Re: Missiles

Bertil Jonell [email removed] writes:
>   Using the T2k2 demolitions rules on the yield sizes gives ...
> ... between 40 and 125 major hits worth of damage.

My reasoning was based on physics.  Assuming that the nuke was detonated
"close" to the ship (within about a shiplength or so), the hull of the
ship will intercept between a a quarter and a third of the energy output
of the explosion; probably enough to wreck the ship.  As a game
mechanic, probably about half of those hits go to the point of impact,
and the other half divided evenly between the hit locations adjacent to
the point of impact.

>   But based from the system (and the TDR discussions on space combat, agility,
> ranges, weapons and hit chanses) it would be very hard to achieve a direct
> hit with a missile. At least 2 levels of difficulty harder. And the defence
> would have a much easier time hitting it.
>   This is also a problem for missiles carrying large shape charges.

Agreed.  I was thinking about, but didn't want to post before I have
finished reading T:TNE, the following game mechanic: achieving a direct
impact hit would be 2 levels of difficulty harder, and achieving a
proximity hit would be 1 level of difficulty harder than the equivalent
detonation laser targetting task.

To even attempt an intercept, the missile should already be in the same
range band as the target, and should have more maneuver fuel available
than the thrust rating of the target's drive.  In other words, the
missile has to start it's final attack from nearby, and must be at least
as maneuverable as the target.

This assumes that the missile is using the T:TNE command guidance
system; alternative guidance systems could make it considerably easier.
The command guidance system has serious problems in co-ordinating an
intercept across distances of several light seconds.  Some example
guidance systems:

Active: Uses an active radar, ladar, or EMS sensor onboard the missile
to detect the target, and guide the missile to intercept.  Large, heavy
and expensive.  Easy to detect missile, may give away location of the
firing ship.  Makes intercept task 1 level of difficulty easier.

Semi-Active: Uses an active radar, ladar, or EMS sensor onboard the
launching vessel, and a reciever onboard the missile, to guide the
missile to intercept.  Relatively simple and cheap.  Easy to detect the
firing ship, and gives away location of the firing ship.  Makes
intercept task 1 level of difficulty easier.  If firing ship stops
operating active sensor (shuts it down, or antenna or sensor destroyed
by battle damage), the missile automatically misses.  Generally
longer-ranged than Active guidance.

Active and Semi-Active guidance can be defeated by jamming the sensor
used to guide the missile, and they can be rendered less effective by
"stealth" techniques which reduce the detection range of these sensors.

Passive: Uses a passive sensor (EMS, Neutrino, Densitometer, IR, etc) to
detect the target, and guide the missile to intercept.  Cost and Size
depend on the type of sensor.  Nearly impossible to detect, and does not
give away the location of the launching ship.  Relatively short
detection and homing range (particularly compared to Active and
Semi-Active missiles).  Makes intercept task 1 level of difficulty
easier.

Passive guidance can be defeated by jamming the sensor used to guide the
missile, or they can be rendered less effective by "stealth" techniques
which reduce the detection range of these sensors.  Passive guideance
can also be defeated by the use of decoys which mimic the passive sensor
profile of the target.

Anti-Radiation: Uses a passive sensor designed to detect specific
emissions (Radio, Radar, Active EMS, missile guidance radars or
communicators) of the target ship, and guides the missile to intercept.
This guidance system makes the intercept task two levels of difficulty
easier.  If the emission stops (is turned off, or the antenna or sensor
is destroyed by battle damage), the missile automatically misses.  If an
impact hit is made, the missile automatically hits the location
containing the antenna for the emission used to guide the missile.

Inertial: The guidance system flys the missile to a location determined
at launch time.  Intertial guidance systems cannot directly cause an
intercept.  Typically used for the first part of a missile's flight, and
then one of the other guidance systems takes over.  This guidance system
is self-comtained, and is nearly impossible to detect the missile or the
launching ship.

Command: The "Normal" T:TNE missile guidance system.  The launching ship
controls the flight of the missile via communications link (Laser,
Maser, or Radio Communicator), or through coded signals from an active
sensor (Radar or Active EMS; this type of guidance is also known as a
"Beam Rider").  The communications link may or may not give the
launching ship's location away.  Can also be used in combination with
other guidance systems.

