Hacker News Reader

Comment by amelius | Hacker News Reader

> it relays its view of the World back to the ground station which returns its recommended geometry.

Can't the missile jam the signal?

Sure it could. And then the impactor could target the jamming transmitter. Therefore emitting a jamming signal would actually make the missile easier to intercept.

Or the jammer could be separate from the missile.

In this cycle, we see a war of complex resources (produced by logistical wealth) emerge. Those with the most of everything, to produce the greatest fighting flexibility, eventually win. Perhaps pyrrhicly.

That would be awfully nice if it were true. In reality, the opposition to this kind of tech just makes lots and lots of cheap missiles, while your interceptors cost millions each, and drive you bankrupt.

This is happening in Gaza. Hamas cuts down telephone poles and fills them with homemade solid rocket fuel and a 50 KG warhead, which are then called Katyushkas because they superficially resemble the 1940's Grad missiles. These are then intercepted by $100,000 Tamir interceptors.

The worst part is that misfiring telephone poles have killed about as many Gazans as Israelis.

You could attach the jammer to the missile using a wire of some random length.

Aerodynamically this is quite a bad idea. Better to send two missiles, and have one use a jammer and the other not.

I see that you work in software, not hardware.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com