What will become the main dominant of future space battle?
Jul 15, 2017 15:36:42 GMT
Enderminion likes this
Post by linkxsc on Jul 15, 2017 15:36:42 GMT
Everything's a hypothetical situation. Getting pedantic over my points being hypothetical, while your Yolo superlaser apparently isn't is silly.
How about you actually try and refute some of my arguments?
You've said nothing to painting the target with a laser (a very real technology)
Active radar?
Semi-active (another ship or missile paints the target with radar).
HARMs?
Visual spectrum guidance? Have you ever actually seen how effective ATGM-65 mavericks are with their TV guidance?
Not to mention the silliest bit. Can you even chill yourself down enough that even a sidewinder wouldn't pick you out against the background? Isn't that like 5x more hypothetical than anything I've said? Big lasers? Sure. Missiles with a lot of intelligence? Perfectly reasonable. Ships "going cold" yeah doubtful. And that's one that has plenty of supporting evidence against it.
>yes if you want the swarm to get information before it's out of date again
There's nothing stopping me from deploying the missiles around that cone of uncertainty and getting something close enough that local terminal guidance can manage. Target prediction is very much a thing, even if your sensor data is several seconds or minutes old. And that also includes delays in sending data to the missile swarm themselves. And that's assuming you A know where my sensors even are (after all we can apparently "go cold" in your universe) And there's not much reason in an "awacs" ship anyways, as the missiles themselves can easily carry their own computers (they're getting pretty small these days) to handle combining their net sensor datas and handling the prediction, as well as receiving data from other sources.
Honestly, how up to date do you need target data when shooting at something on a predicable course? Also do you really expect that missiles would be guided by a ship far away on terminal guidance?
Also how in the hell are you going to NOT generate heat with your laser? I'd really love to hear your theorycrafting for that bit.
How about you actually try and refute some of my arguments?
You've said nothing to painting the target with a laser (a very real technology)
Active radar?
Semi-active (another ship or missile paints the target with radar).
HARMs?
Visual spectrum guidance? Have you ever actually seen how effective ATGM-65 mavericks are with their TV guidance?
Not to mention the silliest bit. Can you even chill yourself down enough that even a sidewinder wouldn't pick you out against the background? Isn't that like 5x more hypothetical than anything I've said? Big lasers? Sure. Missiles with a lot of intelligence? Perfectly reasonable. Ships "going cold" yeah doubtful. And that's one that has plenty of supporting evidence against it.
>yes if you want the swarm to get information before it's out of date again
There's nothing stopping me from deploying the missiles around that cone of uncertainty and getting something close enough that local terminal guidance can manage. Target prediction is very much a thing, even if your sensor data is several seconds or minutes old. And that also includes delays in sending data to the missile swarm themselves. And that's assuming you A know where my sensors even are (after all we can apparently "go cold" in your universe) And there's not much reason in an "awacs" ship anyways, as the missiles themselves can easily carry their own computers (they're getting pretty small these days) to handle combining their net sensor datas and handling the prediction, as well as receiving data from other sources.
Honestly, how up to date do you need target data when shooting at something on a predicable course? Also do you really expect that missiles would be guided by a ship far away on terminal guidance?
Also how in the hell are you going to NOT generate heat with your laser? I'd really love to hear your theorycrafting for that bit.