Using MIRV as anti-missiles?

[Sheb (OP)]

Well, after reading one of Steve's campaign, I've started to add a few AMM to my ASM ships. I'd figure that were I to encounter aliens with superior range, I could as well use those AMMs. And that should I ever encounter much stronger aliens, they would be useful in covering my retreat.

Now, of course, a size-4 missile launcher can only launch a size-1 AMM every so often. But it could launch a small MIRV carrying two or even three AMMs, thus greatly improving their performance. So here is my question, can you use MIRV against AMMs?

[Brian Neumann]

Yes you can.  The best way I have seen is to have a missile with nothing but the submunitions.  Have it set for the max range of your anti-missile fire control or missile range whichever is shorter.  For a size 4 missile this could be 4 size 1 amm.  You will need a fire control on board to with a resolution 1 so that it can see the incomming missiles.  The way all this works is you launch the mirv and it stays in place while your ship moves.  5 seconds later the mirv releases it's submunitions which will home in on the target of the fire control.  You do need to be sure that the incomming missiles will take at least 15 seconds to cross the range so that the amm submunitions have a chance to see the target and then attack them.

Hope this helps you
Brian

[Charlie Beeler]

Why would you try to use an ICBM with MIRV's for ship to ship missile intercept? MIRV is Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle.

Yes, I know what you really ment, which is a missile bus with multiple submunitions to intercept missile salvos.  That is possible.  It is a tricky juggling act of sensors and release ranges.  

[Sheb (OP)]

I know what a MIRV is, but I have seen it used to describe a missile with submunitions. Would the AMMs need their own sensors?

[Brian Neumann]

I know what a MIRV is, but I have seen it used to describe a missile with submunitions. Would the AMMs need their own sensors?

As long as the firing ship's fire control is still up and targeting the SAME targets as when they launched then no the amm do not need thier own sensors.  If the firing ships fire control goes down then they will lose lock on and detonate as normal.

Brian

[Charlie Beeler]

I know what a MIRV is, but I have seen it used to describe a missile with submunitions. Would the AMMs need their own sensors?

It's one of those things that bugs me, obviously incorrect use of naming conventions.  After a while the old NCO in me has to "address" the issue.  It's not really a big deal.

In my own campaigns I use names like MWM (Multi Warhead Missile) that show my background in SFB play.  I also have used swarm as a name prior to the NPR of the same name being introduced. 

Brian has given a good response about the onboard sensors.

[Sheb (OP)]

Okay, so it seems pretty easy to do, and it should allow my ASM ships to be several times as effective.

[sloanjh]

n my own campaigns I use names like MWM (Multi Warhead Missile) that show my background in SFB play.  I also have used swarm as a name prior to the NPR of the same name being introduced. 

I used to name the missile "Flechette", back when I used to do this.  In more recent games, I haven't bothered - it's too much of a bookkeeping overhead, the reload rates are slow enough, and the benefit is small enough that it hasn't been worth it to me....

John

[Charlie Beeler]

I used to name the missile "Flechette", back when I used to do this.  In more recent games, I haven't bothered - it's too much of a bookkeeping overhead, the reload rates are slow enough, and the benefit is small enough that it hasn't been worth it to me....

John

I have to admit that I haven't been doing it for some time either.  Sometimes I use an MWM from PDC's for ranged intercept of smallcraft, but even that is rare.