Here at the Naval Postgraduate School, Captain Rogers did an extensive
investigation into hardkill options versus guided missiles in naval battles
(Harkill defined as a object such as missile, gun etc. successfully engaging
the missle before it causes harm to the intended target). What he found was
that there was only one successful hardkill versus a missile in the entire
history of modern naval war. It was a British ship that engaged an Iraqui
balistic missile intended for the USS Wisconsin. The missile was destoyed by a
Sea Dart, but after the missile was a threat to any allied ship... Captain
Rogers also found that the most successful engagements versus missiles were
soft kill methodsm specifically chaff and jamming. The Isreali Navy have been
the most successful fleet in this regard and destoyed the Egyptian Navy's
fleet of corvettes in this manner. Phil P.
In a message dated 3/27/97 3:37:27 PM, pepourne@nps.navy.mil (Phillip E.
> Pournelle) wrote:
> What he found was that there was only one successful hardkill versus
The
> missile was destoyed by a Sea Dart, but after the missile was a threat
OK- what was he using for examples? It's not like we have a bevy of
experience with modern naval warfare...
Is this report unclassified? If so, I'd like to see it...
> On Thu, Mar 27, 1997 at 12:55:36 PM, "Phillip E. Pournelle" wrote:
> Here at the Naval Postgraduate School, Captain Rogers did an extensive
> investigation into hardkill options versus guided missiles in naval
> target).
Has Capt. Rogers though of submitting it for publication? This, of course, is
the _exact_ sort of thing for which USNI Proceedings exists.
> The Isreali Navy have been the most successful fleet in this regard
Um, I think they destroyed the corvettes by attacking them, not by decoying
the Egyptian missiles, but I understand what you meant. <grin>
BTW, I am of the opinion that anyone who is interested in naval wargaming
(either SF or historical) really needs to read Capt. Wayne Hughes'
_Fleet
Tactics_. It explains, among other things, why designers of the era
missed
the "obvious" idea that big-guns were preferable to small ones. [The
short answer is that, due to relative weights of mechanisms, rates of fire and
projectile energy, a ship armed with 6 inch guns (for example) could actually
deliver 8 times the projectile energy of a ship of same displacement firing 12
inch guns. (p.63)]