What about CM pods?

Jonathan_S wrote:That's a heck of a lot of defensive depth to give up if you save them fire at missiles that overflew you.

Oh, just had a thought and did a quick check. Based on the numbers we have for the Mk31 it appears they 'burn' out at about 0.31c; that's too slow to catch an MDM in a stern chase. You've almost got to fire them at closing targets. (Technically you could try putting them in front of MDMs that were about to overfly you in the hopes the MDM would overrun the wedge of the CM; but the CMs sensors all point the wrong way and the target would cut you control links to the CM -- it might be technically possible but I doubt it's practical)

CM's can flip just fine, orienting themselves to vector of MDM approach. Sensor availability is not the problem.

J6P wrote:Math says(light speed limitations) CM's ARE fire and forget, other than very crude navigational control. I know, MWW has some dip "babying" the buggers into their MDM targets at millions of kilometers. What a load of...

If you had not let your prejudices influence your thought processes, you would see that is not how RFC has explained how counter missiles work. CMs are only guided for a short period after launch, when the ship's larger sensor arrays can pick out targets better. They then switch to internal guidance once they think they have achieved target lock.

Potato wrote:

J6P wrote:Math says(light speed limitations) CM's ARE fire and forget, other than very crude navigational control. I know, MWW has some dip "babying" the buggers into their MDM targets at millions of kilometers. What a load of...

If you had not let your prejudices influence your thought processes, you would see that is not how RFC has explained how counter missiles work. CMs are only guided for a short period after launch, when the ship's larger sensor arrays can pick out targets better. They then switch to internal guidance once they think they have achieved target lock.

Are we reading the same books? DW has the control links "dropping" at near the end of run(common sense). That is hardly initial target and then fire and forget. That is "some dip "babying" the buggers into their MDM targets"., As is explained in multiple locations about how CM's require lots of babying as they are myopic(poorer resolution). As an aside, I more than agree with your line of logic due to simple logic: assume even a partial % of acceleration in dodging, even 2s old data is effectively useless outside of internal sensors of the CM(600k km). So, no, MWW certainly does not ascribe to your position and my logical position based in reality. He has steadfastly ascribed to the baby handling in book after book.

Look no further than the Rolland pearl, where he is all proud of himself for shoehorning in an "amazing" 40 control links for CM's! In other words can have a maximum of 40CM's at space at ANY ONE TIME under MWW's definition of "control link" until final acquisition. So, the Roland can fire all of a double broadside of CM's and if against SDM missile opponents can get a third salvo off when the initial salvo goes into final acquisition. Makes one scratch ones head at why ships even bother with 8s CM cycle times.

Weird Harold wrote:
IIRC, it has been asserted that a Viper can't be used in fire-and-forget mode against missiles because Missiles are too fast for the guidance AI.

That doesn't make any sense. A missiles homing circuit is a very simple problem. One that was solved pretty darn well with discrete transistors in the original sidewinder missile in the late 1950s.

kzt wrote:That doesn't make any sense. A missiles homing circuit is a very simple problem. One that was solved pretty darn well with discrete transistors in the original sidewinder missile in the late 1950s.

It's a very simple problem as long as the missile has perfect information of its target's position and velocity. Pretty much everything that might get shot at in the Honorverse puts a lot of effort into denying its opponents that information.

Dafmeister wrote:

kzt wrote:That doesn't make any sense. A missiles homing circuit is a very simple problem. One that was solved pretty darn well with discrete transistors in the original sidewinder missile in the late 1950s.

It's a very simple problem as long as the missile has perfect information of its target's position and velocity. Pretty much everything that might get shot at in the Honorverse puts a lot of effort into denying its opponents that information.

You do not NEED POSITION OR VELOCITY for a homing solution. Why it is called a HOMING solution...

kzt wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:
IIRC, it has been asserted that a Viper can't be used in fire-and-forget mode against missiles because Missiles are too fast for the guidance AI.

That doesn't make any sense. A missiles homing circuit is a very simple problem. One that was solved pretty darn well with discrete transistors in the original sidewinder missile in the late 1950s.

Except that in the Honorverse, incoming missiles of the Havenite and Manticoran varieties travel at such great speeds that only one or two salvos of opposing CMs are possible before the attacking missiles have crossed the CMs detonation zone. Except, of course, FOR Havenite and Manticoran CMs, because those two star nations' navies have long since developed defensive tactical doctrines to deal with the greater range, speed and density of each other's missile launches.

Also keep in mind that CMs naturally will have less capable AIs than attack missiles, because they are so much smaller, which means that, when the VERY capable EW birds in any RHN or RMN missile salvo go active, the opposing CMs are extremely likely to lose lock on their targets, and will struggle to reacquire lock before the incoming missiles have crossed their (the CMs') detonation zone.

All of that has been explained NUMEROUS times in various combat scenes.

J6P wrote:

Dafmeister wrote:It's a very simple problem as long as the missile has perfect information of its target's position and velocity. Pretty much everything that might get shot at in the Honorverse puts a lot of effort into denying its opponents that information.

You do not NEED POSITION OR VELOCITY for a homing solution. Why it is called a HOMING solution...

But you do need your sensors to actually see the target in order to home in.

For a variety of reasons (mentioned in my previous post) a LAC should be a lot easier for a Viper to see to home in on.
For one the LAC is much larger, and has a vastly larger wedge; so its easier for both gravity and light-speed sensors to see.
And for another it normally wouldn't have the insanely high closing velocity of an MDM so you'd launch the Viper much closer its 3.5 million km range from rest; compared to the 15+ million range you need to intercept an MDM out at near max range.

Firing at a target that's less than 1/10th the size, from over 4 times further away, means it should be a hell of a lot harder for the little sensors you can cram into a CM to even see.

Jonathan_S wrote:Firing at a target that's less than 1/10th the size, from over 4 times further away, means it should be a hell of a lot harder for the little sensors you can cram into a CM to even see.

You are targeting the wedge, which is a massive gravity anomaly. Total wedge strength would seem to be related to mass x acceleration. Missile mass x acceleration is not that far from LAC mass x acceleration. It should also be pointed out that nobody talks how sneaky RMN/RHN missiles are, while they constantly talk about how close you need to be to detect a LAC wedge, which tends to suggest that missile wedges are much easier to detect and track then LAC wedges.

kzt wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:Firing at a target that's less than 1/10th the size, from over 4 times further away, means it should be a hell of a lot harder for the little sensors you can cram into a CM to even see.

You are targeting the wedge, which is a massive gravity anomaly. Total wedge strength would seem to be related to mass x acceleration. Missile mass x acceleration is not that far from LAC mass x acceleration. It should also be pointed out that nobody talks how sneaky RMN/RHN missiles are, while they constantly talk about how close you need to be to detect a LAC wedge, which tends to suggest that missile wedges are much easier to detect and track then LAC wedges.

Even if it's true that a 10km wide missile wedge is as easy to see as a 100 km wide LAC wedge the missile is still almost 5 times further away.