Jeffrey MacHott wrote:
> Vorlonagent wrote:
> > "Wesley Struebing" 
wrote in message
> > news:glb5r25c492s9c57jdo32kf3i9assnq2fv{at}4ax.com...
> >
> >>> It would also be good economics.  The intercepting
projectile is best when
> >>> it costs less than the missile it is intercepting.  Short
of lasers, a
> >>> railgun projectile with guts no more sophisticated than a
wad of shot and
> >>> small explosive and a timer good to a hundreth of a second.
> >> You bet, and it doesn't hardly matter what the rail gun is propelling,
> >> so that "wad of shot" can be quite cheap.
> >
> > I seriously hope that the laser angle isn't the only one being pursued when
> > ti comes to this stuff.  The mideast situation changes greatly when the US
> > and Israel can deploy effective ABMs.
> >
> > One other thought that has bounced around my mind would be a
similar use for
> > the US strategic missile stockpile.  If a railgun-deivered kinetic shell
> > hits hard, what about something delivered by an ICBM?  Right now
they're off
> > the table because their only payload is nukes.
>
> Well, ultimately the problem is that it's awful hard to tell an ICBM
> carrying a nuke from an ICBM carrying parachute-equipped puppies, and
> most folks on the other end would prefer to not have to wait and find
> out which it is before deciding whether to send a nuke back or a payload
> of parachute-equipped chocolates.
>
> That said, I think some of the ICBM missiles are also used for things
> like space launches.  Probably one reason the Space Race was so heavily
> supported was that the same technology needed for putting a man in space
> was also equally handy for putting a nuke on Moscow (or DC, depending on
> which side of the race you were on).

It was easily one of the best things to come out of the Cold War. So
much better to compete at that than warfare....

"Anything you can do I can do better... I can do anything better than
you." - Annie Get Your Gun

> -- 
> --Jeffrey MacHott
> 
> "Sola bona lingua est mortua lingua"
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32