Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!mips!apple!veritas!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Message-ID: <1991Apr22.072212.25970@amd.com>
Date: 19 Apr 91 17:30:52 GMT
References: <1991Apr12.055056.13916@amd.com> <1991Apr13.015125.23382@amd.com>,<1991Apr19.070752.13682@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 26
Approved: military@amd.com


From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)


jjb@sequent.com writes:
>>(very difficult to get an after-action report from this first-generation
>>missile :-). 
>The smiley at the end of this got me to thinking: what could you do to
>get an on-the-spot target assessment from a cruise missile?  How about
>carrying your own drone, equipped with a TV camera and UHF uplink?
>Launch the drone, hit the target, drone can transmit the after-action
>report.

Naw, too much technology involved. You could either use the SLAM approach
(watch in real-time -- stereo requiring two missiles :) or just have the
missile kick out a little package containing a CCD TV camera, a burst
transmitter to send out the image(s) and a little balloon to raise the package
above tree-top level before snapping the target image. Have the thing do a slow
spin. Transmit a 360 degree picture, send it. Burn the camera. 

Alternately, you could have a loitering UAV (Unmanned Air Vehicle) which could
flit from target to target, but the presence of the UAV might give warning
to untouched targets.

-- 
sysmgr@cadlab.eng.umd.edu