Prev: HUGE GREAT HUMONGOUS BUGGY THING! Next: RE: RE: [DS] Gently -- Capacity, Points

RE: [DS] Gently -- Capacity, Points

From: Ryan M Gill <rmgill@m...>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:29:10 -0400
Subject: RE: [DS] Gently -- Capacity, Points

At 11:20 PM +0200 4/11/02, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
>
>What the sales literature you referred to didn't mention is that 
>when you fire a BILL you aim at the top of the target, whereas for a 
>side-attack missile you aim at the center-of-mass - the hull of a 
>modern AFV is usually less heavily armoured than the turret. This 
>means that the aim point for a BILL is ~1 meter higher up than it is 
>for a side-attack ATGM. This puts the BILL flight path closer to 2 
>meters above the side-attack missile's flight path (unless the 
>target is hull-down, of course).

So its not a mode that one switches between in the system causing the 
missile to fly at this path or this path, it has to do with 
employment of the aiming device.

>
>>I think you're giving too much in one area and not in another.  I'd 
>>have to think that if you're ballistic like Javelin, then yeah, the 
>>ADS has an easy bead on you, but otherwise, I think the trajectory 
>>diff between BILL2 and TOW isn't much of a difference where ADS 
>>would be concerned.
>
>I can't refute your belief without going into classified stuff, but 
>I can say this much: you're wrong.

*shrug* Ok. So I take it that Bill flies above the trees or even 
higher? All this really is is way off the scope of what I was trying 
to get at. For game purposes there isn't any difference made between 
the attack profiles of any missiles. The game currently assumes that 
all missiles have the same exposure to the ADS and all missiles 
attack the same armor as every other missile.

When you compare low (saggar), medium (BILL2 and TOW2) and high 
altitude (Hellfire) they all have a different profile or path that 
they follow to the target correct?

My original point was that in the context of missiles fired from a 
ground platform there were situations where attacking the top armor 
is valid when compared to the catch all that is currently the armor 
attacked is the one facing the launcher (barring an air launched GMS).

>
>There's a very significant difference between the *horisontal* 
>separation between those tanks and the *vertical* distance between 
>them.
>.

I can only assume then that the missile is then flying several meters 
above the ground such that there isn't any possibility of the 
(currently non existent) ADS not seeing it. The closest thing we have 
to ADS in modern times is CIWS, Goal Keeper (a bit large for a 
vehicle mount) and the Russian 30mm thingy.

>You're not barred from an engineer that has worked on it, you know. 
>One of them just told you not to trust third-hand sales literature...
>
>(My first real job assignment as ballistician for the company 
>currently known as Saab Bofors Dynamics was on the blast area around 
>the BILL2 launcher; some of my older collegues worked on the flight 
>characteristics and trajectory of the missile itself.)

Neat! :-)

[snip]

>If you have different armour ratings on top and sides, then the 
>difference between side-attack and top-attack is definitely large 
>enough to capture in the game. So is the difference between 
>side-attack and top-attack. The difference between DA 
>(Javelin-style) and OTA (BILL-style) is however likely to be below 
>the granularity of the game rules.

What of then the difference between Javelin and air launched like 
Hellfire which is ballistic in it's path or TOW when launched from 
the air? Also, can't one assume that by 2183, ATGM's are at least 
imitating the attack profile of the better ASMs that hug the surface 
and then finally execute a pop up and dive attack on their targets 
with very little time for engagement by the target? After all if the 
ADS systems are in fact able to target them during a high profile 
flight, the designers would be fixing that in subsequent missiles 
designs.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill			     '01 Honda Insight -
- rmgill@mindspring.com 			    '85 CB700S -
- ryan.gill@turner.com			 '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
- www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       '72 Honda CB750 -
-				      '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 -
-				   '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-    Smart ID cards in the US, Smart ID cards in Hong Kong,    -
-		      what is the difference?		       - 
----------------------------------------------------------------
-  C&R-FFL  /  Protect your electronic rights!	  \ EFF-ACLU   -
- SAF & NRA/  Join the EFF!  http://www.eff.org/   \ DoD #0780 -	 

Prev: HUGE GREAT HUMONGOUS BUGGY THING! Next: RE: RE: [DS] Gently -- Capacity, Points