budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) (12/15/90)
From: budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) Too much snake oil to pass these by further. A ballistic missile trajectory is in a high arc -- the warhead rains down on you, near vertically. Tactical units, fleets included, don't have much that can stop that. Scud-B's are not ballistic missiles, though, they are cruise missiles. Anti-cruise missile defense is much like anti-aircraft defense or anti-kamikaze defense. Since Scud's are ground launched, the references to shooting down the bomber are irrelevant. The layered CVBG defense is, however relevant for shooting down cruise missiles. But a good share of the problem got left out. Scud's take time to fuel and ready for launch. Plus a fair amount of travel time from launch to impact. A battle group has a lot of time to get lost (and how's Saddam gonna fine it in the first place?) in the interim. Assuming Saddam gets decent targeting data and successfully launches a Scud, it's got to terminally engage, else it blows a big hole in empty ocean. If you know what the missile's homing mechanism is (in Scud's, it's nil, I believe, making the problem rather easy), you can defeat it. Optical detectors can be confused with smoke; radars with chaff and some other EW (electronic warfare) things I'd rather not go into. Infrared homers can be fooled by IR flares and stack cooling -- all requires preparation, you can't get caught flat-footed. Finally, regarding Phalanx (aka Close In Warfare System - CIWS), all the ammunition is depleted uranium, not just selected rounds. Truly a hairy event (the Brits can speak from similar experiences in the Falklands, their CIWS is called Goalkeeper) resulting in missile pieces raining all over you if successful. The MV remains more or less the same -- what changes is that instead of an incoming missile, you have a whole lot of incoming missile parts flying in close formation. USS Stark (of the FFG-7, Perry class) did have a Phalanx system, as do all the ships of that class. Stark's was placed in manual, vice automatic operation at the time. Reason was twofold: there was no indication that an attack was imminent and if left in auto, the CIWS does predictable but not terribly desirable things like engage your own helicopter. Rex Buddenberg
randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) (12/17/90)
From: Randy Appleton <randy@ms.uky.edu> In article <1990Dec15.011719.12728@cbnews.att.com> budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) writes: > > >From: budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) > >Scud-B's are not ballistic missiles, though, they are cruise missiles. Actually, it *IS* a balistic missile. I looked it up in both "The Russian Military Machine" and "The Encyclopedia of World Military Weapons". More data points. It has a range of between 50 miles (minimum) and 112 miles (maximum with Nuke warhead) or 174 miles (max with HE warhead). Not 174 miles from the coast, but 174 miles from the launch site. I doubt any U.S. carrier is getting that close. Maybe an anphibious force????? Also, the C.E.P. is 1015 yards at the 112 mile range, and gets worse farther out. That means if a ship wpuld just *sit* there, and execerise itself *not* to drift, the missile would still probably miss. Finally, the warhead (HE variety) is only a 1000kg bomb. And although it will be comming down with more velocity than most impacts, it's still not a sure kill on any large ship. -Randy -- ============================================================================= My feelings on George Bush's promises: "You have just exceeded the gulibility threshold!" ============================================Randy@ms.uky.edu==================
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (12/17/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) >Scud-B's are not ballistic missiles, though, they are cruise missiles. Sure you haven't got it confused with something else? All the Scuds are ballistic, according to three different references. -- "The average pointer, statistically, |Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology points somewhere in X." -Hugh Redelmeier| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) (12/22/90)
From: dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) In article <1990Dec15.011719.12728@cbnews.att.com> budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) writes: > >Scud-B's are not ballistic missiles, though, they are cruise missiles. That turns out not to be the case. At least a recent article in Scientific American is in disagreement with you. You may be confusing the Scud-B with the Chinese Silkworm cruise missile that Iran has. -- The aliens are watching! They are | David Messer dave@Lynx.MN.Org -or- waiting for sentient life to evolve. | Lynx Data Systems ...!tcnet!viper!dave