![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In thinking about missiles, there are two very different niches that could be filled by them. In fact, the roles are different enough that the very well-appointed warship may have two different anti-ship missile systems.
The first missile roll is what I would call the “hunter-scout.” This would be a missile that would be optimized for long-range attacks. It would have an engine capable of being throttled, be as stealthy as possible, and be smart with good sensors. Part of its “scout” roll would be the VID function.
In modern warfare, it’s very difficult to look at a radar screen and tell the difference between a B-52 and a Boeing 747, especially if the B-52 is trying to look like a 747. They are, after all, large multi-engine subsonic vehicles made by the same company. In modern warfare, manned fighters are sent out to “VID” or “visually identify” (AKA “go look at the damn thing!”) any suspicious targets. A sufficiently smart missile could do that job much safer than a manned vehicle.
The second missile roll is what I would call the “hard-kill” role. This missile is designed strictly for attacking enemy warships. Since presumably the enemy will be trying to use their lasers to melt the inbound missile, hard-kill missiles would be designed to be as laser-resistant as possible. They’d do things like spin, have heat-resistant hulls, and be as fast as possible for shorter-range work.
Tactically, the hunter-scout missile would be used much like a sniper – one missile, one kill. It would try to sneak in and destroy. The hard-kill missile would have to be cheaper and possibly lighter, because it would be launched in a swarm, to attempt to overwhelm the anti-missile lasers. It would be a tactically more of a “spray and pray” weapon system.
I think my future space navy may end up with two missiles. A short, squat fast missile called “Harpoon” to fill the hard-kill role and a larger, stealthy “Arrow” missile for the scout-hunter role.
The first missile roll is what I would call the “hunter-scout.” This would be a missile that would be optimized for long-range attacks. It would have an engine capable of being throttled, be as stealthy as possible, and be smart with good sensors. Part of its “scout” roll would be the VID function.
In modern warfare, it’s very difficult to look at a radar screen and tell the difference between a B-52 and a Boeing 747, especially if the B-52 is trying to look like a 747. They are, after all, large multi-engine subsonic vehicles made by the same company. In modern warfare, manned fighters are sent out to “VID” or “visually identify” (AKA “go look at the damn thing!”) any suspicious targets. A sufficiently smart missile could do that job much safer than a manned vehicle.
The second missile roll is what I would call the “hard-kill” role. This missile is designed strictly for attacking enemy warships. Since presumably the enemy will be trying to use their lasers to melt the inbound missile, hard-kill missiles would be designed to be as laser-resistant as possible. They’d do things like spin, have heat-resistant hulls, and be as fast as possible for shorter-range work.
Tactically, the hunter-scout missile would be used much like a sniper – one missile, one kill. It would try to sneak in and destroy. The hard-kill missile would have to be cheaper and possibly lighter, because it would be launched in a swarm, to attempt to overwhelm the anti-missile lasers. It would be a tactically more of a “spray and pray” weapon system.
I think my future space navy may end up with two missiles. A short, squat fast missile called “Harpoon” to fill the hard-kill role and a larger, stealthy “Arrow” missile for the scout-hunter role.
