FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (jim bowers) (09/24/90)
From: jim bowers <FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU> It seems to me that the technology exists to destroy every Iraqi Tank in Kuwait without any U.S. personnel ever crossing the border. Use RPV's (like the ones the Israelis have used to such good effect for intelligence gathering) and attach a laser designator to the tv camera. The only thing you now need is a long range delivery system for some pave laser guided bombs. Ideally a simple unguided long range rocket should do the trick. Since it would probably take too long to develop this technology, I suggest a high speed / high altitude release from an F-15 in a ballistic trajectory. Although I haven't worked it out, it seems to me that a 250 lb laser guided bomb released from an F-15 at 50,000 ft at a 45 degree angle (up) at mach 2 would be able to travel one very long way. A technician targets a tank, the computers work out the ballistics, a F-15 pilot goes for a little training mission, and 150 miles away an Iraqi tank mysteriously disappears into a small crater. Feasible????????
raymond%europa@uunet.UU.NET (Raymond Man) (09/27/90)
From: raymond%europa@uunet.UU.NET (Raymond Man) RPV do not have the necessary range because of the need to communicate with the home base. Even for shorter range, the channels can be jammed easily. As for tossing a guided bomb at Mach 2 from 50000', an F-15 can't even fly level in that condition clean, let alone carrying bombs. Just call me `Man'. "And why take ye thought for " -- Matt. 6:28 raymond@jupiter.ame.arizona.edu
khearn@uts.amdahl.com (Bug Hunter) (09/27/90)
From: khearn@uts.amdahl.com (Bug Hunter) In article <1990Sep24.001517.23322@cbnews.att.com> FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (jim bowers) writes: > > >From: jim bowers <FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU> >It seems to me that the technology exists to destroy every Iraqi Tank >in Kuwait without any U.S. personnel ever crossing the border. > >Use RPV's (like the ones the Israelis have used to such good effect for >intelligence gathering) and attach a laser designator to the tv camera. >The only thing you now need is a long range delivery system for some >pave laser guided bombs. Ideally a simple unguided long range rocket >should do the trick. Since it would probably take too long to develop >this technology, I suggest a high speed / high altitude release from >an F-15 in a ballistic trajectory. > You might find that it is hard to keep a laser from an RPV on target for the length of time it takes for a bomb to arrive. RPV's probably aren't the most stable platform in the world, and it could take quite a while for the bomb to arrive. It is an interesting idea, though. It would take some development, but it might be feasable if you could gyrostabilize the laser. I don't know how small you could make a stabilizer though. I doubt we could get a working system ready for the battlefield before fighting starts this time. :-( Keith -- Keith Hearn \ If the emeny is in range, khearn@amdahl.com \ Amdahl Corporation \ so are you. (408)737-5691(work) (408)984-6937(home)\
BXR307@CSC.ANU.OZ.AU (10/03/90)
From: BXR307@CSC.ANU.OZ.AU In article <1990Sep27.031554.7357@cbnews.att.com>, khearn@uts.amdahl.com (Bug Hunter) writes: > From: khearn@uts.amdahl.com (Bug Hunter) > In article <1990Sep24.001517.23322@cbnews.att.com> FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (jim bowers) writes: >>It seems to me that the technology exists to destroy every Iraqi Tank >>in Kuwait without any U.S. personnel ever crossing the border. >> >>Use RPV's (like the ones the Israelis have used to such good effect for >>intelligence gathering) and attach a laser designator to the tv camera. >>The only thing you now need is a long range delivery system for some >>pave laser guided bombs. Ideally a simple unguided long range rocket >>should do the trick. Since it would probably take too long to develop >>this technology, I suggest a high speed / high altitude release from >>an F-15 in a ballistic trajectory. > > You might find that it is hard to keep a laser from an RPV on target > for the length of time it takes for a bomb to arrive. RPV's probably > aren't the most stable platform in the world, and it could take quite > a while for the bomb to arrive. > > It is an interesting idea, though. It would take some development, but > it might be feasable if you could gyrostabilize the laser. I don't > know how small you could make a stabilizer though. I doubt we could > get a working system ready for the battlefield before fighting starts > this time. :-( They are gyro-stablised. Its the only way you can get a steady picture/paint at the ranges they view their targets. Gyro-stablisers are now very small and very compact. They are in use on most RPV (or as they are now called in the dynamic world of military acronyms just to confuse more people with more jargon UAV [Unmanned Air-Vehicles] :-) and have even now found a use in some of the more advanced tank project around the world in gyro-stablised tank sights for tank commanders (the AMX-30b2,AMX-32,AMX-40, LeClerc and Challenger Mk II's are all vehicles which immediately spring to mind.). Most UAV's also now carry laser designators as standard equipment. However what the original poster has ignored is that most (if not all) laser glide bombs are not intended to be tossed bombed. In addition they would have difficulty aquiring the laser "paint" (the bomb needs to be able to "see" the laser spot before it is released normally) because of its extremely narrow field of view. Finally I think this scheme is just a touch expensive in material terms. I do not know how much a laser guided PGM is, but I would suggest that it could well be more expensive than most of the earlier types of MBT's (such as the T55) which make up the bulk of the Iraqi's tank strength. Brian Ross
gwh%earthquake.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) (10/04/90)
From: gwh%earthquake.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert) In article <1990Sep27.031554.7357@cbnews.att.com> khearn@uts.amdahl.com (Bug Hunter) writes: > >It is an interesting idea, though. It would take some development, but >it might be feasable if you could gyrostabilize the laser. I don't >know how small you could make a stabilizer though. I doubt we could >get a working system ready for the battlefield before fighting starts >this time. :-( The Aquila RPV, developed by Locheed for the US Army, has a laser designator built in. In tests, it successfully designated for a Copperhead 155mm LG Artillery shell, and Hellfire ATGM's. However, the project was never continued into general production. That does not mean that the prototypes could not be brought out... But Unlikely. The armed forces are somewhat reluctant to try a important attack with a 'trick' like this. They'll want to use the known reliable methods... A-10, Cobra{Apache 8-P}/OH-58 kill teams, and the good ole 105 and 120mm tank guns... == George William Herbert == **There are only two truly infinite things,** == JOAT for Hire: Anything, == * the universe and stupidity. And I am * =======Anywhere, My Price======= * unsure about the universe. -A.Einstein * == gwh@ocf.berkeley.edu == ********************************************* == ucbvax!ocf!gwh == The OCF Gang: Making Tomorrow's Mistakes Today