Alternate Design Rule - VLS Launchers for Missiles

[phavoc]

Yes, gas. I'm not suggesting hydrazine (it burns hot), but any gas (or liquified gas) should be sufficient for orienting the missle.

That's fine but doesn't do anything once the missile starts towards its target.

To the best of my knowledge, the DSP detectors currently in orbit have never been tested trying to discriminate objects during a battle in space... It IS possible to defeat or generate false-positive IR signatures today against DSP satellites.

In space that would require an IR source, again ineffective as the missile would be vectoring and easily distinguishable.

When you have megajoules of energy slashing through space and ship bodies giving off thermal energy (from thrusters, damage, whatever), it is possible to defeat passive and electo-optical IR detectors if you do it right. We can do it today with much lower tech (or, better stated, using today's tech we can defeat today's scanners. Not forever, but long enough.)

Umm, no. In space there is no atmospheric effects or absorption. Nothing
short of a direct IR laser hit against the sensors would do it.

If you are referring to our using IR detectors to discriminate between ICBM's and decoys in orbit, that's a different story. The ICBM, being larger and having more heat stored in it, loses its thermal signature at a slower rate than the smaller decoy's. But we also dont' have the tech today to build decoy's that protect against it.

Decoys won't work in space as the vectors would be too different. Given that the IR sig from the missile travels at 300,000 km/sec, there is zero problem with detection.

What exactly is it that you are objecting too? The original concept of the "stealthy" missile only applied to a missile ejected from a ship but not yet activating its drive motor. At best it would align itself with its intended target and then wait. Not exactly useful if you are pursuing someone, as the missile would drop behind you as your ship continued to thrust. But highly useful is someone was chasing you and you wanted to stage missiles to decrease their time to engage them, or to generate a larger barrage by having missiles launch as previous waves interpenetrated with them.

As far as decoys and such, you can still blind a sensor to something going on if you generate enough infared "noise" so that it cannot individuall make out an IR source. The effect is different when it is in the vacum of space and not in an atmosphere, but the effect still exists.

 

[kristof65]

A couple of thoughts here on the Delta-V discussion.

Considering the relative velocities/directions of the combatants is going to be more important than any individual ship's Delta-V, then I agree that any missile capable of dealing with that should be more than sufficient to deal with the associated problems of current Delta V when missiles are hot-launched


However, it could produce a problem with cold launches where stealth is desired, especially if a ship has been under full thrust for any significant period of time. Basically, any cold launched missiles that need to stay hidden, probably aren't going to have sufficient velocity to deal with the Delta V of their launching ship - for them most part, until they go hot, they'll be relatively close to the ship that launched them, unless that ship changes it's own vector.

It's not like dropping a mine off the back of a Naval ship, where the mine is going to stay pretty close to where you drop it - it's going to be more like dropping that mine with a rope attached to it that you're slowly letting out. That mine's going to follow the ship until you cut the rope. In space, the equivilent of cutting that rope is more than likely going to require lighting up a power source sufficient enough to be noticed.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that cold launching for stealth tactics probably isn't going to be as effective as one might think, except under a very few conditions.

 

[phavoc]

A couple of thoughts here on the Delta-V discussion.

Considering the relative velocities/directions of the combatants is going to be more important than any individual ship's Delta-V, then I agree that any missile capable of dealing with that should be more than sufficient to deal with the associated problems of current Delta V when missiles are hot-launched


However, it could produce a problem with cold launches where stealth is desired, especially if a ship has been under full thrust for any significant period of time. Basically, any cold launched missiles that need to stay hidden, probably aren't going to have sufficient velocity to deal with the Delta V of their launching ship - for them most part, until they go hot, they'll be relatively close to the ship that launched them, unless that ship changes it's own vector.

It's not like dropping a mine off the back of a Naval ship, where the mine is going to stay pretty close to where you drop it - it's going to be more like dropping that mine with a rope attached to it that you're slowly letting out. That mine's going to follow the ship until you cut the rope. In space, the equivilent of cutting that rope is more than likely going to require lighting up a power source sufficient enough to be noticed.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that cold launching for stealth tactics probably isn't going to be as effective as one might think, except under a very few conditions.

You are correct. If you are pursuing a ship, it is of limited use. Or if you are on intercept courses, unless you are wanting to leave a little "present" for your enemy, assuming they still remain on the same vector, again its not very useful.

It's primary advantage is when you are being pursued and are wanting to hit the enemy with the biggest punch you can.

I suppose if you are engaging a static target, like a station, and you are on a perpendicular course to it, you could use it to create a "front" of missiles that all activate simultaneously. Since Traveller doesn't go too much into weapons bearing, would be a moot point on smaller targets. And anything really big, well, you aren't going to be using these types of tactics anyways.

