Would depend on the distance of the trajectory.
Normal 'close range' trajectory is called 'flat trajectory' and is the norm, but such is not the case with an intercontinental nuke which uses gyro guidance that is dependent on spin and counterspin of a rotating spheroid that is earth and has a 'curved' path as shortest pathline to the target due to the spheroid spinning.
I’ll clarify that I am not a flat earther I am a NASA is a hoax person. So I will take this discussion as far as it’s fruitful. My issue with your statement is that guidance systems are used because too many variables. It could be miscalculations or damage to flight control surfaces etc. So you would need gyros on a flat earth for long range ballistics. You need it because of the range not the “curve” of the earth. If gyros are needed for both the flat and the sphere earth models we are at the impasse of the flat vs sphere of more proof is needed. Gyros in airplanes don’t prove the earth is round. The artificial horizon stays level at cruise and altitude stays constant when mathematically altitude should increase if nose is pointed level on the artificial horizon
Gyros aren't intended to 'prove the earth is round'.
I said they are used in long distance targeting BECAUSE the earth's surface curves.
Also these 'difficulties' involved in all such missiles involve need for slight corrections in accord, so ...............gyro.
As for artificial horizons - So what happens at the edge, where monsters be?
"It could be miscalculations or damage to flight control surfaces, etc"
I'm running this through my intergalactic space discombobulator to translate.
It just crashed so I'll have to get back to you on that.
Well I hope whoever shoots missiles uses a flat earth schematic as trajectory.
Sure to miss.
The military uses flat earth math and excludes all earthly rotation and whatnot when triangulating coordinates and launching artillery
Would depend on the distance of the trajectory. Normal 'close range' trajectory is called 'flat trajectory' and is the norm, but such is not the case with an intercontinental nuke which uses gyro guidance that is dependent on spin and counterspin of a rotating spheroid that is earth and has a 'curved' path as shortest pathline to the target due to the spheroid spinning.
I’ll clarify that I am not a flat earther I am a NASA is a hoax person. So I will take this discussion as far as it’s fruitful. My issue with your statement is that guidance systems are used because too many variables. It could be miscalculations or damage to flight control surfaces etc. So you would need gyros on a flat earth for long range ballistics. You need it because of the range not the “curve” of the earth. If gyros are needed for both the flat and the sphere earth models we are at the impasse of the flat vs sphere of more proof is needed. Gyros in airplanes don’t prove the earth is round. The artificial horizon stays level at cruise and altitude stays constant when mathematically altitude should increase if nose is pointed level on the artificial horizon
Gyros aren't intended to 'prove the earth is round'. I said they are used in long distance targeting BECAUSE the earth's surface curves. Also these 'difficulties' involved in all such missiles involve need for slight corrections in accord, so ...............gyro.
As for artificial horizons - So what happens at the edge, where monsters be?
"It could be miscalculations or damage to flight control surfaces, etc"
I'm running this through my intergalactic space discombobulator to translate.
It just crashed so I'll have to get back to you on that.