Re: [SG2] weapons

Imre Szabo wrote:

> >(Hmmm..... so in the future, the cost of a GMS will be
> >exactly ten times that of an equally effective RR?
> >I'd love to see how you came up with that figure.....)
>
>An estimate...  Look at the price of a Milan 2, look at the price of an
RR
>round...  You're right, I really can afford more RR's rounds...

RR *rounds*, yes. What's more interesting is how many *RRs* can you
afford, 
though - in particular, how many RRs and their crews can you afford to 
*lose*, when you send them against enemies they have only a small chance
of 
taking out?

> >In other words, you're going to spend enough to deploy
> >the EMP device(s), then SAVE by using RR's instead of
> >GMS'?  Robbing Peter to pay Paul, are we?
>
>Microwave radation warheads aren't themonuclear EMP warheads.

Who said anything about *thermonuclear* EMP warheads (well, until you
did)? 
You don't need a nuke to create a really nasty EMP pulse (normal high 
explosives are quite sufficient, at least for short-range applications
like 
this); and microwave radiation warheads are a type of  non-nuclear type
of 
EMP warheads.

>This requires a significant amount of munitions to be stockpiled in 
>advance to work.  Any factory capable of build missiles will either be 
>siezed rather quickly, or destroyed
>by orbial bombardment.  Trying to defend such a factory will simply pin
the
>defensive ground troops down to a location so they can be destroyed
quickly,
>quite possibly by orbital bombardment.

What makes you think that stockpiles of or factories capable of
producing 
*RR rounds* will be any easier to protect than stockpiles/factories for 
*missiles*...?

>My strategy is listed above.  The microwave radiation warheads are
required
>to make the strategy work against PDS.  So they are used.

And where did you get *these* weapons from? Those stockpiles and
factories 
you've just said you can't defend, or something...? <g>

>   The material scientists swear that one day they
>might be able to get carbon based chips.  But if only a fraction of
these
>resources were spent on Microwave radiation warheads, we would quite
>probably already have them inservice.

Nope. Oh, sure, we could produce a weapon capable of taking out
*civilian* 
electronics quite easily even with today's tech, but most of the
military 
ones are much, *much* tougher than that. All those dollars spent have 
already started to get results, you see :-/

> > And you still haven't answered the question, IF the
> > EMP DOESN'T take out the PDS/ADS, how will a low
> > velocity weapon fare against them? (if you want to
> > address LVC's and RR's separately, feel free.)
>
>Not very likely.  See above comment.

Not very likely that the EMP doesn't take out the PDS/ADS, or not very 
likely that the low-velocity round will defeat the PDS/ADS when the EMP 
doesn't do its job? Not that it matters; I agree with both <g>

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry