The weight classes used to be round numbers, but they changed them all up or down a couple kilo in 1992 after a doping scandal in order to reset all the records.
And then they did the same thing in 1997, for the same reason.
And then they did the same thing in 2018, for the same reason.
It's very silly, but I guess it means we get more world record attempts?
Caught NPR this morning as they brought someone on to tell us:
So I guess it was an assassination then?
Iskandr and Kinzhal don’t follow that ballistic missile trajectory, though. Neither does ATACMS. These are all semi-ballistic missiles that follow something closer to the "hypersonic glide vehicle" trajectory in your drawing (without the little skim maneuver, though, probably).
The real difference here is range. Things called "hypersonic glide vehicles" are intercontinental. Iskandr is "just" a missile that flys a low trajectory really fast.
Worked for Fidel, though?
Just passed a pro-Palestine trucker convoy near the Islamic center in Rashida's district (I don't live there), kinda cool.
They also claimed to have damaged the Samum a while ago, but I’m not sure how anyone would be able to tell.
Its heartbreaking how the two coolest ships in the world just never worked right. There’s a grand total of two seconds of footage of Sivuch at full hover, and I was almost hoping we might get more. :(
EDIT: found it. Soviet archival footage of Sivuch fully out of the water running on turbines at 15 seconds.
As a weeb who speaks Japanese... what the hell is he even talking about?
I guess there was an episode of Ragna Crimson with some blatant bowdlerization in the subtitles, but that was more notable in just how absurdly offensive the original was, out of nowhere and for no appreciable reason at all (correct subtitles would have needed the f-slur, for a start). But that's the only thing I've even noticed?
I mean IOF are psychos, but that's an APFSDS shell. It's a big tungsten dart with no explosives in it. The only thing it can really destroy is an armored vehicle, since if you shot it at a car or a building it would just punch straight through and make a little hole.
So in context, this just seems like a really tasteless joke about "innocent tank crews". It's hard to find any extra outrage for this specifically.
Wait, that’s actually really impressive. How does that work?
Wire-guided ATGMs work because there’s a big beacon in the tail of the rocket for the launcher to home in on and give steering commands to. It doesn’t work if there are two of them (which is how the big silly glowing eyes thing on the T-90 defeats them, by the way).
Must be a digital guidance system with different beacon ID frequencies in the missiles?
Though when they showed both of them through the sight the second missile was all over the place, and all the combat footage was only one missile at a time. Dual shot was probably just for the cameras, but it did still appear to be guiding both of them, if poorly.
Looks like some sort of shaped charge, something similar to this, and it looks like he pointed the business end of it right towards the turret ring.
Decent chance that that thing took out the tank on its own, actually, if it was pointed the right direction and was the right distance (not too close, not too far) from something vital.
Historically the flat end of anti-tank grenades like that were magnetic so they could be stuck to the tank with the right stand-off from the armor, but maybe that doesn’t work as well today? Or more likely nobody expects to place a demo charge on a tank anymore.
Not a single person without dual citizenship will be on it.
The fundamental problem I have with all of this kind of analysis is that it treats democracy as a tool for finding the median set of ideas amongst a population of people with ideas, and that the “most democratic” system would enact the idea of each idea set that is most tolerable to the most number of people. This is the ur-liberalism.
Politics is the process by which society’s scarce resources (commodities, nature, leisure, whatever) are allocated between people with competing interests. A just outcome would require negotiation between representatives of affinity groups, however composed and however determined, weighted somehow by the size of each group and the impact upon them. Matters of popular opinion just fundamentally are not the problem of politics, and the Condorcet criterion is only good for finding the least unpopular opinion.
I honestly think there’s just no way to make a single-seat election just or democratic in any meaningful way. Multi-member districts are better, since at least you might elect representatives from multiple affinity groups.