Guidance system can be combined by specifying when each system is used.
For example, a combined guidance system might consist of Intertial,
Command, and Semi-Active guidance.  Inertial is used for the first part
of the missile's flight.  The Command system provides course corrections
to the Inertial guidance, and commands the switch-over to Semi-Active,
which guides the missile to intercept.  Another example might be a
missile with Active and Anti-Radiation guidance.  The missile is
launched on Active guidance.  If at any time the Active guidance is
successfully jammed, it switches over to Anti-Radiation (the emission it
homes in on is the jamming signal for the active guidance).  If the
Anti-Radiation guidance looses it's signal, the missile switches back to
active.  Nasty.

In all cases of multiple guidance systems, the system that handles the
final ("Terminal") guidance to intercept is used to determine the
intercept task difficulty.

>   Damage from nuclear explosions in space are mostly in the form of soft xrays
> that cause structural damage and other radiation that cause biologic damage
> and disturb electronics. None of these effects are even close to strong enough
> to affect more than one range band.

Definitely.  I've been assuming that an "Impact" (in nuclear terms,
anyway) is anything closer than a shiplength or so.  "Proximity" is
probably a couple of kilometers.  Anything outside of that is a miss.

> the damage of which is determined by how close they were. (I have
> read somehwere that the concussion induced by soft xrays are aproximately of
> the same strange at a certain range from a certain yield as the shockwave
> in air from an airburst of the same yield at the same range, but I'm not
> certain of this). I'd also inflict small scale damage (1h to 1H, say) all
> over the ship but concentrated to the side facing the explosion.

Say, 1h everywhere, and 1H on the sides facing the explosion?  In
general, your ideas sound about right to me, too.

> The cannister round replaces the nuke/laser warhead with a lot of heavy metal
> spheres and a bursting charge. At the range where a nuke/laser missile would
> detonate it spreads the spheres in a cloud which hit the target at high speed.

I'm not sure, but I've always assumed that the detonation laser's range
is tens of thousands of kilometers as a minimum.  At those ranges, the
shperes would be spread too far apart to do much damage.

On the other hand, detonated no more than a couple of kilometers away,
this coule be the basic proximity warhead.  Getting closer to the target
(an "impact" hit) would increase the number of hits, but the penetration
and damage would be about the same.

> The SFF round uses an explosive warhead that generate the 'cloud of buckshot'
> from self forging fragments (a relative of the shape charge, used in the
> experimental SADARM round).

Again, from detonation laser ranges, this will be ineffective.  However,
from a "proximity" hit, this could have the general effect of peppering
the target with buckshot.  From an "Impact" hit, all of these fragments
would go into one or two hit locations, with pretty severe results.

I like these, and I think that they could work.  Maybe Loren could
forward these comments to whomever is writing the boardgame, and also
for inclusion into the Technical architecture book?


[email removed]
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                            in the New Era

  First I'll list my assumptions about the missiles. There is a big risk
this will be obsolete when Technical Architecture and Brilliant Lances comes
out, but I need this stuff now for my own campaign (starting Saturday, provided
I finish a c program that converts old sectors according to Hard Times and
'collapse effects' by then) so I'll use the following until it is superceeded.

  Data given in TTNE: Normal missiles weigh 7 tons, communicate via a lasercom,
have 10-12 Gturns of acceleration, and use command guidance.

  Extrapolated data: They have a volume of 7m3.

  Assumptions: Normal xray missiles consist of a 150kg warhead(1), 100kg of
electronics, actuators and guidance (aka communicator), and all the rest is
a big engine. Their laser tubes are arranged to spread many beams to cover a
large area (like the shrapnel from a claymore) and on average 3.5 beams will
impact a 100m2 target(2) on normal range.

  (1) Fractional yield nukes shouldn't weigh much, probably around 20kg, but
the laser tubes takes up the rest.

  (2) This is the profile area of a 50t spherical ship. I use it as baseline
since class VS (10-99t) is used as baseline with regards to hit difficulties.

> I was thinking about, but didn't want to post before I have
> finished reading T:TNE, the following game mechanic: achieving a direct
> impact hit would be 2 levels of difficulty harder, and achieving a
> proximity hit would be 1 level of difficulty harder than the equivalent
> detonation laser targetting task.

  I think we should divide it into four types instead of three.

