Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!rohn
From: rohn@randvax.UUCP (Laurinda Rohn)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Star Wars -> Nuclear war
Message-ID: <2400@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 19:20:08 EST
Article-I.D.: randvax.2400
Posted: Wed Apr 10 19:20:08 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Apr-85 02:31:31 EST
References: <827@ames.UUCP> <5201@ucbvax.ARPA> <869@ames.UUCP> <523@whuxl.UUCP> <5652@ucbvax.ARPA> <906@ames.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 26

> > What I was saying is that shooting down cruise missiles is no big deal,
> > all you need to do is beef up the air defense system with SAM's (we
> > have none now) and the interceptor wings (we have about 300 planes in
> > noth america, mostly ancient).  We used to have a large system,
> > but ICBM's came along....  In short, its not a hard problem...
> > 
> Not a hard problem in theory, in practice knocking down several thousand (or
> tens of thousands) of cruise missles within a few hours or days is quite 
> another matter indeed.  Particularly when every one that gets through destroys
> another city....

Shooting down cruise missiles is not that difficult (though it's not
easy) *once you've detected them.*  Detecting them can be very
difficult though.  They are difficult to see with radars as they can
fly very low to the ground (on the order of 100 feet above ground level)
and can get mixed up with ground clutter.  If stealth technologies are
applied to cruise missiles, they will be even harder to see.  But Al
is right; if enough cruise missiles are shot close together, they can
easily saturate the existing minimal air defenses.


					Lauri
					rohn@rand-unix.ARPA
					..decvax!randvax!rohn

Opinions are the author's and may not be those of Rand.