Mobile Emp Missile Defense

[Combine Crusier]

It's been a while since I posted and this probably isn't a likable idea but here is the general concept. A minimal contingent of two vehicles. One equipped with a wide range radar and target data system. IE it detects an incoming missile then predicts its likely trajectory. This data is then fed to a lightly armored tiger class vehicle which is equipped with a single long range laser which uses the targeting data to aim at a predetermined location which the missile will possibly pass through. After aiming it waits the predetermined amount of time then fires and if the missile was there the missile is either destroyed or is disabled and falls to the ground and onto whatever was on the ground beneath it. If the radar vehicle had a savant or something similar on board it could be used to provide data to maybe four long range laser tigers. The tigers could use their lasers for limited defense in case of ground attack but due to the light armor you'd probably want an escort, of course then why would the enemy be shooting an EMP missile out in the middle of nowhere?

Pros:
Shoots down EMP missiles if it scores a direct hit.
Due to light armor the tigers wouldn't necessarily need rare.

Cons:
Long range lasers would have a noticeably longer cooling and recharge time than normal lasers.
Requires at least one radar vehicle and one long range laser tiger (LRL) tiger to operate.
Radar vehicle would have to be somewhat close to LRL tiger in order to provide accurate targeting data. (The further away from the LRL tiger the less chance of it giving an accurate prediction)
Doesn't always hit EMP missile.

[Hidiot]

Why would we need a meteor defense on wheels?

I doubt you can fit a reactor powerful enough to power such a laser into a Tiger chassis. The meteor defenses in OP2 use 1/3 of a tokamak's power to run, and that's a big reactor. The Tiger can't hold even a laser 1/4th weaker than a meteor defense's

[Combine Crusier]

That maybe so but an EMP missile uses fuel to propel itself and fuel is combustible. Also the meteor defense was designed to vaporize the entire meteor where as here you are just trying to blow a hole in the thing so that the warhead won't detonate. Also the EMP warhead would require a power source and that too would likely be explosive. Look at todays avenger system they are mounting a laser on hummers to blow up IEDs and those lasers are likely to be much less powerful than the ones in OP2/3 since the lasers in OP2/3 use fusion reactors.

Your argument does point out that this system would be insufficient to destroy meteors though and I never intended for it to be able to do so.

[BlackBox]

1. The missile would likely be designed to exhaust the majority of its fuel by the time it reaches the surface (considering that it's a non destructive weapon, so you don't want flammable or explosive things reaching the surface. Also keep in mind that the atmosphere doesn't contain oxygen (any oxygen would be supplied from a source (oxidizer) on the missile)).

2. A missile is hundreds or thousands of times the size of an IED. You are going to need a much larger laser if you want to destroy one completely (and we're talking "vaporize" here; you don't see chunks of EMP missile falling down from the sky when a Meteor Defense destroys one).

3. Lasers needed to do this require huge amounts of power. (Keep in mind also the computers needed in order to track the missile). It's possible that a power plant on a vehicle cannot supply enough power for this to work properly.

[Freeza-CII]

the only way to have a mobile met def is with some thing like a patriot missile.

You wouldnt have the power on a chassis to run the laser needed to take out a ICBM.  Even if you did the vec would be so slow a advancing army would be over run by regular units.

they way to stop missile spamming isnt in new units.  Its in the game its self with a limiting timer on till the next launch.

[Combine Crusier]

A. An EMP charge would require a power source and power sources are normally volatile!

B. The targeting data comes from the other vehicle!

C. I was comparing modern day examples to OP2/3 but obviously you think I'm talking about using a crappy avenger laser to take out a large missile.

D. Is it a LAW that the missile has to be completely vaporized and did I ever directly say that the laser alone could destroy the missile? I said the combustible fuel if there is any and if not then the power source for the EMP charge could cause a secondary explosion.

E. All the laser has to do is penetrate a small area of the missile to do its damage and disable the missile.

F. If Eden can support thors hammer then it should be able to support a more powerful laser than the original.

But seeing as you can't understand what I'm posting in my response to Hidiot's question never mind. Next thing I know you'll be calling this artillery just beacuse it has the words long range in it.

[Freeza-CII]

look Thors hammer is a short range burst weapon the met def is a laser that stays on long enough to kill the missile.  The missile would explode as a result of the laser going through it.  The EMP missile could have a Capacitor array that is fully charge to make the emp burst. Or its a Nuke that is detonated in the atmosphere.
Yes they can support a heavier laser but it would not be powerful enough to reach the missile.

[Sirbomber]

Yes they can support a heavier laser but it would not be powerful enough to reach the missile.

Because the idea of a vehicle tapping into the colony's power grid is absurd!

[Freeza-CII]

I want my fan to be faster but its only 12 volt.  I can plug it into 110 wall socket BUT it will burn out and the fan wont move.  

[Sirbomber]

That is the worst example ever.  The fan is not designed to run on that kind of power.  The mobile defense obviously would be and would not function if it didn't have the power it needed, just like the regular Meteor Defense.

[Freeza-CII]

Because the idea of a vehicle tapping into the colony's power grid is absurd!

Assuming Sarcasm the power from the colony to run a met def would burn out the chassis.  Plugging into higher power isnt always the solution.

[Hidiot]

A transformer wouldn't be that hard to have...

[CK9]

*slaps Hidiot*

A transformer has the same results as a gear shift-down/up: you're exchanging one problem for another.

motor--small large--small large = higher torc, but much slower

same basic concept with using a transformer to induce a change in current.

[Combine Crusier]

It is not supposed to have the range of a meteor defense!
It takes a long recharge time which is why it isn't a good ground weapon and not only that it would sacrifice armor piercing capabilities for range. You use a multiple capacitor discharge system which takes a while to charge but stores plenty of energy. The shortened range when compared to the meteor defense is why the radar vehicle would be designed to give data to multiple LRL tigers.

