"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:39:57 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:

If they ever figure out how to effectively jam GPS all of those GPS
dependant wonder weapons are going to be pretty limited.

Which may be why so much effort is going into making the upcoming
improvements to GPS and all the investment into anti-jam equipment
logical. Not forgetting of course that teh GPS weapon such as JDAM are
primarily inertial, with GPS updates, so the CEP grow, but not to
much, and even a brief period of GPS guidance to snug down the fix
gets it back on track.

Yes, but the reliance on the one system (GPS) and the independence of the
Maverick's targeting system are serious points. What happens if someone can
jam or knock out the sats?

Also your
targeting options are going to be substantially less than a LOAL
Maverick not to mention the lack of precision compared to a Maverick.
A JCM will not be able to take out the full spectrum of Maverick
targets anymore than an SDB will be able to handle 2000lb BLU-109
targets.

But an aircraft armed with JCM can engage far more targets more
cheaply than one armed with LOAL Maverick. And don't forget that the
command link on the LOAL Maverick (I assume it's commanded rather than
autonomous?) can also be jammed, and far more simply than jamming GPS
over a broad area.

How many targets does the one plane need to hit? It seems that people are
trying to turn fighter-bombers into the Hollywood 50-shot six-shooter
instead of dealing with numbers requirements and reserve force requirements.
Also, the range issue is important. If the flier must take a plane deeper
into a danger area to launch his weapon, it risks the craft, the pilot, and
the ability of such to use the rest of their weapons to good effect on that
sortie at the least.

Quite frankly there are not many battlefield targets that could
withstand a JCM, and those that could are the ones with active
defences (Like Shtora), which will find it easier to engage a larger
missile like a Maverick than a smaller JCM.

Better to risk a missile than a pilot getting close to one of those things
to fire a smaller weapon with lesser range.

At which point you whistle up a couple of CBU-97.

Which would be nice, yes, but how much room do they take up on the racks?
Plus, if they are on other planes, how far out are they, can they be
diverted, and how does this fit in the "more weapons, less planes"
arrangement? Not to mention that if one is worried about Maverick or JCM
range, getting close enough to drop CBUs.... and how big are CBUs for such
an antimissile defense, if Mav is considered a large target? I'm asking
because I am sure you have more knowledge on that one than me....

Does LOAL Maverick have a role for which it is particularly suited?
Probably, but the role can be covered quite nicely by JCM plus other
systems with more flexibility and without adding another system to the
inventory.

Working a system that is Maverick compatable into things spares having to go
to futher lengths than such in another system, actually.

Peter Kemp