Not really. By definition an inertial guidance or navigation system has to do some sort of integration of inputs over time. Gyroscopes are typically used as part of inertial guidance systems, but connecting a gyro output directly to a rudder input wouldn't by itself be considered as inertial guidance. The device wasn't doing anything to calculate absolute position based on inertia.
This is an incredibly naive approach. All asteroids emit light in the infrared, to detect and track asteroids just takes an infrared telescope making apparent motion against any background completely irrelevant. NASA is working on this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEO_Surveyor
I work on NEO Surveyor, I replied to the parent comment largely agreeing with you, however I wanted to mention that we do rely on apparent motion for determining if a source is moving (asteroid/comet). However IR is ideal for spotting asteroids for a few different reasons, a big one is that asteroids have a wide range of surface brightness. Think bright concrete to black coal, so in the visible spectrum a 100m light stony asteroid can be just as bright as a 500m coal colored one. It is very difficult to determine size from the brightness alone. However in IR everything is approximately the same temperature (largely proportional to the distance from the sun), so these things all glow in the IR directly proportional to their diameter.
inkl has pretty good variety of news sources for a reasonable subscription fee, i subbed for years then started using apple news. Unfortunately i cannot recommend inkl because you have to email support to cancel your subscription, they offer a 50% discount if you try to cancel but that business practice of sign up with one click, email support to cancel i cannot condone.
You are correct in that steel is harder and stiffer than titanium. Steel is also more re-usable, smelt-able than titanium.
However, when it comes to fatigue (which I assume, you are referring to fracture strain) titanium has a significant edge. The fracture strain for steel is roughly 15%, but for titanium alloys, it often reaches and exceeds 50%.
I don't say this to contradict you, but to point out that as with most things in life, "it depends".
A better argument for steel is it requires 5-10 kwhr/kg to produce vs 60kwhr/kg for aluminum and 250kwhr/kg for titanium. So for the same energy you get 6 times more steel than aluminum and 25 times more than titanium. Which seems to say when the properties of steel are acceptable it's the cheaper option.
Like steel, titanium alloys have a distinct non-zero fatigue limit, and thus can be engineered to have infinite fatigue lives. Though the exact details differ and steel or titanium can be better depending on exactly what the conditions are.
Running the case this hot will degrade the battery significantly faster, hot battery reduces short term capacity and hot battery reduces lifetime capacity. MacBook(2015) has similar issues.
inkl.com has been around a lot longer than “apple news” and seems to have much more news sources. Im going to be voting for the underdog with my money.
