Darren New wrote:
> clipka wrote:
>> I bet they don't stand a fair chance, however, to reduce the 
>> cross-section of an
>> airplane carrier to anything a missile could not lock on.
> 
> I don't know. It might make it easier to jam the missile, or (and from 
> simple visual observation of where the magic padding is applied) it 
> makes it hard to detect the part sticking up in the middle with all the 
> honchos and electronics in it, compared to the rest of the ship. So, in 
> other words, maybe the idea is to get you to blow up the flight deck 
> instead of the bridge, for the same reason you don't give the general a 
> rifle and put him on the front line to help out.
> 

It's about balancing your chances against those of your enemy. One 
important factor is the distance a missile can lock on at. The closer 
the attacker has to get to lock and launch a missile the more likely 
they are to get hit before they hit the launch button. Once launched, if 
a hostile device has to put out a stronger signal to correctly track 
you, it stands more chance of giving away it's own position and trajectory.

Post a reply to this message