1 'Shrapnel' missiles with speed of light 'shrapnel' effective at long range.
  This is the nuke/laser missile given in the book.
  Standard difficulty.

2 'Shrapnel' missiles with slow 'shrapnel' effective at long range or spead
  of light shrapnel effective at short range.
  Cannister missile and nuke missile.
  One level harder.

3 'Shrapnel' missiles with slow 'shrapnel' effective at short range only.
  SFF missile.
  Two levels harder.

4 'Impact only' missiles.
  HE and HEAP.
  Three levels harder.

  (Short range is a km or two, long range is within the same range band. Slow
is everything slower than light. Shrapnel too weak to damage a ship (like from
a normal explosion) is ignored)

  I assume that types 3 and 4 include some kind of end phase autonomous
guidance (and a proximity fuse for type 3). Apart from this I agree with your
rules on final burn fuel.

  The reason for these increased difficulties is that HE and HEAP missiles
otherwise become more effecive than nuke/laser missiles:
  They have lesser penetration but inflicts *huge* amounts of damage.

> Active: Uses an active radar, ladar, or EMS sensor onboard the missile
> Semi-Active: Uses an active radar, ladar, or EMS sensor onboard the
> Passive: Uses a passive sensor (EMS, Neutrino, Densitometer, IR, etc) to
> Anti-Radiation: Uses a passive sensor designed to detect specific

  Isn't these types covered by the rules on SIM and FIM? Adding different types
is good, but I don't think it is necessary on this level. It can attached
as an optional rule to the FIM and SIM rules, but I don't think we should
include it so that it becomes necessary in order to use other missiles than
nuke/laser. We should keep it separate.

  BTW: Having some professional experience with missiles, IMHO the best
guidance model is the Track Via Missile guidance. It is basically a
combination of the best features of FIM and SIM.

  The missile has sensors of it's own and a guidance computer (as a FIM) but
it has also a communication link to the firing vessel (as a SIM or command
guided).
  The link enables the missile to use the much more powerful computer 'on the
ground' (ie on the firing ship in our case)' while the onboard guidance takes
over if the link is broken. The dual viewpoints (sensors on the firing ship
and in the missile) makes it more discriminating versus countermeasures.

  In traveller terms, I'd describe it as a FIM that uses the best of gunners
skill and onboard skill as long as it is in communication with the firing
ship during the final round. Normal restrictions on number of simultaneously
controlled missiles apply during this round.
  An additional trick that is possible with TVM missiles is the 'accumulated
wave attack'. Missiles are fired during several rounds and given (one at the
time) orders such that they will all arrive at the target simultaneously,
overwhelming its defences.

> Say, 1h everywhere, and 1H on the sides facing the explosion?  In
> general, your ideas sound about right to me, too.

  The soft xrays are totally absorbed by air 'within a few feet' from the bomb,
so I think all of them should stick in the hull on the side facing the
explosion. But the shock could travel on through the hull and affect all areas
to a lesser degree.

> > The cannister round replaces the nuke/laser warhead with a lot of heavy metal
> > spheres and a bursting charge. At the range where a nuke/laser missile would
> > detonate it spreads the spheres in a cloud which hit the target at high speed.
>
> I'm not sure, but I've always assumed that the detonation laser's range
> is tens of thousands of kilometers as a minimum.  At those ranges, the
> shperes would be spread too far apart to do much damage.

  I made some calculation on a missile that will spread 15000 1cm tungsten
spheres (10g each, total warhead weight 150kg).

  To achieve 3.5 hits against a 100m3 target, there has to be one sphere per
30m3. The radius of the cloud at impact will thus be 400m. To achieve a spread
of 400m at a closing velocity of 1 to 30 (60,000km/h to 1,800,000km/h) and
a range of 30,000 km (one range band) requires a radial velocity of 0.2m/s to
6m/s.
  So I persist that the 'detonation' range of the cannister round can be the
same as for the xray missile:) (Although I think a variable rate gas generator
might be more appropriate than a charge, since the rate of dispersion has to
vary with the closing velocity).

>>The SFF round uses an explosive warhead that generate the 'cloud of buckshot'
>>from self forging fragments (a relative of the shape charge, used in the
>>experimental SADARM round).
>
> Again, from detonation laser ranges, this will be ineffective.

