asymetric warfare

ess (phil hunt) wrote:
Yes. The progrsamming for this isn't particularly hard, once you've
written software that can identify a vehicle (or other target) in a
picture. It's just a matter of aiming the missile towards the
target.

ROTFL. Yes, once you master the extraordinarily difficult task of
writing software to identify a target, then pretty much else is
simple. But you appear to be underestimating the effort needed to
write that software. (Clue: All of your high tech nations have been
wrestling with the problem for years, with little real sucess.)

Weapons like this were in existance 20 years ago, for example the
Exocet anti-ship missile. I'm not bsure what problems you envisage
with doing this; perhaps you could elaborate?

The Excocet relies on active detection of the target, not on analysis
of passive images of the target.

What you could do is have the missile, if it doesn't find a target
to hang around in the area looking for one. (The British ALARM
missile does this literally :-)).

ALARM, like *ALL* ARM's, depends on *active emissions* by the target,
not on analysis of passive images of the target.

You can't prevent fratricide all the time, and most countries would
have a higher tolerance from losses caused by friendly fire than
most western countries do. The missile would know (at least
approximately - within a few km) were it is, and therefore whether
it is over land occupied by its own side.

Assuming the firing unit has a valid picture of what land is and is
not currently in friendly hands. A problem that 'high tech' nations
are finding difficult to solve.

Otherwise, there are other methods of nagivation: dead reckoning,
celestial, a LORAN-like system could be set up.

One suspects you vastly underestimate the difficulties involved in
accurate navigation.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.