Re: David's vehicle design

At 8:21 AM -0500 7/9/01, Andy Cowell wrote:
>In message 
><2A5C49585B46EC42BB99D3000F725D470748BC@col1smx01.dscc.dla.mil>, "Be
>ll, Brian K (Contractor)" writes:
>>
>>  GMS takes too little capacity for the damage they inflict
>
>Do you think this is a design flaw, and it needs to be fixed?	Guided
>missles do hefty damage today in a relatively small package.

I don't think it's off at all. I'd like to see an even heavier weapon 
used from aircraft. Nothing on the ground should be able to withstand 
a Maverick being launched. I figure that something in the Hellfire 
range is a GMS/H and a Maverick is a GMS/SH (its 8' long and 12' in 
diameter). Of course add to that, ATGM's are getting to the 
Supersonic range pretty soo....

The big thing about Missiles is that just like mortars they can carry 
a pretty good sized warhead in their larger versions (HEAT round 
effectiveness is tied directly to warhead diameter). Add to that just 
now they are able to choose a top attack vs a frontal impact.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill		 ----------	      SW1025 H -
-   Internet Technologies  --  Data Center Manager (3N &10S)   -
- ryan.gill@turner.com			 rmgill@mindspring.com -
-		   www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
- C&R-FFL -	  The gunshow loophole isn't		 - NRA -
-	     keep federal laws out of private lives	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------