There's always a problem of detection of missiles ... consider though that
there are multiple ways of locating them.
First search radar/other advanced sensor.
Second: Once the ship or ships suspect they're targeted they bring their
main radar (sensor) array around and go to full power on it (a peacetime
no-no). This is far more powerful and can detect what the search systems
might miss, it is however very directional.
Note: Something like the Aegis is a step up from what I'm talking about.
Third: How are the missiles powered? Chemical rockets are spotted via
passive IR that looks for their peculiar signature ... in Iraq/Afghanistan
these have admittedly produced a number of false launches and had their
helos pumping out flares unnecessarily, but there are a number of cases
where they worked as designed. Other drive systems would similarly be
identifiable once the missiles get moving, especially as they close on
their target under power. Turning the missile drives off, and then on
again after they're closer would be much more problematic for the
defender. On the other hand if you turn the drives off, and the defender
adjusts course then they'll likely miss unless turned on again. A
preprogrammed maneuver would be defeated, and require comms to be
established with the missile to alter it, assuming that's allowable and, of
course, said communication along with the start up of the drives would be
identifiable.
Fourth: Multivessel data link. Something common with navies, and even air
forces. This would allow ships to defend not only themselves but each
other providing they're close enough to each other.
Antimissile missiles, anti torpedo torpedos yeah all that and more.
On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 5:56 PM, ret7army . <> wrote:
> actually it was guns ala WWII, then missiles til CWIS and still missiles
> ... if there's an improvement in the missiles, however, I'd not be
> surprised, but the new dog on the block is laser.
>
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Evyn MacDude
> [Traveller_TNE] <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:11 AM, 'ret7army .'
>> [Traveller_TNE] <> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That is part of the problem, the idea of CIWS is now on radar guided
>>> rotary barreled cannons in the 20mm-35mm range.
>>>
>>
>> Hum, at little behind there CIWS are replacing the guns with missiles
>> now.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Evyn
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
>> www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>> <#m_-17916217480812790_m_2161124148950490082_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
there are multiple ways of locating them.
First search radar/other advanced sensor.
Second: Once the ship or ships suspect they're targeted they bring their
main radar (sensor) array around and go to full power on it (a peacetime
no-no). This is far more powerful and can detect what the search systems
might miss, it is however very directional.
Note: Something like the Aegis is a step up from what I'm talking about.
Third: How are the missiles powered? Chemical rockets are spotted via
passive IR that looks for their peculiar signature ... in Iraq/Afghanistan
these have admittedly produced a number of false launches and had their
helos pumping out flares unnecessarily, but there are a number of cases
where they worked as designed. Other drive systems would similarly be
identifiable once the missiles get moving, especially as they close on
their target under power. Turning the missile drives off, and then on
again after they're closer would be much more problematic for the
defender. On the other hand if you turn the drives off, and the defender
adjusts course then they'll likely miss unless turned on again. A
preprogrammed maneuver would be defeated, and require comms to be
established with the missile to alter it, assuming that's allowable and, of
course, said communication along with the start up of the drives would be
identifiable.
Fourth: Multivessel data link. Something common with navies, and even air
forces. This would allow ships to defend not only themselves but each
other providing they're close enough to each other.
Antimissile missiles, anti torpedo torpedos yeah all that and more.
On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 5:56 PM, ret7army . <> wrote:
> actually it was guns ala WWII, then missiles til CWIS and still missiles
> ... if there's an improvement in the missiles, however, I'd not be
> surprised, but the new dog on the block is laser.
>
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Evyn MacDude
> [Traveller_TNE] <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:11 AM, 'ret7army .'
>> [Traveller_TNE] <> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That is part of the problem, the idea of CIWS is now on radar guided
>>> rotary barreled cannons in the 20mm-35mm range.
>>>
>>
>> Hum, at little behind there CIWS are replacing the guns with missiles
>> now.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Evyn
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
>> www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>> <#m_-17916217480812790_m_2161124148950490082_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>>
>>
>
>