04-06-2003 01:20									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara On top of that, missiles will cause recoil also.

Not necessarily. They can be released first and then "launch" (like airplane-launched "smart bombs" or so)...

Furthermore, spaceships would already be travelling at great speeds so you can wonder how much more speed those missiles would really need.
You just release a bomb, and let it find its target with its "steering boosters".

	04-06-2003 01:31									#32
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by gsmoove23 I think putting all that weaponry into the hands of an AI is just a little too frightening. You would need someone on hand, though the crew can be very small in proportion to the size of the ship, making the areas that need radiation shielding and oxygen storage very small.

Why? Most of the weaponsry would not be to heavy nor really be able to do much to planetary target, which would still be the home to people. Besides, auto-destruct sequences could always be put in as a safeguard.

	04-06-2003 01:36									#33
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Mercator Not necessarily. They can be released first and then "launch" (like airplane-launched "smart bombs" or so)...

Then they'd have to be carried externally, where they would be suceptable to debris. Things don't "drop" in microgravity. You could, however, give the missile a slight nudge, and it could fire when away from the ship. Even that, however, will cause recoil, just at a much lower strength.

	04-06-2003 01:49									#34
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by GePap Why? Most of the weaponsry would not be to heavy nor really be able to do much to planetary target, which would still be the home to people. Besides, auto-destruct sequences could always be put in as a safeguard.

If your talking about a large ship the crew compartments can take up a negligable amount of space while providing maintenance and flexibility of command that would be incomparable to any AI. Smaller ships could possibly be drones, but I still think AI would not be at such a level in the near future to reliably command such a large investment.

	04-06-2003 02:31									#35
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Even that, however, will cause recoil, just at a much lower strength.

That's true... Having a system that adjusts for the recoil would probably avoid any of this.

	04-06-2003 02:34									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I think the best weapon would be some kind of electomagnetic pulse thingy that knocks out all electical circuits. Then, ppl will start developing shields that would protect against all sorts of stuff. Thus, it is not the weapon that I am most curious about, but the defense... RAMMING SPEED!!!

	04-06-2003 02:37									#37
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The only way I see space-battles is if there are means of manufacturing such vehicles outside of Earth. The construction and launch of such vehicles would be hard to hide on Earth. And any war on Earth would most likely result in the destruction or capture of enemy command and control facilities. Even if these functions were in space, it would have to be either in a self-sufficient ship, or near a resource rich base. It's impossible to think of such scenarios without treading into sci-fi territory.

	04-06-2003 02:38									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Japher I think the best weapon would be some kind of electomagnetic pulse thingy that knocks out all electical circuits. Then, ppl will start developing shields that would protect against all sorts of stuff. Thus, it is not the weapon that I am most curious about, but the defense... RAMMING SPEED!!!

I think the development of Quantum computers and circuits would negate the advantage of EMP's. Maybe someone smarter than myself can elaborate on this subject.

	04-06-2003 02:44									#39
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

But it would still be cool to build real point ships and ram ppl... Heck it was how sea warfare first began, we should do it in space!

	04-06-2003 02:48									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Download Elite 2 and find out about realistic space combat.

Last edited by Hueij on 04-06-2003 at 03:01

	04-06-2003 12:19									#41
	Increase Your PM Length

My more than 2 cents... (some things have already been said by others)

re: Missile launches
Will technically correct that things don't "drop" in space, and that launching missiles from a space-borne platform, it really isn't difficult to manage a missile form of weaponry. Assume the USS Apolyton CV-06071998 has a bisymmetrical geometry (left side mirrors the right side). On either side of the cruiser you have matching missile bays. Just like on a nuclear submarine, the missiles would be kept safe inside the vessel, not exposed to the external environment. To combat the forces produced by a missile launch, either of these methods would work to balance said forces result in a net force of zero: (1) launch 2 missiles, one on either side of the vessel at the same relative positions; their forces would be balanced instead of throwing the ship in one direction or the other; or (2) using the "drop" technique you simply attach the missiles to extendable arms that position the payload outside the ship, detach themselves from said payloads, then retract back into the ship. The missile(s) would then be launched without physical contact with the ship. If the US Space Shuttle fleet can maintain an orbit with their single manipulator arm swinging about (<- exagerating of course ), then launching single-missle salvos should be easily possible.

re: Manufacturing
It is correct that space combat at the level discussed in this thread would only be feasible, short of sci-fi technology, if off-world facilities are built. Earth-borne launches would be prohibitively expensive both of completed vessels and simple components, even if the VentureStar or similar launch platform had been built or a space elevator constructed.

re: Ramming
Ramming enemy spacecraft is a very risky kind of maneuver, probably only a last resort. But likely damned effective; most "bang for your buck" if you will.

