Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US military options against Iraq
Message-ID: <1990Aug14.033616.8464@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 14 Aug 90 03:36:16 GMT
References: <1990Aug6.031122.1992@cbnews.att.com> <1990Aug8.030215.25088@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 21
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)

In article <1990Aug8.030215.25088@cbnews.att.com>, richk@tera.com (Richard Korry) writes:
> Since cruise missiles use computerized maps I wonder if the information to
> retarget to Iraqi installations is already available.

The AP reported that such information has in fact already been delivered
to the appropriate units in the Gulf.  I'm curious what technology is
used to store the maps on board?  PROMs?

> Secondly, if they
> have to fly over sandy deserts (presumably without large features) would
> this make it difficult to achieve accurate delivery?

This is also a problem in the environment cruise missles were designed
for:  the Russian tundra is also pretty featureless.  In fact, that's the
reason why the U.S. pushed Canada pretty hard to get rights to fly some
test runs in Alberta (I believe it was Alberta).  There was substantial
(or at least loud) Canadian opposition to such flights.