  Yup, you need to be within a kilometer or two.

> From an "Impact" hit, all of these fragments
> would go into one or two hit locations, with pretty severe results.

  Perhaps too severe for game balance. The effect of one 10mm tungsten sphere
at 16km/second (closure velocity of 1) is 2-30 if I write it in the same
form as the laser damage. Imagine a 7 ton missile...

  I'll post a message with tenative designs for HE, HEAT, Cannister, SFF and
LGB missiles as soon as I've typed them in.

> [email removed]

- -bertil-
- --
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

Bertil Jonell [email removed] writes:
> [assumptions about missiles]

These seem reasonable.

>   I think we should divide it into four types instead of three.

That sounds good, too.  But I'm going to argue that Cannister missiles
should be in category three (short-range shrapnel missiles).  The levels
of difficulty seem about right, too.  One more thing: in category four,
we should probably add "smart rocks": an "impact only" missile with no
warhead; damage by kinetic energy of impact.

>   I assume that types 3 and 4 include some kind of end phase autonomous
> guidance (and a proximity fuse for type 3). Apart from this I agree with your
> rules on final burn fuel.

I was assuming that the exact type and capability of the terminal
guidance would make a big difference in the effectiveness of the
missile.  But you have a good point; the basics are covered under the
FIM/SIM rules.  The sensor/guidance system types should be optional
rules.

>   BTW: Having some professional experience with missiles, IMHO the best
> guidance model is the Track Via Missile guidance. It is basically a
> combination of the best features of FIM and SIM.

I'm partial to inertial with terminal active radar homing (and of
course, the bearing only launch option).  The USN Harpoon is a good
example of what I mean.

>   In traveller terms, I'd describe it as a FIM that uses the best of gunners
> skill and onboard skill as long as it is in communication with the firing
> ship during the final round. Normal restrictions on number of simultaneously
> controlled missiles apply during this round.

That sounds reasonable; and the same rules can apply to any type of FIM
missile that has a command reciever as well.  One more thing I can think
of, though.  T:TNE assumes a tightbeam command link (laser); if the
missile ever goes fully independent (the command limk is cut off for
whatever reason), you can't re-acquire the missile --- it stays in FIM
mode because you no longer have accurate pointing data your laser.

> But the shock could travel on through the hull and affect all areas
> to a lesser degree.

That's what I was thinking.  1H for those areas that absorbed X-ray
energy directly, and 1h for those areas that were subject to the
concussion transmitted through the ship.

>   To achieve 3.5 hits against a 100m3 target, there has to be one sphere per
> 30m3. The radius of the cloud at impact will thus be 400m. To achieve a spread
> of 400m at a closing velocity of 1 to 30 (60,000km/h to 1,800,000km/h) and
> a range of 30,000 km (one range band) requires a radial velocity of 0.2m/s to
> 6m/s.
>   So I persist that the 'detonation' range of the cannister round can be the
> same as for the xray missile:)

I persist in insisting that it's practically impossible.  You are
putting the detination at 30,000km from the target; anywhere from anout
a minute to nearly thirty minutes between detonation and impact.  But
you can no longer guide that cloud of pellets after detonation.
Assuming the worst case, the target has only to move 400m in that minute
in order to be 100% safe; this works out to slightly under 0.25g --- for
slower approach velocities, the neccessicary accelleration is even less.
So even minor "jinking" by the target can throw off the aim of the
cannister shot; the maneuver expenditure is relatively minor, so ships
could afford to jump around this way even if they didn't detect a
missile closing on them.

On the other hand, detonating one of these at a kilometer or so away
gives the target less than 0.005 second to respond; getting an assumed
50m diameter ship out of the path of the fragments would require
thousands of Gs of accelleration.

> (Although I think a variable rate gas generator
> might be more appropriate than a charge, since the rate of dispersion has to
> vary with the closing velocity).

No; fire the bursting charge based on estimated time to impact, so that
the fragments always have the same amount of time to disperse.

> > From an "Impact" hit, all of these fragments
> > would go into one or two hit locations, with pretty severe results.
>
>   Perhaps too severe for game balance. The effect of one 10mm tungsten sphere
> at 16km/second (closure velocity of 1) is 2-30 if I write it in the same
> form as the laser damage. Imagine a 7 ton missile...