 

[kristof65]

It's primary advantage is when you are being pursued and are wanting to hit the enemy with the biggest punch you can.

I'm not so sure about that. At least not with a VLS system, since a VLS essentially allows you to launch all your missiles at once. Cold launching in a pursuit situaton makes more sense when you can't launch all your missiles at once, because then you can get more missiles "into the air" before you light them all off.

The only really useful situation I can see for dropping missiles behind you like that with a VLS is if you can get them clustered in a pattern that mimics the signature of your ship, then changing vectors, leaving the pursuer a choice of which contact to follow. If he chooses wrong, you get away and he gets damaged, if he chooses right, you'll probably know well enough in advance to still be able to bring those missiles to bear.

I'm not saying that cold launch stealth applications don't exist, only that after examining several scenarios, I don't think there are as many effective ones as one might think, especially in one on one ship combats.

 

[TC]

Just a comment, Trav missiles are thruster driven, not rockets. Just saying.

 

[DFW]

Just a comment, Trav missiles are thruster driven, not rockets. Just saying.

Actually, they are too small for ship thruster plate tech. They'd be grav drive (very poor accel at >100 diameters) or reaction thrusters.

 

[locarno24]

Here's the rub. What is the propulsion system for the missile? If it produces significant IR, there is NO way to make the missile stealthy in open space. In the far IR band it would stand out like a campfire on an open plain in the dead of night.

Only once the drive has lit off. We're talking about booting the canister out the side and leaving it to wait, inert, before firing.

I'm with DFW on this one. ANY object launched from a vessel under thrust is going to have the same vector and initial velocity. So a steerable turret won't give you any advantage if launching a missile that can control itself. Not as long as the launching mechanism is equivalent.

Traveller combat rounds, being six minutes long, are more than generous enough for a missile ejected from any point on the ship to maneuver using thrusters to orient towards the target - especially if the vessel is travelling under thrust. A stationary vessel, well, the missile would need to maneuver to clear the ship, but even so, under 1G of thrust it would easily clear a ship's bulk in one combat turn.

Yes. See my comments. If you're just launching from a standing start using just the missile's own drive to accelerate you, I agreed that it is the same and no trainable turret is really needed.

However, an equally valid concept, which isn't mine but has popped up in science fiction novels from Arthur C Clarke to David Webber, is that your 'missile launcher' is essentially a big sod-off mass driver which whacks the missile up to quite a few hundreds of kilometres per second in a straight line before it exits the 'barrel', and THEN the missile's drive lights up to provide additional acceleration and steering.

If a railgun can fling slugs which are over half the volume of a missile (and probably a similar mass, since they're - presumably - solid metal) to a sufficiently meaningful speed for them to be a weapon without needing a drive at all, then it's not infeasible for a big chunk of a missile's velocity to come from its launcher, rather than its drive.

 

[DFW]

However, an equally valid concept, which isn't mine but has popped up in science fiction novels from Arthur C Clarke to David Webber, is that your 'missile launcher' is essentially a big sod-off mass driver which whacks the missile up to quite a few hundreds of kilometres per second

Interesting but, irrelevant as that design hasn't been presented here.

 

[locarno24]

Has it ever been stated one way or another if the missile launcher provides any assistance to launch?

Doesn't really matter, anyway. As discussed above, the 'cold launch' is principally for a mine-laying type role, hence the suggestion of incorporating stealth into the missiles launch canisters so they aren't spotted before they fire, and passive sensors so they have a limited ability to self-track and aren't totally dependant on a third-party sensor (the firing ship) to generate an intercept vector.

 

[DFW]

Has it ever been stated one way or another if the missile launcher provides any assistance to launch?

No, and since there isn't ANY indication that they do, the assumption is the negative.

 

[phavoc]

Only once the drive has lit off. We're talking about booting the canister out the side and leaving it to wait, inert, before firing.

Actually just the missle itself would be ejected. I haven't gotten to designing missile "pods" that are essentially packs of missiles that are dumped out of your ship and can bolster your missile salvos. A good example of them is in the Honor Harrington series.

 

[justacaveman]

IMTU I treat all TL 10+ missles as being multi-mission capable. This includes a Lurker mode that allows them to act as improvised mines (Automatic attack on hostile vessels within short range), Active Sensor Homing, Ground Attack, and a few other mission specific settings.

 

[locarno24]

Actually just the missle itself would be ejected. I haven't gotten to designing missile "pods" that are essentially packs of missiles that are dumped out of your ship and can bolster your missile salvos. A good example of them is in the Honor Harrington series.

I'm only talking about a single missile per canister. If there isn't a stealthed/sensor equipped canister for the missile, then the same stuff would need to be on the missile instead.