USS Jack Riley wrote:
Thanks for the encouraging comments.
My pleasure. Anything to encourage great work.
The solution you describe is the one I like most conceptually, and IIRC it's something like what David Weber does in the "Honor Harrington" books. In the case of his ships (someone who's a Weber fan correct me here, if necessary) the guidance scrambling part is moot because both weapons and ships are traveling at such velocities that beyond a certain point it would require too much energy for either to veer from their trajectories; their paths will intersect. OTOH, his ships employ close-in lasers and interceptor missiles to try to destroy incoming missiles.
I have read almost all of the Honor Harrington books. They use something similar to what I describe above, but the first level of defense is Electronic Counter Warfare (ECW), then the anti missile missiles, then the close in anti missile lasers (not to mention sidewalls, etc.). The ECW is similar to what is used today in modern navies (and the air forces) in that it is passive and causes the incoming missile to think that a target is in one palce when it is someplace else, or that there are 2 dreadnaughts, when there is but a single cruiser.
The Israeli system I referenced above is an active system in that the weapons pod (for lack of a better term) focuses on the incoming missile and scrambles its electronics as opposed to making the incoming missile think there is more than one tank and that the real tank is a "ghost" and the missile should, therefore, attack what is in fact the "ghost" tank. Am I clear on that explanation? Not sure if I cleared that up for you or not.
Regardless, keep up the great work!