Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: jtchew@csa2.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Anti-Ballistic Missiles Now
Message-ID: <1990Dec17.045843.27514@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 17 Dec 90 04:58:43 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Lines: 21
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: jtchew@csa2.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW)
Of trying to hit a carrier with a high-trajectory ballistic warhead:

>How about some blue sky here:  stick a GPS receiver in it -- so it knows
>where it is; feed it a link from something like an AWACS or RORSAT that
>knows where the ship is; add maneuverability (and stir till thick :-).

>From childhood memories of watching incoming space capsules on TV, I recall 
that communication was cut off during re-entry.   I think the things come in 
so hot and so fast that they make their own ionization screen.  To prevent 
this you'd have to slow them down a lot, and there goes your advantage. 

A smart bomb built along the same principles, delivered by an extremely-
high-altitude aircraft rather than a ballistic missile, might be more
feasible.  It also wouldn't have the potential for, ah, _misunderstandings_
that would be part and parcel of a ballistic missile launch in wartime.

--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"