But hitting the target is pretty hard, as we have both pointed out.
Cannister rounds detonated at tens of thousands of km provide the target
with far too much time to get out of the way.

A couple of other points which have occurred to me: the missiles use a
laser link for communications to the firing ship.  A cannister of
anti-laser "sand" placed at just the right spot should do wonders to
break this link; and once lost, it should be nearly impossible to
re-establish.  I'd treat it as firing the sandcaster at the missile; a
hit breaks the link, the results of which depend on the type of guidance
the missile has.

Managing to intercept the target and go for a proximity or impact hit
should be considerably easier if you are quite close to the target.
Like in the same range band with it.  Does T:TNE already have a modifier
for this? (if not, there probably should be one for <1 range band and >5
range bands for proximity and impact missiles).

>   I'll post a message with tenative designs for HE, HEAT, Cannister, SFF and
> LGB missiles as soon as I've typed them in.

Aside from the gotcha with cannister, I've seen these and like them.


[email removed]
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                            in the New Era

> Bertil Jonell [email removed] writes:
> > [assumptions about missiles]
>
> These seem reasonable.
>
> >   I think we should divide it into four types instead of three.
>
> That sounds good, too.  But I'm going to argue that Cannister missiles
> should be in category three (short-range shrapnel missiles).

  Perhaps category 2 should be modified from slow shrapnel on long ranges
to slow shrapnel on medium ranges.

  I looked on how much an evading ship could burn since the detonation, and
moving 400m at 6G takes a little more than 3s. At closing velocity 1, the
shrapnel moves 48km in 3s, and 48km is significantly more than the 'a few km'
that is the range of nuke and SFF missiles (big enough difference to warrant
category 2 IMHO).
  (Back to the charge idea: The spheres has to spread with 130m/s radial to
get to 400m in 3s.)

  The reason for my perservance is that I think there is need for a cheap
non-nuke missile that works with a penalty of one difficulty level and lower
damage and penetration. It fills a niche.

> The levels
> of difficulty seem about right, too.  One more thing: in category four,
> we should probably add "smart rocks": an "impact only" missile with no
> warhead; damage by kinetic energy of impact.

  Yes, but like I said, I don't want to think about the impact energy of this
one.

> I'm partial to inertial with terminal active radar homing (and of
> course, the bearing only launch option).  The USN Harpoon is a good
> example of what I mean.

  Guess we look on them from different viewpoints: I look on them as SAM's or
AAM's and you use the SSM model:)

> That sounds reasonable; and the same rules can apply to any type of FIM
> missile that has a command reciever as well.  One more thing I can think
> of, though.  T:TNE assumes a tightbeam command link (laser); if the
> missile ever goes fully independent (the command limk is cut off for
> whatever reason), you can't re-acquire the missile --- it stays in FIM
> mode because you no longer have accurate pointing data your laser.

  Depends on how tightbeam that laser is, and on if the firing vessel has
a sensor lock on the missile itself.

>>   So I persist that the 'detonation' range of the cannister round can be the
>> same as for the xray missile:)
>
> I persist in insisting that it's practically impossible.

  Ok, I've gone down to 50km:)

> No; fire the bursting charge based on estimated time to impact, so that
> the fragments always have the same amount of time to disperse.

  Yup, that's easier.

>>   Perhaps too severe for game balance. The effect of one 10mm tungsten sphere
>> at 16km/second (closure velocity of 1) is 2-30 if I write it in the same
>> form as the laser damage. Imagine a 7 ton missile...
>
> But hitting the target is pretty hard, as we have both pointed out.

  I have an nasty suspicion that a kinetic only missile would be more
effective than a HE missile... I don't have my books here, but I think the
energy even at closing velocity 1 would be in the nuclear range (0.1 to 10kt).

> A couple of other points which have occurred to me: the missiles use a
> laser link for communications to the firing ship.  A cannister of
> anti-laser "sand" placed at just the right spot should do wonders to
> break this link;

  But think about the trouble to predict where that spot will be. Both the
launcher, the missile and the target jets around at high speed and the TNE
sand casters don't work in the 'eject a large unguided cloud of sand' mode
of classic Traveller.

