Excalibur used in combat

[olduvai_again]

Originally posted by Steiner14:

I don't understand this development. Maybe someone can explain it to me? [/QB]

I suspect there aren't a whole lot of governments with the military capacity to take out a large number of satellites at the moment, so I'm guessing this is not a huge concern.

Likewise a conflict involving the destruction of satellites is probably going to look a lot more like a World War III than the current conflict. Which I suspect would mean (in at least the case of artillery) that precision guided munitions might not be as important (or at least using AE wouldn't have the same civilian political repercussions).

Now, who knows what the future may bring. The Chinese for example do seem to be intent on upgrading their space program which could certainly mean a large-scale anti-satellite capability down the road. Likewise, any future that sees a significant build up of Russian forces to the point of a hot US/Russia conflict would probably also mean an increase in their military space capability. Japan has an orbital capacity, and the European Space Agency obviously could put dangerous things in orbit; however a large scale military conflict with either of the latter seems even less likely than with either of the former.

Regardless, I suspect that any large-scale capacity to take out US satellites is probably at least a decade away, which would give even a slow-to-respond-to-changes bureaucracy (such as the US military) to respond in any number of ways (hardened satellites? Unmothballing old artillery tubes? Building new ones? Recruitment of Giant Space Lobsters to counter the Red Space Threat? The elevation of Peng denizens to high military council?).

This is all rampant speculation on my part and I retain the right to equivocate in the light of any subsequent illuminating posts.

I don't think unmothballing is a word, but it is kind of fun to say.

[Steiner14]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Most GPS-guided weapons have inertial back-up, so lack of GPS doesn't render them useless.

Ok they have backup-systems. But if the GPS-system falls out, the resyncronization of the clocks is lost nevertheless and that leads to the effect, that the clocks drift apart and the accuracy is lost. No matter how good the backup system is. After some time every clock leaves it's accuracy interval and the demands at those speeds are that high, that the clocks need to be syncronized within a few hours.

Even if we assume (unrealistical) atomic precise backup-clocks and assume the allowed resync-interval is extended to several days - what is a span of a few days in a big conflict, within the best weapons are useable?

[ July 22, 2007, 03:40 AM: Message edited by: Steiner14 ]

[dan/california]

Just as an example there is a GMLRS guidance package under development with FOUR modes of guidance. GPS, laser, infrared homing and I forgte the fourth one. I believe but am not absolutely positive that it can switch modes mid flight, follow the GPS signal until it acquires the laser for instance.

[dan/california]

I have read at least hints about ways up keeping the system up as well. These include but are not limited to small short lived satellites that can be launched from aircraft on demand, and ultra high flying UAVs that essentially serve the same function.

This level of attack on US space assets would also provoke a far more serious strategic air campaign on all aspects of a countries vital infrastructure. And when a couple of cruise missiles can reliably take out a power plant that is going to hurt very quickly. Putting the lights out in Belgrade is after all what made the Serbs fold.

[flamingknives]

The new GMLRS sounds like the Lockheed Martin P44.

It was my understanding that the inertial systems were simply point-to-point guidance for the projectiles. Navigation would be a deciding factor in the resultant accuracy, but the dropshorts aren't too bad on getting that right.