DS3 Artillery was Re: DS3 design (long)

> --- John K Lerchey <lerchey@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:

I'd say "System" or "Guidance" rather than "FCS", just to distinguish it from
the vehicle system, but sure. There are two issues which can be resolved
seperately or combined: a) does the projectile recognize the target as a
target? b) does the projectile successfully attack the target?

For a), it might be possible to have to check against several possible targets
which are all in the sensor basket (area of effect) in some order of
preference, attacking the first successful target lock. In the case of a
target designated system, this might be replaced with some sort of roll by the
designating element to successfully designate the target.

For b), this might resemble either a to-hit roll or a GMS roll.
arguements can be made for either one.

> > iii) assumption of vulnerability to counterbattery tracking. A

But under the curent system, if they MOVE-FIRE, then they are subject
to counterbattery. I am saying that a vehicle with the right equipment
and technology should be able to MOVE-FIRE (interpreted as firing while
under way) and be immune to any non-seeking, non-designated CB fire.

> > iv) low ammunition capacity: with designated or autonomous

I assume this means that you like the current system. What I am saying is that
artillery with an ammunition marker of a type that uses designated targets or
is autonomous seeking, when firing "harrassing fire" each of the handful of
rounds (which don't count as expending the ammo marker) can "plink" vehicles.
A steady drizzle of HE is harrassing; the same drizzle of guided projectiles
will wipe out your armor company.

J