> Managing to intercept the target and go for a proximity or impact hit
> should be considerably easier if you are quite close to the target.
> Like in the same range band with it.  Does T:TNE already have a modifier
> for this? (if not, there probably should be one for <1 range band and >5
> range bands for proximity and impact missiles).

  I wonder if it is necessary. A simple trader firing a impact only missile
on a Small target within the same range band will have a Formidable task
(Average to begin with, +3 to Impossible for the missile, -1 for the size of
 the target) which usually is a hit 25% of the time. That is good for a
target that potentially can be 30,000km away.

  Ok, perhaps. But not more than -1 difficulty.

  My idea was that the 'simple terminal guidance' I talk about removes the
need for an extra mod for >5 range bands above and beyond the usual -1
per 3 range bands.

> >   I'll post a message with tenative designs for HE, HEAT, Cannister, SFF and
> > LGB missiles as soon as I've typed them in.
>
> Aside from the gotcha with cannister, I've seen these and like them.

  Thanks.

  BTW: Does anyone have other ideas for missiles? I have thought about a
nuke pumped 'fusion gun' warhead analogous to the laser warhead but fail to
see how it would differ to any significant degree.
  Cluster warheads are also a possibility but the anti-ship effect of those
would be inferior to cannister IMHO.

> [email removed]

- -bertil-
- --
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

Bertil Jonell [email removed] writes:
>   Perhaps category 2 should be modified from slow shrapnel on long ranges
> to slow shrapnel on medium ranges.

OK.

>   (Back to the charge idea: The spheres has to spread with 130m/s radial to
> get to 400m in 3s.)

This will work.

>   The reason for my perservance is that I think there is need for a cheap
> non-nuke missile that works with a penalty of one difficulty level and lower
> damage and penetration. It fills a niche.

Agreed.

>   I have an nasty suspicion that a kinetic only missile would be more
> effective than a HE missile... I don't have my books here, but I think the
> energy even at closing velocity 1 would be in the nuclear range (0.1 to 10kt).

It may be.  If so, we should chuck the HE and HEAP missiles in favor of
a KEAP missile (cheaper, and lighter too!).  Could you work out this and
the nuclear missiles we discussed earlier (I *still* haven't gotten back
to that section in T:TNE --- I've been reading through it carefully, and
spending far too much time posting on the net:).  Then I'll pull it all
together so that we have everything in one place.

>   But think about the trouble to predict where that spot will be. Both the
> launcher, the missile and the target jets around at high speed and the TNE
> sand casters don't work in the 'eject a large unguided cloud of sand' mode
> of classic Traveller.

True, but blocking the missile's commo link with sand *has* to be easier
than taking out the missile with anti-missile laser fire.

>   Ok, perhaps. But not more than -1 difficulty.

You are probably right; I haven't read the complete combat rules yet.
25% is a high enough chance; I was afraid that it would be less than
that.

>   My idea was that the 'simple terminal guidance' I talk about removes the
> need for an extra mod for >5 range bands above and beyond the usual -1
> per 3 range bands.

OK.

>   Cluster warheads are also a possibility but the anti-ship effect of those
> would be inferior to cannister IMHO.

On the other hand, they could be very useful for a planetary attack
missile.  How about a series of missiles with re-entry heat-shields and
HE, HEAP, CBM, and nuclear (and probably thermonuclear) warheads?

Other possibilities: a cheap, light-weight missile with (say) about 7
G-turns of fuel and warhead, shorter endurance, etc.  Designed
to be launched from fighters at close range (in the same range band).
These can probably get by with a much simpler guidance system
(laser-designated target?).  Although the lower cost is nice, the real
goal is a smaller, lighter missile, so that a fighter could have 2 or 4
on launch rails.

Other ideas:
	The T:TNE equivalent of a phalanx gun: installed in a turret
hardpoint, this is a small, rapid-fire laser (or gatling laser).  It has
it's own sensor, and fires at anything that comes near.  It can operate
in FIM (Fully-Independent Mode) or SIM, just like a missile.  Intended
to be a defense against proximity and impact missiles, its damage and
penetration aren't much, but effective against missiles out to about
100km.
	Sensor drone: the same general size and shape as a standard
missile, but the "warhead" is the best sensor system that can be crammed
into the available space (probably with a folding array).  Communicates
sensor data back to the mother ship.  Recoverable/reusable.

[email removed]
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                            in the New Era