On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:24:56 GMT, Fred J. McCall
wrote:

(Richard Bell) wrote:

:I do not know about anti-ship missiles, or anti-aircraft missiles, but an
:anti-vehicle (except tank) missile that combines a portable TV, a
en sized camera, two diode laser TXRX sets, an RC aircraft on steroids, and
:a six mile spool of optical fibre should be possible. While hardly a threat
:to tanks, if they were all available in Iraq, coalition casualties might have
:unpalatable numbers. The users lofts it over the hard cover that he is hiding
:behind and uses its camera to find a target and then dives the missile into
:it. Probably only a few thousand dollars worth of parts.

And you don't think after the first time that folks would start to
notice them and follow the cable back?


The Army FOGM used this-- I don't recall what happened to it, or if
its still an active program. But this design is also "slow", in that
if it's seen, people will have the time to follow it back to the
launching point.
Also, a "pen size" camera won't be very effective in guiding the
thing, unless you're talking perfectly ideal conditions. If you have
a clee or any of those dinky camera's that are currently being sold,
here's a little excercise.
Got to a park, hold the camera in front of you, and *run*-- try to
guide yourself with thecamera, with no cheeting by looking around it.
It won't be very easy at all.
Also, realize that the U.S., after the first few shots (and
probably before, because this kind of development effort WILL be known
about), will probably start using UAV's to pinpoint the launching
site, and kill them with artillery fire. Alternately, they'll send in
troops, which is generally the procedure for dealing with resistance
in built up areas, except when people try to solve the problem by
charging in with a tank force, as the Russians did in Grozny.