fools, show us manufacturers specifications datasheet showing the speed of a guided bomb in this world

Soweto fools, na inside vacuum una go sink today
.

Your brain has exploded. You are clueless. You are a security guard that has never touched a calculator in his life. In air, objects fall at different speeds based on drag. I asked you, how can a skydiver fall at 200km/h, faster than Umbani, which you claim falls at 150km/h?

You have completely hung yourself. You say no manufacturers releases the speed of guided bombs, THEN HOW DID YOU KNOW UMBANI FALLS AT 150km/h? You hacked into secret Denel files? They sent you a personal email? You have been exposed, you security guard fraud!


And NO, they DID NOT do a complex experiment in a vacuum to determine the speed of 773 mph. How do you make a 20 000 foot vacuum? It's a basic basic CALCULATION you learn in grade 8. But we can't blame you, you don't learn such from under a tree. CALCULATION is the same way they find a RANGE of 550 - 650 mph depending on drag coefficient when falling in air. Even the lowest value of 550 mph is much higher than your fake 150 km/h. Exposed fraud.

agaugust:


[size=20pt].....inside a vacuum.

The ONLY experiment done was inside a vacuum where no air exists, is that a normal world?

Fool

No experiment was done in real air, show us a real air test dude !
.[/size]

Not even worth replying to.

Speed is 1000km/h with drag

End of story.

agaugust:



Listen to a wise man, quoted below :

"Depends on drop method, air resistance, weight, and drop altitude. A bomb from a dive bomber would be much faster since it is "launched" at the diving aircraft's speed. Dropped from a conventional bomber, at some speed, air resistance will balance acceleration and the bomb will reach terminal velocity. This will take much longer to happen with a bomb from a dive bomber. In either case, the bomb must be released high enough to allow time to reach terminal velocity. Sorry I can't give you actual numbers."

See how you Southies contradict yourselves, Saengine says 200 km/hr, Patches says 1,000 km/hr

Now, you two fools, show us manufacturers specifications datasheet showing the speed of a guided bomb in this world

Soweto fools, na inside vacuum una go sink today
.

So you are literally unable to read simple english sentances?

I asked you, how can a skydiver with a higher drag coefficient than a streamlined bomb fall at a terminal velocity of 200km/h?

This guy is just trolling now.

[size=20pt]All that Augustus is trying to do with this childish argument is distract everyone from the fact that Nigeria has no means to defend itself against sustained attack from Hawks and Gripen dropping PGM's and stand-off munitions.

Nigeria had to call in foreign help to deal with Boko-Haram.... yet they still think they stand a chance against the SANDF [/size]

Patchesagain:
[size=20pt]All that Augustus is trying to do with this childish argument is distract everyone from the fact that Nigeria has no means to defend itself against sustained attack from Hawks and Gripen dropping PGM's and stand-off munitions.

Nigeria had to call in foreign help to deal with Boko-Haram.... yet they still think they stand a chance against the SANDF [/size]

Boko Haram would have brought the SANDF to its knees within a few months.

http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=9075:veecraft-building-two-oilfield-security-vessels-for-nigeria&Itemid=229

APRIL 24, 2015 —South African shipyard Veecraft Marine is building two Incat Crowther designed, aluminum hulled commercial oilfield security vessels for UTM Dredging Ltd. a privately held Nigerian company.

According to Incat Crowther there are also future orders pending for what it describes as "a customized vessel design suited to meet the needs of an expanding and demanding oilfield security industry."

The 35 m monohull vessels will each have three Caterpillar C32 ACERT engines, each producing 1,450hp at 2,300 rpm to give the propeller driven vessels a maximum speed of 29 knots. Electrical power is supplied by two Caterpillar C4.4 generators and maneuverability is enhanced by a Hydro Armor Type 800 bow thruster.

Patchesagain:


Not even worth replying to.

Speed is 1000km/h with drag

End of story.

Show scientific proof
.

saengine:


Your brain has exploded. You are clueless. You are a security guard that has never touched a calculator in his life. In air, objects fall at different speeds based on drag. I asked you, how can a skydiver fall at 200km/h, faster than Umbani, which you claim falls at 150km/h?

