RE: [DS]LAD versus GMS/L

>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
>[mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of Glenn M Wilson
>Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 5:06 PM
>To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: [DS]LAD versus GMS/L
>
>On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:47:21 -0500 (EST) Roger Books
><books@jumpspace.net> writes:
>>I'm setting up my artillery.	I'm going to attach a couple units
>>of infantry to act as air defense.
>>
>>The question is should I use LAD as specific to air defense or
>>should I give them GMS/L which can be used as opportunity
>>fire when the get LOS to the air unit?
>>
>>Roger Books
>
>On VTOL's (during those pesky pop-up attacks) but aerospace?????
>
>Now *that's* Terminal Guidance - a GMS on an Aerospace frame!
>
>Wonder how GMS/H's would work?!
>
>Seriously, can you do that?  I always assumed no - that's why LAD
>exists...

No, I do not think you can do that. My solution has been to attach at
least
one (if there are more than one) ADS vehicle to the artillery battery.
More
expensive than a LAD unit, I know, but it has worked so far.

Adding the GMS/L makes some sense to protect the guns from enemy ground
vehicles, though. I will have to consider that.

>Gracias,
>Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
>This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
>Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
>Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit: