On May 10, 1:31 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On May 10, 12:21 pm, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:
Making itself a marvellous TBMD target for a SM-3... and suddenly much
of the attraction of an anti-ship ballistic missile is gone.

((what's TBMD?)),

Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence.

anyway, I'll play this game a bit more.

The inbound is changing velocity rapidly and unpredictably,
reducing interception probability. It's subsonic at 80k feet,
strips, and fires at 75k, (consider 1960's ASROC).

It's dead by then: SM-3 is an exoatmospheric interceptor, capability
demonstrated at 133 miles up.

1st stage cheap solid, 2nd stage ditto, the ballistic
course is set, and the 3rd stage is lobbing, however,
when the 3rd stage separated, 5 decoys also blow
off.
"A saturation campaign my boy", 6 missiles is 30
inbound targets.

Suppose they fire 10 $1million missiles at an asset (CVN)

You're not going to get these missiles with the capability you describe
for a million dollars each. These are going to be expensive beasts...

Not really, mass production reduces cost.

with a value of $10Billion, then successive vollies.
We need to understand the problem before we can solve
it, and *rose-colored* glasses won't work.

Okay - according to you these missiles can't be stopped, can't miss,
and are so cheap they can be fired in hundreds. We all die and nothing
can be done. So why worry?

It's like a game of chess. We're trying to discuss
the vulnerability of a CVN fleet to conventional
missile attack, especially going forward 20 years.
Ed covered the fighter attack scenario.

The satellite's location is known and its ability to change speed and
direction very limited. A carrier can cover thirty miles in an hour, in
any direction it chooses: this gets you not only the physics problem of
manoevering to hit it, but the target identification issue.

So the enemy peppers the region.

So instead of firing dozens of missiles at *one* aimpoint, you're now
trying to saturate a whole ocean? Just how many of these missiles do you
have anyway?

One with a real time update is likely sufficient.

I think Red have their own rose-coloured lenses welded firmly to their
face here...

Do you agree a CVN is slower and less maneuveurable
than a Blimp?

Having worked on the stuff, fielded military electronics is a few years
behind civilian.
What you wrote is correct, (in my experience),
but there is much more to it than the CPU!
Consider imagers and transducers that feed CPU.

Same issues, often more so. If you're running a bespoke R&D project to
produce special-purpose components, you can completely forget a $1
million price tag per missile...

You should buy a digital camera, they are amazing.
Ken




--
He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.