You have completely hung yourself. You say no manufacturers releases the speed of guided bombs, THEN HOW DID YOU KNOW UMBANI FALLS AT 150km/h? You hacked into secret Denel files? They sent you a personal email? You have been exposed, you security guard fraud!


And NO, they DID NOT do a complex experiment in a vacuum to determine the speed of 773 mph. How do you make a 20 000 foot vacuum? It's a basic basic CALCULATION you learn in grade 8. But we can't blame you, you don't learn such from under a tree. CALCULATION is the same way they find a RANGE of 550 - 650 mph depending on drag coefficient when falling in air. Even the lowest value of 550 mph is much higher than your fake 150 km/h. Exposed fraud.

Patchesagain:


So you are literally unable to read simple english sentances?

I asked you, how can a skydiver with a higher drag coefficient than a streamlined bomb fall at a terminal velocity of 200km/h?

This guy is just trolling now.

That is what scientists call experiment without a laboratory, a mathematical hypothesis, needs no laboratory, a paper calculated 'experiment'.

It's the same thing you are trapped with on your paper and pen calculations that you posted as a photo. It's for a vacuum.

The source clearly says his chart is for free fall bomb speed INSIDE a perfect vacuum....

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Nobody can ever calculate the real speed of a guided bomb in combat, every drop will be determined by :

1. Different horizontal wind resistance
2. Different aircraft
3. Different vertical air resistance
4. Different bomb weight
5. Different air density
6. Different bomb shape and added external kit
7. Different sideways wind resistance
8. Different bomb size
9. Different target mobility
10. Different bomb movements and directional guidance correction



That is the reason why you guys have searched internet tired today and you cannot find any military source for the speed of a dropped bomb.

Also, that is why NO MANUFACTURER in this world has ever quoted combat speed for it's guided bomb.

Show us the manufacturers' data specs sheet for the speed of Paveway and Umbani guided bombs? I dare you all


Your problem is that you think you are smarter than all military analysts and bomb manufacturers of this world, you want to become an Albert Einstein by proving the speed of a guided bomb, something that intelligent people of this world have carefully avoided for decades.

Fool

Now to your question I quote below :

"I asked you, how can a skydiver fall at 200km/h, faster than Umbani, which you claim falls at 150km/h?."

Simple, the Skydiver is smaller in size than the Umbani bomb, he is about half the size of the bomb and therefore less air resistance on him.

Also, he has no wings and the wings of a guided Umbani creates more surfaces for air to push back against and slow down the bomb.

Next, the skydiver falls free downwards, but the Umbani at 40 km away from target is also using it's little battery energy to glide forward over the distance of a whole city to city transit !

First, every single time seconds your bomb travels, it faces more exposure to air resistance horizontally pushing it backwards in a straight line.

Second, more wind resistance pushing it sideways off course and forcing it to re-correct and re-direct flight path via the guidance system to avoid going off course and missing target because it is a precision weapon and that causes up-down oscillation movement common to guided bombs.

Third, another air resistance is pushing upwards against the bomb vertically while the bomb falls down in altitude.....3 different air resistances backwards, sideways and upwards all against the guided bomb because of it's horizontal travel long distance range of many kilometers !

The skydiver man does not travel 40 km from city to city, or does he? No, he has far less struggle against air resistance, he will land on ground with more speed than your guided bomb, if he makes 200 km/hr....your bomb will make about 150 km/hr.

Let me tell you reality to save you guys from trapping and drowning yourselves into repeated delusions and hallucinations :

A bomb is slower than a missile, fact that needs no argument, all eyes see that.

A bomb has NO rocket combustion system to power it like a missile, so bombs will forever be slower than missile.

The speed of an AGM-65 Maverick missile is about 1,000 km/hr....a missile

Patches says the speed of Umbani bomb will be about 1,000 km/hr....a bomb

How does a free fall bomb and a rocket fuel powered missile move at the same speed ? Mission impossible.

That is the simple practical life proof that shows you that your assumption of a 1,000 km/hr speed bomb is very wrong, the world has NEVER built or seen such a thing !

