Prev: Re: SG Close Assaults revisited... Next: Re: Nukes

Re: Aircraft Vs Dreadnoughts (Which is what the topic mutated into :o)

From: ShldWulf@a...
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 05:37:16 EST
Subject: Re: Aircraft Vs Dreadnoughts (Which is what the topic mutated into :o)

A couple of points about this thread:

>Your opponent forgot about blip enhance, and you forgot that you have
to 
find the
target with your radar before you can start to launch harpoons; unless
you do 
a
bearing-only-launch, and you still need to know where the target is.<

Not a problem in the least. The aircraft all got a radar hand-off from a

dedicated sensor platform probably at least a couple of hundred miles
away 
and in all likely hood "over-the-horizion" from all the action. SOP.

>Except for the Iowa's, no battleship has the capability to fire on an
A-6 at
all, and even the Iowa has problems.<

Incorrect. The Iowa's have anti-air missiles, (Sea-sparrows as I recall)
with 
15-20 mile range. As to the A-6 dropping a guided "bunker-buster" that
is 
what the Phalanx is for and it would have NO trouble ripping up an
free-fall 
bomb. Especially a LGB, since it drops in a nice predictable pattern
around 
the laser beam. A quarter second burst and move on to the next one. Even
if 
the shell don't detonate the bomb, (in all likely hood not) they will
destroy 
the guidance unit, airfoils and probably the detonation train.

>and the last plane drops the LGB to detonate under the keel, between
the 
funnels.<

Kinda hard. The LGB would hit the water and would go deep. It might, 
(Keyword: Might) drop under the hull, then again, with all it's external

stuff torn off it might just tumble the other way. Even with a delay on
it it 
might not detonate "under the keel".

Randy


Prev: Re: SG Close Assaults revisited... Next: Re: Nukes