Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: jake!wcarroll@encore.encore.com (William Carroll)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US military options against Iraq
Message-ID: <1990Aug21.024534.728@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 21 Aug 90 02:45:34 GMT
References: <1990Aug14.033616.8464@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 31
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: jake!wcarroll@encore.encore.com (William Carroll)
>From article <1990Aug14.033616.8464@cbnews.att.com>, by 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?

I don't know if it is operational, but a number of aircraft manufacturers
have been very interested in rewritable magneto-optical technology in the
last year or so.

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

It was my impression that these missiles used inertial navigation to
plot current position and used the digitized maps to determine when to
change altitude/course to maintain terrain-following. I would think that
using recognition of geographical features as a guidance mechanism would
be a rather complex task to install in the nose of a missile, even one
as large as a cruise missile.


William R. Carroll  (Encore Computer Corp., Ft. Lauderdale FL)
wcarroll@encore.com         uunet!gould!wcarroll
"The brain-dead should not be allowed to operate motor vehicles!" - Me