Here is another thing, the lower the frequency IE microwave compared to an X-Ray wave the microwave would actually maintain stability longer IE. greater range because it doesn't dissipate as quickly where as a X-Ray wave has a higher frequency and deteriorates faster. This in part means the lower the frequency of an electromagnetic weapon the longer the range. Correct me if I'm wrong but this is the answer I got from principles of technology.

[BlackBox]

An EMP charge would require a power source and power sources are normally volatile!

Freeza mentioned a capacitor (and I had thought of this when writing my original post also, didn't have the time to describe in detail). A capacitor gets charged before detonation (perhaps at launch or inflight). Now to how a capacitor is constructed -- in its simplest form, it's two pieces of metal separated by a dielectric. This is not "volatile" in itself (we're not talking about chemical reactions like in a battery, as a capacitor is not a battery. Point being, it can't explode).

I can think of other power sources as well that are not volatile (which probably aren't very useful or applicable in this case, but I include them here anyway for the sake of argument): wind and solar power to name just a couple.

Is it a LAW that the missile has to be completely vaporized and did I ever directly say that the laser alone could destroy the missile? I said the combustible fuel if there is any and if not then the power source for the EMP charge could cause a secondary explosion.

If you don't totally destroy the missile, what happens if it slams into whatever its intended target is? (It's going to do a lot of mechanical damage, considering we're talking about a rocket that's many times the size of a semi-truck). You have to cause it break up into small enough pieces so that it won't cause significant damage to anything below.

(One possible method would be to eject a small module containing the actual warhead, leaving the rocket to burn up in the atmosphere. This would also remove the problem of "volatile fuel" explosions or similar).

With regards to the transformer comment, in an ideal transformer power is constant (keep in mind that power = voltage * current, a transformer changes the voltage of an incoming current -- in simple terms, if the voltage increases, the current must decrease). Of course, in the real world, some power is lost due to resistance within the inductors, leakage flux, etc. but the same general rule remains. You still have the same amount of power (or slightly less) after passing current through the transformer.

By the way, the HERC (the weapon used in the meteor defense) was a particle beam if I remember correctly, which is totally different from a system using masers (focused microwave radiation).

[CK9]

and hacker has to come along and point out that I got voltage and current switched in my head, lol

[Freeza-CII]

Combine

Range has every thing to do with a met def because it has to reach the missile before it can do any damge.

The laser itself

It can vaporize a large ASTEROID!!!! a small missile in comparison would be easy to destroy.  HOW ever This is about putting it on a chassis Tiger or larger.

the problem is how do you power such a thing.  I dont see a tiger chassis being able to power it and a larger chassis would be slow as hell leaving the army to be killed to faster moving units just because they have to stay under the umbrella of the mobile def.  Capacitor yes because you can charge it up but how long are you talking and how big would it have to be.  would its rate of fire make it useful or just a one shot wonder then left to watch a missile plow into it.  

[Combine Crusier]

It would probably end up taking 150% the time it takes an upgraded thors hammer to fire again.

The primary, I think, reason the tiger is so slow is because of its armor with lighter armor a tiger could  go faster or the same speed on less power and considering the lighter armor couldn't the internal structure be redesigned to accommodate a larger reactor. Another thing is that in the novellas the vehicles including tigers had driving cabs in case a person wanted to use them like when Axen used one of the thors tigers. This cabin could be removed to make room for a more powerful reactor. Then since there is only a single laser instead of a double the capacitors could be added to the turret section so they aren't taking up space inside the tiger.

Essentially once the LRL tiger fired at the missile, if it missed then it couldn't do anything except run away and it would probably be too late for that. The only way to protect against that would to have multiple LRL tigers with overlapping ranges.

One more thing if the EMP missile just detonates its EMP charge why does it completely vaporize upon detonation if there is nothing explosive on board?

[Hooman]

One more thing if the EMP missile just detonates its EMP charge why does it completely vaporize upon detonation if there is nothing explosive on board?

To simplify game design?
 

[Sirbomber]

One more thing if the EMP missile just detonates its EMP charge why does it completely vaporize upon detonation if there is nothing explosive on board?

To simplify game design?

It doesn't.  It transforms in2 TEH MES HAL.  BLARYEUGH!

And because it would be even more broken if it did damage as well as EMP stuff.

[Combine Crusier]

Perhaps Plymouth installed an small warhead to detonate the missile after the EMP went off. They'd shield the warhead of course and they'd do this to prevent Eden from recovering the missile and reverse engineering it.    

[Slaughter_Manslaught]

I liked the idea, but it should be applied diferently.

I doubt a Tiger-sized vehicle can fit a reactor capable of feeding a particle beam that can destroy meteors.

What about Eden using one of their other technologies, The Rail Gun?

If this vehicle was made to fight EMP Missiles, instead of using energy-demanding Particle Beams, why not fit a big rail gun (or multiple small ones) into one Tiger-sized vehicle?

The small projectile would most likely destroy the core of the EMP missile with a shot or two. Reserve railguns would be there to fire on the remaining debris raining from the skies. That would also force Plymouth to make better, faster, stronger missiles, leading to enhancements of the EMP missile.  

[Freeza-CII]

you would need some insane tracking to use a rail gun plus the rail gun isnt going to explode the missile just break it up.  It would still require alot of power since you need to push it farther and these guns do have a recoil.  

Simple ways of acutally killing a incoming missile is the Vulcan system on Carriers but that means letting the missle get reallllly close.  Or a smaller faster missile.  See the Patriot missile.