NavList:

   

Reply

Fred,

I am sorry, It was not you who started the sentence with "No,"
:-)
Anyway, I have no problems with understanding written English:-)

Alex.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Alexandre Eremenko wrote:

>
>
> Fred,
>
> I understand that we were discussing different
> inertial nav systems, and I think I perfectly understand
> your English:-)
> I only tried to make clear that we were talking of DIFFERENT things.
> (If you are talking of a different thing from the thing your interlocutor
> is talking about, you do not begin your sentence with "No",
> correct?)
>
> Anyway, let us discuss now inertial nav of a submarine itself.
> If I understand correctly, inertial nav alone cannot be accurate
> over a long period of time. Because the error accumulates.
>
> So it is not a substitute for Cel Nav, and can only complement it,
> when the boat is under surface and Cel nav is not available.
>
> In any case, I think that my argument that high accuracy
> Cel Nav was necessary for launching a ballistic missile is valid.
> And it was indeed necessary in the period after ballistic missiles
> appeared, and before sattelite nav became available.
> The first ballistic missile launched from a submarine
> was in the middle or late 50-s (different sources give different dates).
> But they agree that this was a Soviet submarine which launched
> SS-11 Scud missile.
>
> Satellite nav was apparently not available in USSR until they
> started to use the de-classified US Transit system in 1967.
> Russian book of 1989 (!!) only mentions this satellite system,
> but adds that "Soviet Union also has one" without any detail.
> Perhaps a secret one.
>
> In general, Soviet space program was a king of "show business".
> They wanted to sow to everyone that they have working ICMB.
> In 1960-s I was a child, and I followed the space exploration very
> closely. The Soviets launched first satellite, then first man,
> then first woman, etc. Everything was widely advertised as "world's
> first's". At the same time, US launched hunderds of satloites which were
> not advertised. All we knew was that these are "communication satellites"
> or just "secret satellites". But they made real use of these satellites:-)
>
> Sorry for deviating from the list subject.
>
> Thus the interest to accurate Cel Nav was really brief, especially in
> the West.
>
> Alex.
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Fred Hebard wrote:
>
>>
>> Alex,
>>
>> The inertial nav I was discussing was for determining the position of the 
submarine prior to launch, rather than sat nav, as I had suggested earllier.  
This is clear to me in the text I quoted, but perhaps not as clear to you, 
being a non-native speaker of English.  It also aligns with my memories of 
the description of the method, in National Geographic or wherever.
>>
>>
>> Fred Hebard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 10, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Alexandre E Eremenko wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Fred,
>>>
>>> I suppose that when speaking of "inertial nav" as a guidance system,
>>> they mean the nav of the missile itself, not of the submarine.
>>>
>>> To use an inertiale nav in the missle one needs the position
>>> of the starting point. This is what Sat nav was for.
>>>
>>> Now we see Shufeldt's report in new light:-)
>>> The reaseach was made in 1957-1961 :-)
>>> And then classified.
>>> Exactly at the time when they developed the Polaris A-1 missile...
>>>
>>> When Transit became available, they declassified the Shufeldt report.
>>>
>>> So now we know what "Precision Cel nav" was really for:-)
>>>
>>> Alex.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=118918
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=118925
>
>
>

   

Reply