Subject:
|
Re: Jormungand Carrier Strike Craft
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Oct 2004 03:03:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1079 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Niels Bugge wrote:
| |
Yes off course! I would’ve started the faction myself, hadn’t Chris beat me
to it - at least I’d thought about doing it! It’s probably good that he did,
since I probably wouldn’t get around to do it in ages...
|
Meh, I’m the same way. I have a lot of projects I’d like to get to, but I never
start on most of them.
| |
It wasn’t actually meant as a nitpick,
|
You misunderstood me, I was sort of calling my own comments a nitpick since this
argument is rather pointless given the conjectural subject matter, but since I
enjoy technical discussions, I continued anyway.
| |
but more of a “hey if you blow a nuke
in space everybody gets hit by the radiation, incluing your own forces”, so
I’ve been quite sceptical on using nukes in space, at least as a tactical
weapon, and especially around lightly amoured crafts like fighters.
|
Meh, the radiation is what would DO the damage to an enemy craft, by destroying
electrical systems and personnel and the like. Without an atmosphere,
conventional kinetic damage (including heat) will not propagate nearly as well
as it would in the presence of air. This is why enhanced-radiation explosives
were developed in the first place. About 80% of the energy emitted by a fission
device is in the form of radiation, anyhow, and indeed the principle which
allowed the development of thermonuclear devices (see: Teller-Ulam design,
staged radiation implosion). At any rate, considering the distances and
velocities that would be involved in space warfare, fratricide wouldn’t be much
of a problem, especially considering that it’d be a huge challenge in and of
itself to accurately and within a lethal distance deliver any warhead, even to
an intended target. Bomb-pumped x-ray lasers (the only feasible method of
creating an x-ray laser useful as weapon, actually) or enhanced-radiation
devices would likely be the explosives of choice in space.
| |
But as
far as I can understand you, the dispersion would mean that the radiation
would thin out and dissapear quite fast, so your own crafts would go
unharmed. That’s good news for nuclear weapons and looters in space.
|
Yes, though I think our central disagreement stems from the fact that you’re not
thinking of the sheer scale involved in space. The energies, velocities, and
distances involved in anything relating to deep space are such that not even
nuclear weapons provide the kind of energy density that one would truly desire
for space combat.
| |
Regarding your aversions of conventional weapons in space, I didn’t specify
what I was talking about (first rule of sci-fi and alternative medicine), >so
I could be talking of anyting!
|
I was simply saying that explosives less energy dense than nuclear weapons are a
waste of time, given the scale of things. Directed-energy or simple kinetic
weapons might be useful if one can solve power problems, as well as accuracy of
targeting and range.
| |
But IF I meant current technology, wouldn’t > a
direct hit by such, transfer at least 50% of the energy to the target? And
anyways, if you whish to use some kind of neutron beam, why use a rocket? >You
could just as well use a neutron gun mounted on a capital ship to fry the
enemy ships.
|
Eh? The only time I mentioned neutrons was in referring to the common misnomer
for enhanced-radiation weapons (a type of nuclear explosive). A particle beam,
as you describe, would be preferable in certain instances. Regarding
enhanced-radiation weapons or bomb-pumped x-ray lasers versus particle beams,
the argument can only be settled if certain technical characteristics are
defined. However, as far as the general use of nuclear weapons in space versus
the general use of conventional explosives, mathematics and logistics
unequivocally favor nuclear weapons.
| |
No and neither would fighters (because of advanced targeting systems) or
humans (demands a lot for life support), nor would there be any windows in
spaceships (planned future spaceshuttles wont have any AFAIK), and they
wouldn’t be painted since paint weighs and costs money (NASA skipped painting
the main rockets for the spaceshuttles recently to save a lot of bucks per
launch). And now we’re at it; forget about greeble, since this would be
shielded off as protection against enemy fire (like EMP’s!) or atmospheric
friction.
|
You either missed my point or deliberately ignored it. :) I was saying that
discussing the relative merits of his gun in regard to realistic utility in
space dogfights is pointless, as such would not occur in the first place. Thus,
discussing the aesthetics of the gun based on utility is pointless. Hence, the
gun ought to only be judged based on relative coolness, something which it
clearly possesses.
| |
It has to be fun too!
-NB
PS: MY space fighters has wings because they have to be able to operate in
atmosphere as well, but that’s just an excuse: They look a lot cooler that
way, and it’s the only way I can convince my surroundings that they’re
actually fighters.
|
Sounds good to me.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Jormungand Carrier Strike Craft
|
| (...) Ok, lets go straight to the roots then: In my view the basic disagreement is, put to the extremes, if one should “shape reality to fit sci-fi” or “shape sci-fi to fit reality”, where I have a bias toward the first one, and doesn’t really (...) (20 years ago, 17-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
| | | Technical nits (Was: Jormungand Carrier Strike Craft)
|
| OK, as long as we're picking nits... :-) (...) Actually, heat (a form of radiation, *not* kinetic energy) will propagate in space than in an atmosphere. But for a bomb outside the atmosphere, a higher percentage of the yield will go into direct (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Jormungand Carrier Strike Craft
|
| I just returned to town: (...) Yes off course! I would've started the faction myself, hadn't Chris beat me to it - at least I'd thought about doing it! It's probably good that he did, since I probably wouldn't get around to do it in ages... (...) It (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
