Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

Joined March 2014

Tweets

2K
Followers

17
Following

75
Likes

1K

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

7 months ago

@Nero Are you kidding? As somebody who grew up Catholic I think that this whole mess is one of the most Catholic things I've ever seen. Hypocrisy is a feature, not a bug.

0 0 0 2 0

View Details

@CXCarroll No. Court costs don't include legal fees. Court costs are the costs incurred by the court itself, such as the reporter's salary. In the US civil system each party pays their own fees by default. It is extremely rare for fees to be awarded, and that didn't happen here.

0 0 2 120 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

7 months ago

@CryptosBlues @BenjaminDEKR You're making the mistake of assuming that he's capable of understanding deep technical issues in AI. Musk has always been "superficially technical". He did dictate large parts of the "tuning" and [lack of] safety guardrails in Grok, but I doubt that he understands the core.

0 0 0 3 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

7 months ago

@apestein_dev @BenjaminDEKR Because he's not and has never been a deeply technical person. He probably wouldn't have understood the nature of the problems with xAI even if they were explained to him.

0 0 0 1 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

8 months ago

@oz_a13banger @NOELreports WTF? The Sun is obviously coming from the left (which is clearly apparent from shadows), such that surfaces facing that way are more heavily illuminated. That isn't a sign of manipulation, it's just basic light and shadows.

0 0 1 26 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 @matt_saunders_ This is why even some "hit to kill" atmospheric interceptors like PAC-3 aren't really hit to kill at all - They use "lethality enhancers" to create an expanding pattern of tungsten slugs. Pure hit-to-kill with rods etc only works for purely ballistic targets.

1 0 1 90 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 @matt_saunders_ The problem isn't just movement during the rod's flight time, but also lag and uncertainty of the tracking process itself. Again, it takes time for Kalman filters etc to "settle" after the target starts accelerating in a new direction. Inducing >3m of error is easy.

1 0 1 37 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 @matt_saunders_ This is why the hit-to-kill approach is usually associated with _guided_ projectiles. It's really hard to hit anything that can maneuver with an unguided rod.

0 0 2 20 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 @matt_saunders_ Remember also that the defender can't know the exact trajectory at any moment. They will be using radar with Kalman-filter-based estimation or similar, that takes time to respond to RV maneuvers. Warheads are very small, and 0.5*a*t^2 accumulates quickly.

2 0 2 47 1

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@matt_saunders_ @krakek1 Nope, Mach 24 is the velocity at reentry, and assumes perfect conversion of potential to kinetic energy. By the time they reach the ground Trident II's warheads are moving at mid-single-digit mach numbers, just like every other modern ICBM RV (older ones would go subsonic).

0 0 0 35 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 @matt_saunders_ This. Even the fastest ICBMs are down to low-hypersonic velocities at impact. Maneuvering warheads as fitted to Pershing 2 and originally planned for Trident 2 would pose a more serious challenge to this system.

1 0 0 78 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@krakek1 Very true. A system like this would have the effect of increasing the "sponginess" of each silo (i.e. the number of enemy warheads required to reliably neutralize it) and that actually increases stability by reducing the penalty for riding a strike out.

0 0 0 22 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@Sassy_Khat @JewishWarrior13 How on Earth could Israel "finish the job" when it could barely manage 100 sorties/day? Do you realize how utterly insignificant that is in historical terms? The Israeli was tactically brilliant as usual, but it simply lacks the hitting power to accomplish much more than it did.

1 0 0 44 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@JontiAllegra @ArmsControlWonk @SangerNYT "Vertical envelopment" is a way to rapidly concentrate forces against an enemy weakness. In other words, to strike where the enemy isn't faster than they can reinforce. That works when there are many potential targets, but Iran only has to protect a couple here. Not buying it.

0 0 0 50 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@columbus_derek @vcdgf555 There aren't enough B-2s to justify this sort of deployment. This is much bigger.

0 0 1 240 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@elerrantenomad @ragipsoylu Enriched Uranium has extremely low radioactivity, so much so that it's the material of choice for submarine-launched nukes (which are stored literally feet from where the crews sleep). The idea that this would create a radiological disaster is risible.

1 0 3 223 1

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@nhawk2174 @Osinttechnical Could also be Arrow 3 or SM-3. THAAD is technically endoatmospheric, but high enough that it might look like this anyway.

0 0 3 187 0

View Details

Patrick Chase @patrickjchase

a year ago

@waltersaysthin1 @clashreport I don't think you could "preserve the stealth" of an F-35 while mounting CFTs. The seams between the base airframe of the tank would present serious RCS issues, and the presence of the tanks would change the angles of topside surfaces, also degrading stealth.