FT: M&GT 2

Ok, I had to break this up into 2 messages, sorry. Gerald: Missles in FT, (as
appposed to Sub Munitons packs) are not even close to AIM's of today. Due to
rangees involved and realtive velocities and such your looking at an FT missle
being about Trident sized to be even remotly effective. Sub munittons
munitions would probably be about the size of a Phonix, if not bigger. (john:
There
ought to be a rule on the effect of ADS/PDS's on them anyway, i'd
think as they can be intercepted. IMHO) and both would use fuel to preform
"evasive" manuvers to try and throw off the defenses of the target as well as
manuvering for a hit. One thing you stend to see in Anime is mass missle
attacks, with missles cork screwing through the sky. Though we don't do that,
yet,
as it is too expensive, we have develope the sea/ground skimming
missle and the plunging attack to try and confuse the enmey defenses for just
the same purpose. The jist of this is the missles are getting bigger anyway as
we need more fuel to preform these manuvers. BTW: The official definitons are:
Missles have guidence and manuverability. Rockets are unguided. (Point and
shoot) The problem with, (as illustrated by the KV rail gun) just firing a
missle at high velociity and using a guidance motor for course corrections is
this is only a "short" range option. Granted an Battle ship will never out run
a missle, but at a range of several thousand kilometers, your probable target
location area is huge. It would only take a few degrees off to be unable to
close with and damage the target. (Launch an ICBM at a carreir from say the
middle of the US, you have to have a nuke just to have a chance of damaging
the thing, and without terminal guidance you have little chance of that) I
know that FT has no set "range values" but just looking at the set up I figure
the ranges have to be pretty big. Wet Navy examples tend to fall short when
talking about a space battle no matter how you define it.

Randy