Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: ATGM questions
Message-ID: <1991Jun27.015159.1564@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Date: 27 Jun 91 01:51:59 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.cb.att.com (william.a.thacker)
Organization: City College of New York - Science Computing Facility
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)
hc1@jaialai.cis.ufl.edu (Harry Campbell) writes: 
	>3rd generation missiles rely on internal tracking, and have a very
>high engagement speed.  They are usually designated for with a laser.  The
>best countermeasure is atmospheric conditions that degrade the lasers
>functioning (thick smoke, fog, heavy rain, snow).  Some examples are the
>U. S. Hellfire, and the Russian Spiral-AT-6.

I wonder how highly reflective chaff would work...Does anyone use it? 

	>At present there are no 4th generation missiles, I would imagine they
>would be true Fire-And-Forget, able to track and home in on a pre-designated
>target.  It may become necessary to use IFF on every vehicle to make it safe
>to use this type of weapon in close quarters.

Since we're including helicopter-launched ordnance, where would Maverick fit
in?  Isn't one variant of the Maverick TV-guided?  Also, what is the
guidance on Copperhead?  

Chris Thompson

-- 
"Never count a human dead until you've seen the body.  And even
then you can make a mistake".
			-Lady Fenring