View Single Post
  #17  
Old December 18th 03, 11:23 AM
Bernardz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
says...
LCCMs could be designed to attack enemy vehicles, both armoured, and
supply columns. The missile could use dead-reckoning to move itself
approximately where the enemy vehicles are, then use visual sensors
to detect vehicles (moving ones would probably be easier to detect).
This would require digital cameras and computers in the guidance
system, both of which are cheap. Programming appropriate image
recognition software is non-trivial, but has been done, and the cost
could be spread over large production runs. As the LCCM sees a
vehicle and chooses a target, it could dive towards it, and
simultaneously broadcast its position and a photo of the target
(useful intel for the missile controllers).


Without getting much into the technical end of this discussion (which other
posts have already done), it is safe to say that pretty much any cruise
missile system built 'on the cheap' (especially by second and third-world
standards) would be so obsolete at the time of its deployment that existing
and near-future US countermeasure systems will easily detect and deter their
success. Do you think that you are the only one who thought of this? The DoD
is very much aware of the cruise missile threat.


Say I built heaps of multiple-rocket launchers built an improved WW2, V1
jet to hit a city say at 200 miles and then targeted them at an US ally
cities.

Aiming would be pretty trivial, most modern cities are pretty big anyway
and so what if a a lot miss? Its not like they cost me much anyway each
missile.

My missiles shot down are a lot cheaper then the anti missiles the US
uses anyway.

The make sure that this US ally is aware of your capability. That might
keep the US out of the conflict.


This strategy seems to work for the North Koreans.


--
Wealth must be produced before it can be distributed.

20th saying of Bernard