"downrange countermissiles"

Relax wrote:

Kizarvexis wrote: Would the ACM have enough processing power to get a dozen or two of CMs to attack that many single small targets?

A hand calculator from 20 years ago has more than enough "processing power"

We are not talking real life, because I have yet to see a show or book accurately predict computer power and processing in a few decades, much less then a millennia or two down the road.

I think the new anti missile system will be a combination of a keyhole type anti missile system were a multi stage intercept missiles are guided with real time telemetry. I think the missiles will use some type of canister shot. The shot would be hard to track, to avoid and at the speed they would be traveling impacts would be devastating. Creating clouds of this shot with real time telemetry forcing the missles to go through them should deplete the incoming swarm of missiles to were point defiance systems and doctrine would be able to cope with the rest.

Kizarvexis wrote:
Doesn't an Apollo pod attack one ship at a time? Would the ACM have enough processing power to get a dozen or two of CMs to attack that many single small targets? If it can get enough of a hit rate, then it might be a way to extend the CM basket. But you would need a at least a second drive for the CM, so would it still fit 2 CMs per regular MDM?

good questions.

so far most of the apollo uses have used only the ftl relay and no real use of the onboard AI. all we are told is that it is VERY good, for something that is part of missile. not quite as good as shipboard AI support but much smarter then just about any other missile AI.

as to size? no clue.

as far as i know CMs are still only single drive missiles, so it maybe possible, emphasis on maybe to take a 3 drive missile, remove warhead and 2 drives, launch carrier missile to extent of its single drive which should be good for at least 6 million klom (nearer 10 if you use LERM drive,) then release CMs. info sent from ship to comm missile which passes it to the CMs it has deployed.

if it works then in theory you can start taking out enemy missiles 3 times further then currently

I'm not suggesting this what they will do. i am merely trying to clarify what i think was somtaaw's idea

Dauntless wrote:
good questions.

so far most of the apollo uses have used only the ftl relay and no real use of the onboard AI. all we are told is that it is VERY good, for something that is part of missile. not quite as good as shipboard AI support but much smarter then just about any other missile AI.

My assumption is that at Spindle; where the Apollo missiles were controlled via lightspeed fire-control from cruisers, the onboard 'AI' came into play to a far greater extent than when they're in FTL fire-control mode.

marcus wrote:I think the new anti missile system will be a combination of a keyhole type anti missile system were a multi stage intercept missiles are guided with real time telemetry. I think the missiles will use some type of canister shot. The shot would be hard to track, to avoid and at the speed they would be traveling impacts would be devastating. Creating clouds of this shot with real time telemetry forcing the missles to go through them should deplete the incoming swarm of missiles to where point defence systems and doctrine would be able to cope with the rest.

Ships have fields to divert space dust. Wouldn't missiles also, or would they just rely on a mostly empty space only taking out occasional missiles? If there is no such diversion method, at the speeds involved, the finer the shot (until it is too fine to disable or destroy) the better.

Yes mIssiles have particle/radiation shields.

This idea is really dumb as space is an enormous volume. Even if you dumped entire megatons of "shot" into space the missiles still would not run into them.

Relax wrote:Yes mIssiles have particle/radiation shields.

Incorrect. Remember Osyter Bay, the MAlign sent their pods in ballistic with full-up physical shields to protect the missile's sensors.

Nobody even HAD MDM's until now, so engagement ranges were limited to the best a missile could do on one drive (and still be able to track), or they're being launched at c-frac for bombardment of bases, fortresses, and other relatively low mobile targets (such as the planet Grayson). Nobody would 'waste' mass on a missile to give it even ionized plating to divert galactic particles & dust.


Manticore and Haven haven't also really spent more than a few years slinging MDM's at each other for really conclusive data to be formed. With Apollo transmitting data in real-time, they'll probably start seeing that some of their prior 'misses' were actually missiles that had their sensors slagged and thus couldn't see their targets anymore. But since the missiles are now attached in small hubs with an Apollo missile, their miss rates are going to drop because anything upto 5 of the 8 missiles could go blind from dust, and the Apollo CPU can still guide them to detonate right.

Missiles have particle and rad shielding while the wedge is up. From SftS:

The shroud-jettisoning maneuver had been programmed into the missiles before launch. Unlike any previous attack missile, the Mark 23s in an Apollo pod were fitted with protective shrouds intended to shield their sensors from the particle erosion of extended ballistic flight profiles at relativistic speeds. Most missiles didn't really need anything of the sort, since their impeller wedges incorporated particle screening. They were capable of maintaining a separate particle screen—briefly, at least—as long as they retained on-board power, even after the wedge went down, but that screening was far less efficient than a starship's particle screens. For the most part, that hadn't mattered, since any ballistic component of a "standard" attack profile was going to be brief, at best. But with Apollo, very long-range attacks, with lengthy ballistic components built into them, had suddenly become feasible. That capability, however, would be of limited usefulness if particle erosion had blinded the missiles before they ever got a chance to see their targets.

Duckk wrote:Missiles have particle and rad shielding while the wedge is up. From SftS:

The shroud-jettisoning maneuver had been programmed into the missiles before launch. Unlike any previous attack missile, the Mark 23s in an Apollo pod were fitted with protective shrouds intended to shield their sensors from the particle erosion of extended ballistic flight profiles at relativistic speeds. Most missiles didn't really need anything of the sort, since their impeller wedges incorporated particle screening. They were capable of maintaining a separate particle screen—briefly, at least—as long as they retained on-board power, even after the wedge went down, but that screening was far less efficient than a starship's particle screens. For the most part, that hadn't mattered, since any ballistic component of a "standard" attack profile was going to be brief, at best. But with Apollo, very long-range attacks, with lengthy ballistic components built into them, had suddenly become feasible. That capability, however, would be of limited usefulness if particle erosion had blinded the missiles before they ever got a chance to see their targets.

Ah, so I was partly right. Wedge up = particle screens, wedge down and they only have a small amount of shielding.

Ultimately, would such counter missile ideas be worth the cost of the Apollo control bird?



Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk