Re: PDS vs. IAVR/LAW/SMAW/etc.

>We've beaten all of these in Naval applications (Phalanx, Goalkeeper,
etc).
>Does it seem unlikely these will shrink to be aboard tanks and other
AFVs?
>They'll get lighter, smaller, cheaper, faster, and more effective. I
can't
>see PDS being unable, by 2183, to engage IAVRs and other similar
weapons.
>This is doubly true if some recent US experiments with laser
line-of-site
>horizon-to-horizon area defense systems show satisfactory results and
prove
>this can be workable. It may well be by 2183 that anything in the air
can be
>engaged by such a high-powered, very accurate laser driven by powerful
>target acquisition and tracking systems mounted on a fast slewing
multi-axis
>gun mount. 

And that's why there are no aircraft used in combat roles in the
Slammers'
universe - their tanks can engage orbiting spacecraft (I'm sure they
mention in one story using the tanks to take out satellites), and their
air
defense systems can deal with anything else that is practical to make
airborne. 

Ignoring the Slammers, one could suggest that perhaps the rocket (or
whatever) propulsion systems of these weapons are so zoomie that the
projectile travels too fast to be engaged.  Like trying to use a PDS of
today to engage a hyperkinetic penetrator anti-armour round of today...

However, I agree with Tom here - I don't see why a PDS shouldn't be able
to
engage an IAVR if it can engage a GMS/P...

Adrian

Adrian Johnson
adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca