Lim Jyue (lim_jyue@pacific.net.sg)
Mon, 26 Jun 2000 00:57:46 +0800


At 10:36 06/23/2000 MST, Blackeagle wrote:

        Sorry for the slow response; Had been in a slow mood lately..

>Well, it also leaves anything in orbit around either the Earth or the Moon
>which isn't in one of the Lagrange points. I'd say one of the better places
>to attack Zeon from would probably be a polar orbit around the moon, but
>virtually anyplace else will do.

        Unfortunately, the Moon declared itself neutral as soon as it could;
The Federation could have launched a few missiles before the declaraton went
into effect, but my guess is that the Lunarians would have been against any
launching of the missiles since it could bring down the wrath of Zeon onto it.

        (Hey, that has a nice ring to it. =)

>Actually, Earth proper is probably the worst place to launch an attack from.
>Low Earth Orbit, on the other hand, is a lot more practical.

        Let's consider the word Earth to include the LEO region, shall we?

>The best way to deliver a chemical or biological agent is probably through
>submunitions.

        Actually, the best way to deliver a chem/ bio agent is to pump the
agents, brought in by MSes, into the cylinder. =)

>Basically, when it gets near the target the missile would disgorge several
>warheads that would hit different points along the colony.

        Right, but would each submunitions have sufficient power to
penetrate the outer hull and the inner earth layer of the cylinder to
disperse in the colony?

>BTW: This is same concept is one of many reasons why the proposed American
>National Missile Defense is a bunch of bullshit.

        Well, that's the American National Missile Defense. For us here in
Singapore, even a near miss would kill us.. =)

>I don't see any reason why the Federation wouldn't do the same.

        Yes, but the designs of current ICBMs are relatively straight
forward, since there isn't a real defense against ICBM current (AFAIK).

>Currently, a Trident II D5 missile has a CEP of under 122m. This means that
>after a 6000 mile flight, half the warheads will land within 122 meters of
>the target point.

        Pretty good. Assuming each mile is 1.6km, at the end of a 447,000km
(279375 mile, give or take), it will land within a 5680.625m radius, give or
take. This is good enough to nail a cylinder, but a little off the centre
can mean a clean miss from certain angles too.

        Still, this is using stats for a ICBM designed to work near Earth.
How effective it would be in such long range flights is difficult to say.

>It depends how powerful the warhead is. However, since there is no upper
>limit on the power of thermonuclear weapons, the smallest possible answer is
>1.

        While it is true that the smallest possible answer is 1, isn't there
a limit on practical thermonuclear weapons, not in the actual process, but
in the subcomponents of the delivery system?

-------------
Lim Jyue
ICQ: 24737555

I am careful not to confuse excellence with perfection.
Excellence I can reach for; perfection is God's business.

-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Jun 26 2000 - 01:57:59 JST