re: AI control
Currently a lot is being done towards the goal if AI, both in the commercial sector and the military. Will it soon reach the level of sophistication necessary in the heat of a space-borne battle? We'll see; my guess is yes and I can see the great advantages of unmaned combat drones...but I'd still be more comfortable with a Human giving commands. You can't bring a robot before a military court-martial for mistakes made...

re: Recoil
Any type of weaponry about a ship will experiance recoil of some type. Read "re: Missile launches" for possible answers. With regards to railguns, if they are aimed straight down the central axis of the ship, then a simple burst of thrust from the rear-facing engines (perhaps computer-controlled to fire at the same time as the weapon) would be enough to counter any recoil.

re: Radar detection et al.
Already been said

re: The battlefield
Unsure who already said it, but they're correct that most battles aren't likely going to be fought in deep-space. They'll probably be fought well within one light-second of a major gravity field (planet, moon, asteroid et al.) or along the shortest path between two such bodies.

re: Propulsion
Well, we've already designed, built, tested, and used Ion drives. They require far less fuel than traditional chemical rockets. Combined with modest nuclear fission, or preferably fusion, powerplants they should be reasonably effective at moving ships through space. Using magnetically charged conduits, drive plasma might even be used for attitude adjustments, further lessening reliance on chemical reactants. Before you say that Ion drives that have been used are very slow, bear in mind that these probes are little larger than breadboxes (<-cliche for those that missed it). Their powerplants have to power the engines AND instruments AND communications. A larger vessel might have room enough for multiple powerplants dedicated to different subsystems.

re: Life support
Already been said

re: Shape of things to come
I personally would be APPALED if someone built and launched a cube or sphere-shaped ship. The radar cross-section alone would automatically disqualify such shapes from rational consideration; even employing modern stealth techniques for radar deflection wouldn't be enough to hide the damned things. Slimer, elongated vessels would be better equiped to avoid detection and evade confrontation.

re: Weaponry
I've already hinted my preference for Missile-based weaponry, and how railgun-type weapons might be integrated into a ship, but I do see it possible to employ the use of laser-based weapon systems. I've already stated that larger vessels may have room enough for multiple powerplants, so it should be possible to feed such power-hungry weapons.

re: Quantum and Optical computers
Viable developement of these kinds of computers and related systems would greatly increase the likelyhood of a space-borne vessel's developement. With the computing speed of quantum computers and the efficiency of optics, managing the flight physics versus recoil from weapons versus long and short-range radar versus life support versus propulsion versus everything else...well, what more can be really said?



Spaceward, ho!

	04-06-2003 13:49									#42
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Sava What are we doing in space in the first place?

There's billions of dollars worth of satellites up there. If you have superiority around a planet, you can knock out public and military communication networks.

	04-06-2003 13:52									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Not to mention the immense amount of mineral resources and manufacturing potentials if we continue to access space into the future.

	04-06-2003 14:05									#44
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Movement is totally different from the nonsense in the movies - every time you apply thrust, you accelerate, so if you have constant thrust, you have constant acceleration. Nothing brakes you in a practical time frame, so to slow down, you thrust in the other direction.

How do you apply thrust in space in the first place?

	04-06-2003 14:20									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Simple chemical rockets travel just fine in space. I refer you to Sir Issac Newton's 3rd Law of Motion:

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

While oxygen fires aren't possible in a vacuum, other chemical reactions are, such as liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen being fused at the business end of the Space Shuttle as it goes through the oxygen-poor environment of Earth's upper atmosphere. The force of the two elements fusing is directed out the back of the shuttle, but at the same time it presses against the inside of the reaction chamber, pushing the shuttle ever upward.

Beyond simple chemical reactions, it may very well be possible to harness the incredibly small force of photons (light) pressing against a reflective surface. Tests have already succeeded in levitating small objects with nothing more than highly-focused lasers. On a larger scale, gigenormous "solarsails" could harness the photons streaming out in all directions from our sun. Although gradual, over time the cumulative force of all the photons hitting the sail could conceivably accelerate the solarsail to near-light velocity (ignoring for a moment the physical stresses on the structure, debris in its path, and time necessary) without expendature of any other form of propulsion.

	04-06-2003 14:37									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat Yes you would have a recoil effect because of the law of conservation of momentum. This would make rail guns on spaceships highly unlikely because the recoil would be too much. You could however, have rail guns on planets, since there the recoil would be regligeable.

They might actually be pretty useful for running away and discouraging pursuit, as any momentum from the "rear" of the ship would simply increase the speed of the fleeing vessel while laying down some fire on the pursuer. Otherwise I agree with your analysis.

	04-06-2003 14:42									#47
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Recoil can be taken nito account. Modern ships have to deal with it, no reason to believe it would be a major detriment to space ships. On top of that, missiles will cause recoil also.

