Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!nuchat!steve@uunet.UU.NET
From: nuchat!steve@uunet.UU.NET (Steve Nuchia)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: popup maneuvers
Message-ID: <6276@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 5 May 89 00:35:25 GMT
References: <5977@cbnews.ATT.COM> <6157@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Houston Public Access
Lines: 30
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: nuchat!steve@uunet.UU.NET (Steve Nuchia)

In article <6157@cbnews.ATT.COM> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>I'm slightly surprised that nobody has yet built a heavy antiship missile
>that simply carries a heavy torpedo and drops it 1-2 km out.  This avoids
>*all* the close-in defences, and explodes the warhead in a more effective
>place too.  There are one or two antisub missiles that drop an aircraft
>torpedo, but nothing designed for antiship use.

And I'm surprised that nobody has (apparently) been working on
anti-torpedo defenses.  With several hundred pounds of torpex
homing in on *my* keel I'd sure want to shoot something at it.

Something about the size of one of the shoulder-launched missles,
powered by a solid fuel rocket motor and designed for about 300 yards
underwater seems about right.  How hard can it be to home on a torpedo's
propulsion system?

Having spent a few weeks on a ship whose primary mission was torpedo
interceptor I've given it a little thought over the years :-)

Of course there may be something in R&D or even the inventory
that I don't know about, but more likely it is really hard for
some reason I haven't thought of.
-- 
Steve Nuchia	      South Coast Computing Services
uunet!nuchat!steve    POB 890952  Houston, Texas  77289
(713) 964 2462	      Consultation & Systems, Support for PD Software.