View Single Post
  #41  
Old December 18th 03, 08:17 PM
phil hunt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 05:26:01 GMT, Kevin Brooks wrote:

or up high where the view is better, but also where it
becomes easy meat for the layers of Patriots and Avengers fielded by the
resident duckhunters, along with any covering Aegis controlled Standards in
the littoral zone, and the ubiquitous F-15/F-22 CAP?


These missiles might cost abpout $500,000 each whereas the LCCM
might cost $10,000 each. Furthermore none of these missile systems
are perfectly accurate, thus if many missiles are sent, some
would get through.

Also, if a missile is small (imagine there are several models) it
might be hard for radar to pick it out, or it might have a radar
return the same size as a bird's.

and, (c) Development of
a reliable, compact, onboard sensor suite that provides enough resolution to
find likely targets,


You can buy good resolution digital cameras in any good camera shop.

and a darned intelligent software package to handle
target discrimination (from background clutter, earlier posited garbage
truck, etc.),


There are plenty of people outside the USA who can program computers.

and can also recognize an entire range of potential targets
and select the one you would want hit from amongst all of them. Sorry, but I
don't see ANY potential foes we might face in your near term overcoming one,
much less all, of those hurdles, and I am sure I have missed a few more.


My understanding is the laws of physics work the same for people in
all countries.

The second is when the sensor is in one place, and the shooter
somewhere else; in those situations, what problems have the USA
encountered, and how have they gone about solving them?


Then you have to have a good secure datalink, and as it stands now the only
folks that are likely to have those during the near-term are us and our good
friends.


Encryption technology is well-known and software to implement it can
be downloaded from the net. Any competent programmer should be able
to implement this.

The best currently fielded US system of this nature is the SLAM-ER,
with ATA--think of an extended range Harpoon with an ability to send its
sensor images back to either a launch aircraft or another suitable platform,
and which responds to that platform's commands to acheive retargeting or to
allow more discriminative targeting. IIRC the new Tactical Tomahawk will
also offer an inflight retargeting capability. You will note that the
current trend in the US, which is the undeniable leader ins such
capabilities, is to retain the man-in-the-loop at present, and that will not
significantly change during the period you have set forth, so I seriously
doubt Underwhatsistan is going to be able to do any better.


The only modern technology necessary to make these missiles possible
is computing (both hardware and software). Computing technology is
available to any medium sized nation, and merely asserting that the
USA must be the most advanced is exactly the sort of hubristic
attitude that would help a medium-sized power at war with them.

Then one wonders why those very same nations usually end up trying to buy
the products produced by those "slow-moving, bloated" western defense
contractors.


Because they are more technologically advanced. Some technologies,
for example high performance jet engines, require a large industrial
base to make. The sort of technologies I'm talking about are ones
that can potentially be produced a lot more cheaply, for example by
adapting mass-produced (but nevertheless highly sophisticated)
consumer products. Any medium-sized power should be able to produce
embedded computer control systems.


If it was that easy, others would be doing so already--they are not.


This is a reasonable argument. Hiowever, people are developing
cruise missiles: According to
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=1212
"There are currently 161 operational UAV programs in 50 countries"

There are probably also a number of secret programs, or programs to
add better sensors/computers to existing UAVs/missiles.

Heck,
look at the Storm Shadow ALCM--a good system, but in no way is it verging on
the system brilliance you envision for this asymetric uber-weapon, and Storm
Shadow is the best that is offered by our European allies, who are, while
generally a bit behind the US power curve in this area, light years ahead of
the rest-of-the-world (possible exception of Israel, but if you take the
Popeyes we got lynched into buying from them as an example, not too great
either).


What's thre story with the Popeye?

Sorm Shadow/Scalp are already enjoying export success because the
rest of the world can't do a better job on their own--the only way they get
any capability like what you refer to is by buying from those western
industries you rather prematurely wrote off.


This is true for now. How long will it be? I predict that within 10
years, many countries will be producing missiles with roughly the
same capabilities as Storm Shadow, but at much less cost.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).