In message ,
writes
The Air Staff in the UK were looking at standoff missiles in the late
50s/early 60s. These would have been turbojet or ramjet missiles. They
were always objected to on the grounds of 'vulnerability'.

Can anyone answer some questions?

1. A ramjet missile travelling Mach 2 to 3 at 70,000ft.
(a) would this be vulnerable to 'conventional' SAMs?

In that era, no. Think SR-71.

(b) if it were attacked with a nuclear tipped SAM then:
(i) what would be the effect in terms of EMP on the defence? Would the
radars etc have to be hardened? and

Radars, radios, plenty of stuff, especially early 1960s.

EMP is overrated today because kit is hardened, and back then many
systems were resistant by design (discrete transistors are tougher than
ICs, vacuum tubes virtually immune). It wouldn't be a showstopper, but
you do need to harden your system to keep it fully effective if nuclear
weapons are part of your air-defence plan.

(ii) what would be the effect on the ground below of a 10kT explosion
at 70,000ft?

In terms of blast and heat, not too great. EMP would be nastier but it's
lower and smaller than optimum for generation and propagation.

2. Low level: how vulnerable would such a missile be to conventional
SAMs travelling at say M1.5 at 500 feet?

At that point in history, not at all: SAMs didn't do targets that low
and fast. (Now, AAA and small-arms... depends what you're flying over
and how alert they are)

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk