Re: Some FT rules ideas(Longish)

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Earl D. Hansen wrote:

> I suggest this for your ARM rules:
>     -Yes, missile must lock on to an active radiation source, i.e.
fire
> control radar.
>     -Yes, it may possibly be armed with any type warhead, but I
suggest
> limiting it to a warhead designed to destroy only the radiation
emitter
> itself (the system). Because these missiles are designed for and used
for
> blinding an enemy; his or her radar that is.
>     -No, I must disagee with the loitering of a missile. It is just
not
> believeable; they seek and destroy.

I remember reading, a few years back, of an Anti-Radiation Cruise Missle
that would, if it's target ceased radiating, loiter in the area waiting
for the radar to be turned back on again to look for the missle...it's a
neat idea: ARM incoming. Switch off radar. ARM can't destroy radar,
radar
can't see strike aircraft/second wave of missles incoming. If radar
lights
up to look, loitering ARM turns it off again...permenently...

This would require missles w/ greater fuel capacity than most
have...some
sort of Tomahawk-mod, in modern terms. In space, no feul is needed to
loiter, really, so the missle makes even more sense...deadly, tho...I
can
see people not liking them...

>     -Yes, missiles can switch targets. However, there are two
situations
> envolved in this; one is the missile is fired blind, and the firer
prays
> that the missile hits what it was aimed at yet knowing that the
missile
> might stray off for a more powerful radiation source. On the other
hand to
> ensure that the missile does strike its target it should be programed
with
> say 4 targets should it lose tracking on its first objective.
> 
>		  Paladin

This missle I read about was either in PopSci or PopMech mags, and I
don't
know whether it was merely a paper concept or what...just paper, I
suspect, as I've heard nothing since...

(Speaking of PopSci/Mech, has anyone else read the latest thing on
semi-autonomous, cheap, camera-mounting drones...SG 2, anyone?)

Just my $0.02...

Brian (burger00@camosun.bc.ca)

(For non-North Americans, PopSci is Popular Science, PopMech is Popular
Mechanics...both US magazines, w/ mechanical/technological/scientific
info
of a "practical" nature...meaning they spend a lot of time dealing w/
cars
or the US military-industrial sector...some interesting ideas for SF...)