Manufacturers publish the speed of their missiles BUT none ever published the speed of their manufactured guided bombs !

Guided bombs will speed up to about 150 km/hr.....reality of life, all bombs will be shot down by Roland missile with easy ease.

.

agaugust:




That is what scientists call experiment without a laboratory, a mathematical hypothesis, needs no laboratory, a paper calculated 'experiment'.

It's the same thing you are trapped with on your paper and pen calculations that you posted as a photo. It's for a vacuum.

The source clearly says his chart is for free fall bomb speed INSIDE a perfect vacuum....

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Nobody can ever calculate the real speed of a guided bomb in combat, every drop will be determined by :

1. Different horizontal wind resistance
2. Different aircraft
3. Different vertical air resistance
4. Different bomb weight
5. Different air density
6. Different bomb shape and added external kit
7. Different sideways wind resistance
8. Different bomb size
9. Different target mobility
10. Different bomb movements and directional guidance correction



That is the reason why you guys have searched internet tired today and you cannot find any military source for the speed of a dropped bomb.

Also, that is why NO MANUFACTURER in this world has ever quoted combat speed for it's guided bomb.

Show us the manufacturers' data specs sheet for the speed of Paveway and Umbani guided bombs? I dare you all


Your problem is that you think you are smarter than all military analysts and bomb manufacturers of this world, you want to become an Albert Einstein by proving the speed of a guided bomb, something that intelligent people of this world have carefully avoided for decades.

Fool

Now to your question I quote below :

"I asked you, how can a skydiver fall at 200km/h, faster than Umbani, which you claim falls at 150km/h?."

Simple, the Skydiver is smaller in size than the Umbani bomb, he is about half the size of the bomb and therefore less air resistance on him.

Also, he has no wings and the wings of a guided Umbani creates more surfaces for air to push back against and slow down the bomb.

Next, the skydiver falls free downwards, but the Umbani at 40 km away from target is also using it's little battery energy to glide forward over the distance of a whole city to city transit !

First, every single time seconds your bomb travels, it faces more exposure to air resistance horizontally pushing it backwards in a straight line.

Second, more wind resistance pushing it sideways off course and forcing it to re-correct and re-direct flight path via the guidance system to avoid going off course and missing target because it is a precision weapon and that causes up-down oscillation movement common to guided bombs.

Third, another air resistance is pushing upwards against the bomb vertically while the bomb falls down in altitude.....3 different air resistances backwards, sideways and upwards all against the guided bomb because of it's horizontal travel long distance range of many kilometers !

The skydiver man does not travel 40 km from city to city, or does he? No, he has far less struggle against air resistance, he will land on ground with more speed than your guided bomb, if he makes 200 km/hr....your bomb will make about 150 km/hr.

Let me tell you reality to save you guys from trapping and drowning yourselves into repeated delusions and hallucinations :

A bomb is slower than a missile, fact that needs no argument, all eyes see that.

A bomb has NO rocket combustion system to power it like a missile, so bombs will forever be slower than missile.

The speed of an AGM-65 Maverick missile is about 1,000 km/hr....a missile

Patches says the speed of Umbani bomb will be about 1,000 km/hr....a bomb

How does a free fall bomb and a rocket fuel powered missile move at the same speed ? Mission impossible.

That is the simple practical life proof that shows you that your assumption of a 1,000 km/hr speed bomb is very wrong, the world has NEVER built or seen such a thing !

Manufacturers publish the speed of their missiles BUT none ever published the speed of their manufactured guided bombs !

Guided bombs will speed up to about 150 km/hr.....reality of life, all bombs will be shot down by Roland missile with easy ease.

.

This comment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Simple, the Skydiver is smaller in size than the Umbani bomb, he is about half the size of the bomb and therefore less air resistance on him."

...And who ever liked this post is even more retaarded !

agaugust:




That is what scientists call experiment without a laboratory, a mathematical hypothesis, needs no laboratory, a paper calculated 'experiment'.

It's the same thing you are trapped with on your paper and pen calculations that you posted as a photo. It's for a vacuum.

