[nerfman]

I looked this up Last night in regards to "false images to the side." Deceiving a sensors angular return is harder, but done in two ways:

1) Side Lobe Exploitation: A radar reciever is basically a highly tuned directional antenna. Interfernce phenomena cause "Side Lobes" to be present in both transmitting and receieving. These side lobes are areas that aren't directly "ahead" where the system can register a return as well. Their specifics (angle, "width", sensitivity) are determined by the geometry and materials of the emitter and/or reciever. By carfully timing a deception "ping," you will be able to have a radar actually think a target is in front of it while in real life the thing is down one of its side lobes, and of course, the sensor system is usually designed to make that as hard as possible to do. I do not know if it is theoretically possible to design a radar w/out any side lobes, but even some of the most advanced radars today have them. In 1000 years? Who knows?

2) Some sensors localize by moving in a pattern and locking in on the target, like a conical scan. The radar moves in a circular fashion regularly and tracks the target's movement based on the feedback. Anyway, it is possible to use deceptive false pings to make make it think you are really not exactly where you are. They will still know pretty much where you are, but the targetting solution gets a little more "fuzzy." This type of measure will be designed to defeat a certain type of scan. So if one seeker scanned in a certain way and another came up another way, you would have to decieve each one differently. Possible to do w/ one system, but a lot harder.

That is the only two methods I could find. Also remember that the missile usually doesn't fly "at" the target, its flying towards where it is going to be. Even deception that only makes the target closer or farther is useful here. If the missile thinks the target is farther away it may not get close enough to execute its terminal manuever (attack) before it realizes it and not have enough fuel to come back. On the other hand, if it thinks it is closer, it may fly past and not be able to make its terminal manuever. If it flies "past" it might hit the target, but the chances of that are slim considering the volume of space considered. This all might not make sense if you consider trying to hit something coming right at you or standing still, but when you are trying to get close enough to cause damage against a real target moving through 3d space it is possible to be decieved until it is literally too late to do anything about it.

In fairness to SJ, many missiles now incorporate "Home on Jam" capbilities which can work. Of course new countermeasure make it harder for the mssiles to know it is being jammed. So its all like a big rat race with the only real winners being the defense contractors.

SJ - didn't see your Last post.
Can you elaborate? I don't really understand what you are getting at. Thanks

[This message has been edited by nerfman (edited 04 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by nerfman (edited 04 May 2001).]