Prev: RE: [SG2) Decals Next: Re: FT Campaigns -was Re: London GZG

Re: Quick question on GMS

From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 18:46:35 +0200
Subject: Re: Quick question on GMS

Brian Bilderback wrote:

 >Is it plausible that a GMS should:
 >
 >A) On one hand have an easier time hitting a target at middle ranges
than
 >at short range, since it has more time to home in on the target;

"Short range" in this case is typically less than 100 meters (ie., well 
inside DS2 "Close Assault" range) for today's missiles, and I'd be very 
surprised if it increases in the future - the opposite is rather more 
likely :-/ The arming distance Glenn was talking about is usually even 
shorter, BTW (just long enough that a premature explosion shouldn't be
able 
to harm the ATGM crew).

Longer flight times gives more time for activating countermeasures...
but 
activating countermeasures too early gives the missile more time for 
counter-countermeasures (or to re-aqcuire the real target, in case of 
"hit/miss"-style countermeasures like decoys - either the missile is
fooled 
by them or it isn't, but the time of exposure to the decoy/whatever
isn't 
necessarily important). This is very much part of the "Wiz War", and is
IMO 
well represented by the ECM-quality-vs-GMS-quality opposed dieroll.

 >B) on the other hand be easier for ADS to take out the further it has
to
 >pass through an ADS' zone of fire, since the ADS _ALSO_ gets longer to
 >lock in on it?

Plausible but not guaranteed, depending among other things on how well
the 
missile can use terrain etc. to mask its approach (ref: the "Gently"
thread).

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."


Prev: RE: [SG2) Decals Next: Re: FT Campaigns -was Re: London GZG