Missile Counter Missile

A real missile is the ultimate counter-missile. It destroys the enemy ship so it can't shoot any more missiles at you.

MaxxQ wrote: Minimum size for carrying multiple CMs is Mk23.

Or are you suggesting something along the lines of using an Apollo-capable Mk16 as a booster for a single CM? Seems a little wasteful to me, for only a single CM. Better off going with the Mk23 version I proposed upthread.

So how many vipers can you fit inside the front section of a Mk23 if you pull the laser heads and fusion bomb?

kzt wrote:

MaxxQ wrote: Minimum size for carrying multiple CMs is Mk23.

Or are you suggesting something along the lines of using an Apollo-capable Mk16 as a booster for a single CM? Seems a little wasteful to me, for only a single CM. Better off going with the Mk23 version I proposed upthread.

So how many vipers can you fit inside the front section of a Mk23 if you pull the laser heads and fusion bomb?

None. Vipers are too long.

Duckk wrote:Only for the BuNine.

We will sic Anton and Victor on you and once the appropriate computer is hacked, out your secret!

Don

That was "skippy" (no capital letter) and he claimed to be a "not a dragon".

lyonheart wrote:Hi MaxxQ,

Wasn't there a dragon named Skippy at the bar years ago?

I wouldn't want to get on his bad side by nicknaming someone else after him.

Perhaps another nickname is in order?

I'm sure you can come up with a great one.

L

MaxxQ wrote:
Edit: I see skippy posted.

My two cents:

Mr. Weber really has been vary logical in his tech progressions, some vary basic things seem likely from what I know of current tech and doctrine.

Miniterized more robust drive, power plants, and grav comms will be developed. AKA the next generation of current weapons systems. Ship board systems will also be upgraded based on tech advances, for example new grav lensing tech may significantly alter PD laser cluster range and rate of fire.

Extended range CMs will be available. may be multi drive.

Some sort of CM contol drones or nodes will be available for launch. Whether it is mini apollo styleor apolo lite(one way communication) or some sort of pre positioned drone control net. or in the case of system defense an integrated Moriarty style defence network.

Some sort of forward deployed EW drone or Missile, specifically designed for CM assitance.

Layered Defence will continue, of which LACs will remain a primary componet for a wall of battle.

Keyhole II style defensive instillations and off bore launch capabilities for CMs, drones, missiles will be available for all ship classes.

All systems will have a shipboard version and a sytem defence version.

Logical tech progression makes sence to me!

packhunter wrote:My two cents:

Mr. Weber really has been vary logical in his tech progressions, some vary basic things seem likely from what I know of current tech and doctrine.

Miniterized more robust drive, power plants, and grav comms will be developed. AKA the next generation of current weapons systems. Ship board systems will also be upgraded based on tech advances, for example new grav lensing tech may significantly alter PD laser cluster range and rate of fire.

Extended range CMs will be available. may be multi drive.

Some sort of CM contol drones or nodes will be available for launch. Whether it is mini apollo styleor apolo lite(one way communication) or some sort of pre positioned drone control net. or in the case of system defense an integrated Moriarty style defence network.

Some sort of forward deployed EW drone or Missile, specifically designed for CM assitance.

Layered Defence will continue, of which LACs will remain a primary componet for a wall of battle.

Keyhole II style defensive instillations and off bore launch capabilities for CMs, drones, missiles will be available for all ship classes.

All systems will have a shipboard version and a sytem defence version.

Logical tech progression makes sence to me!

A very simple modification would be to let missiles receive tracking data from RDs. The Apollo missile, at least, has enough processing power to handle that. Admittedly, an Apolo controlled by a Keyhole 2 doesn't need it, but anything else, like the defense of Spindle, would have benefitted from improved targeting information. In that case, they really didn't need it.

And if it worked for Mark 14s, now that would be impressive. Not as good as a Mark 23E, but with precise real time targeting info..

This might require that one of the Ghostrider drones act as a relay, either to get the LOS away from the enemy forces or to reduce observable communications links. And, of course, all the data would be encrypted.

-- Bob G

MaxxQ wrote:If you're thinking about creating a CM carrier/cannister out of something the size of a Mk16 DDM, forget it. You can't get more than one CM inside a DDM - they're just too small in diameter. Minimum size for carrying multiple CMs is Mk23.

Have CM cannisters been ret-con'd as not existing anymore?

Ships firing CM cannisters were not using SD Capital missile tubes. MK-16 tubes are larger than any other tube out there other than SD tubes. ERGO, any ship that could fire a CM cannister before the advent of the MK-16 could certainly graft a CM cannister onto an equivalent MK-16 "booster" in place of its laser head.

Erm... CM's at 30Mkm are going to have a mighty big time lag for targeting... Not an optimum solution here.

Starsaber wrote:A real missile is the ultimate counter-missile. It destroys the enemy ship so it can't shoot any more missiles at you.

Mutual suicide seems sub-optimum to me...

MaxxQ wrote:

Belial666 wrote:1) Sooner or later, Apollo will be miniaturized enough for Mark 16s.

2) A CM canister can't be much larger than an attack missile's main body (other than drive and power plant) on account of it being fireable from the same tubes as the missile in question.




Do you see what I see?

If you're thinking about creating a CM carrier/cannister out of something the size of a Mk16 DDM, forget it. You can't get more than one CM inside a DDM - they're just too small in diameter. Minimum size for carrying multiple CMs is Mk23.

Or are you suggesting something along the lines of using an Apollo-capable Mk16 as a booster for a single CM? Seems a little wasteful to me, for only a single CM. Better off going with the Mk23 version I proposed upthread.

Well, what little textev I remember of countermissile canisters is that they're fired out of shipboard missile tubes. There's nothing to confirm they have drives of any kind and may as well be CM pods in principle.

While there may well be variants of canister(we know BCs and SDs have different size launchers, whether they're pre- or post-MDM designs, but may use the same CMs), the Ghost Rider missile schematic suggests that the warhead and rod module only occupies a small proportion of the missile body. Putting a drive and power source on a CM canister would therefore cut the number of CMs it could carry by up to 75%.

I doubt it's the answer to the need for longer ranged missile defense. It'd probably be more cost-effective to stick PDLCs on drones and push a screen of them further beyond the LACs, possibly strung out along the missile path to maximise attrition. That may not be possible, depending on the size and power requirements of PDLCs and the budgets of drones.