The source clearly says his chart is for free fall bomb speed INSIDE a perfect vacuum....

"The chart shows that the vertical velocity of a bomb dropped from 20,000ft in a vacuum would be the tremendous value of 773 m.p.h. (This figure applies to any piece of matter ; even a feather released at this height in a perfect vacuum would hit the ground at 773 m.p.h or about 1,200 km/hr."

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html

Nobody can ever calculate the real speed of a guided bomb in combat, every drop will be determined by :

1. Different horizontal wind resistance
2. Different aircraft
3. Different vertical air resistance
4. Different bomb weight
5. Different air density
6. Different bomb shape and added external kit
7. Different sideways wind resistance
8. Different bomb size
9. Different target mobility
10. Different bomb movements and directional guidance correction



That is the reason why you guys have searched internet tired today and you cannot find any military source for the speed of a dropped bomb.

Also, that is why NO MANUFACTURER in this world has ever quoted combat speed for it's guided bomb.

Show us the manufacturers' data specs sheet for the speed of Paveway and Umbani guided bombs? I dare you all


Your problem is that you think you are smarter than all military analysts and bomb manufacturers of this world, you want to become an Albert Einstein by proving the speed of a guided bomb, something that intelligent people of this world have carefully avoided for decades.

Fool

Now to your question I quote below :

"I asked you, how can a skydiver fall at 200km/h, faster than Umbani, which you claim falls at 150km/h?."

Simple, the Skydiver is smaller in size than the Umbani bomb, he is about half the size of the bomb and therefore less air resistance on him.

Also, he has no wings and the wings of a guided Umbani creates more surfaces for air to push back against and slow down the bomb.

Next, the skydiver falls free downwards, but the Umbani at 40 km away from target is also using it's little battery energy to glide forward over the distance of a whole city to city transit !

First, every single time seconds your bomb travels, it faces more exposure to air resistance horizontally pushing it backwards in a straight line.

Second, more wind resistance pushing it sideways off course and forcing it to re-correct and re-direct flight path via the guidance system to avoid going off course and missing target because it is a precision weapon and that causes up-down oscillation movement common to guided bombs.

Third, another air resistance is pushing upwards against the bomb vertically while the bomb falls down in altitude.....3 different air resistances backwards, sideways and upwards all against the guided bomb because of it's horizontal travel long distance range of many kilometers !

The skydiver man does not travel 40 km from city to city, or does he? No, he has far less struggle against air resistance, he will land on ground with more speed than your guided bomb, if he makes 200 km/hr....your bomb will make about 150 km/hr.

Let me tell you reality to save you guys from trapping and drowning yourselves into repeated delusions and hallucinations :

A bomb is slower than a missile, fact that needs no argument, all eyes see that.

A bomb has NO rocket combustion system to power it like a missile, so bombs will forever be slower than missile.

The speed of an AGM-65 Maverick missile is about 1,000 km/hr....a missile

Patches says the speed of Umbani bomb will be about 1,000 km/hr....a bomb

How does a free fall bomb and a rocket fuel powered missile move at the same speed ? Mission impossible.

That is the simple practical life proof that shows you that your assumption of a 1,000 km/hr speed bomb is very wrong, the world has NEVER built or seen such a thing !

Manufacturers publish the speed of their missiles BUT none ever published the speed of their manufactured guided bombs !

Guided bombs will speed up to about 150 km/hr.....reality of life, all bombs will be shot down by Roland missile with easy ease.

.

[size=15pt]Augustus,

For the bomb to reach terminal velocity it cannot be falling in a vacuum. Furthermore, i said 550-650 m.p.h not 770mph - which shows that I am not using the value gained from free fall in a vacuum.

It must be remembered, however, that the surface roughness of the bomb is greater than that of the aeroplane, and this will cause considerable resistance at high speed. So it is likely that the T.V. of a bomb is in the 550 to 650 m.p.h. range.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1940/1940%20-%202755.html


See they even talk about the roughness of the bomb causing resistance at high speed!!

Bombs fall at 550-650 m.p.h [/size]