>>510622671
>That's not really the order of actions, or how it would work, especially for very short ranged systems.
>- target is detect long before it enters the engagement envelope the missiles flight perforamance offers
ok let's assume that for argument's sake
>- target is tracked with optical system, which means the laser is automatically pointing at it too since it's essentially glued to the side of the camer
what's the range of cheap mass-produced optical systems in NIR when trying to pick out a Kalibr or black-painted Geran at night?
And what's the range where a cheap mass-produced ground-based laser + the actuated tracking system inclined say 15° above the horizon can reliably lase a Kalibr flying at Mach 0.8 ? Or a black-painted Geran flying between 0.15 and 0.45 Mach?

>- missile is fired when/if target enters engagement envelope
how much time does the missile get to get to intercept velocity?
I get where the argument comes from but "it's easy WestTech does it effectively" seems doubtful and the argument "WestTech does it all cheaply AND effectively" seems even more doubtful.
>>510622853
>The Pantsir often uses optical tracking.
yea but we're not talking about KBP's modern finest we're talking about a jerry rigged system with jerry rigged optics + jerry rigged laser emitter
Assuming the best case scenario with a missile / OWA drone flying directly at the SAM truck & that the optical tracker + laser both outrange the assumed 4km flight envelope of the SAM, picrel is how much time they would spend in the envelope. Could it take down Gerans? If you're lucky I suppose. I don't think 70mm dumb rockets with cheap + mass produced laser seekers + maneuvering kits surface launched from a site equipped with cheap & mass produced optic + cheap & mass produced lasers could threaten Kalibrs.
Just thought of something. Gerans cruise at ~9k feet they'd be pretty much immune for all but 5.8km of their path. Assuming they don't just fly higher