I disagree. Firstly, the lack of friction in space means that every bit of energy put into the rail gun is going to have to be equalled by the engines if you want to maintain a consistent speed while converging on the enemy. Conversely if you are fleeing, rail guns would actually help speed you on your way, assuming that this doesn't push the ship across some sort of G-force barrier that incapacitates the crew, or in an unmanned ship damages or destroys the ship itself.

All a missle has to do to be momentum neutral is detach itself from the ship before it engages its engine.

	04-06-2003 14:42									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by DRoseDARs While oxygen fires aren't possible in a vacuum, other chemical reactions are, such as liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen being fused at the business end of the Space Shuttle as it goes through the oxygen-poor environment of Earth's upper atmosphere. The force of the two elements fusing is directed out the back of the shuttle, but at the same time it presses against the inside of the reaction chamber, pushing the shuttle ever upward.

But you can only use this in the orbit of a planet right?

quote: Beyond simple chemical reactions, it may very well be possible to harness the incredibly small force of photons (light) pressing against a reflective surface. Tests have already succeeded in levitating small objects with nothing more than highly-focused lasers. On a larger scale, gigenormous "solarsails" could harness the photons streaming out in all directions from our sun. Although gradual, over time the cumulative force of all the photons hitting the sail could conceivably accelerate the solarsail to near-light velocity (ignoring for a moment the physical stresses on the structure, debris in its path, and time necessary) without expendature of any other form of propulsion.

Doesn't seem very practical in space combat though.

But can you also reverse-thrust this way?

	04-06-2003 14:43									#49
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Then they'd have to be carried externally, where they would be suceptable to debris. Things don't "drop" in microgravity. You could, however, give the missile a slight nudge, and it could fire when away from the ship. Even that, however, will cause recoil, just at a much lower strength.

Simply fire them in pairs away from the ship on opposite sides.

	04-06-2003 14:50									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Colon But you can only use this in the orbit of a planet right?

No, not necessarily. Remember that we've sent dozens of probes to other points-of-interest in our solar system. Although the cost most of the way there, some have decelerated near their targets in order to be captured by its gravity, establishing an orbit around it. I'm not certain if solid perpellents or other chemical reactions were used or which missions. One probe used the upper atmosphere of Mars in order to slow down and be captured, using little or no propulsion in the maneuver. Just atmospheric friction.

quote: Doesn't seem very practical in space combat though.

True...

quote: But can you also reverse-thrust this way?

One application, which will probably remain in the realm of theory and never application, is sending a solarsail from our system to a nearby star. By manipulating the geometry of the sail upon arriving in the target system, the force of that star's photons would serve to slow the sail. It really isn't all that different from traditional windsails when you think about it.

	04-06-2003 14:58									#51
	Suffering from ads?

Rail guns could be good for short range combat, or perhaps more probably, as a missile defense system (just like on today's aircraft carriers). You have to remember that is is extremely hard to hit anything other than a target moving straight towards (or away) from you if you also are on a moving platform. And the low-gravity space, making quick avoiding and course-change easier, makes things even harder.

	04-06-2003 14:59									#52
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by DRoseDARs One application, which will probably remain in the realm of theory and never application, is sending a solarsail from our system to a nearby star. By manipulating the geometry of the sail upon arriving in the target system, the force of that star's photons would serve to slow the sail. It really isn't all that different from traditional windsails when you think about it.

Yes but can you also turn around like that? Those sails seem very sluggish to me.

Neither does it seem very practical for small fighters and the like.

Is there any way to harness photons by other means than sails? (even if it's purely theorethical)

	04-06-2003 15:00									#53
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Crap, I really should read the whole thread before responding. Sorry.

Sensors: Optics would work very well for unobstructed views into deep space, while radars etc. would be useful for peering into and through more "cloudy" areas like planetary orbits and such. Drones could be used to supply active views of space while not giving away the positions of your ships, assuming that they are not emitting from all 360 degrees, but leave your ships in the "dark".

Ship design: It seems like long thin ships with stealth materials on the nose would be best for remaining undetected. They could either turn broadside to deliver a greater amount of firepower once combat is initiated, use missles that detach from the sides of the ship before they kick in their missles. At first it seems likely that there will be little defense, and thus detecting the enemy first will likely result in a kill. Later, more though will have to be given to increasing the maximum firepower of the ship. Aerodynamics will be of no importance. You could build a needlelike ship (to reduce cross-section and avoid detection) that could reconfigure itself into a plane facing the enemy to maximize firepower for instance. That assumes that you have enough confidence in that firepower to risk becoming a huge target for a while.

Defenses: With nuclear missles being thrown around this will be problematic. Of course you could send some nuclear missles of your own ahead of your ship (ie toward the enemy) a safe distance which could be set off to defeat enemy missles in the no man's land between opposing ships. Kinetic weapons would be effective, but their range would have to be pretty short. They wouldn't lose much energy at long range, but they would be easy to dodge without maneuvering thrusters of their own. These could be destroyed before they got too close by nuclear missles, assuming that your ship was maneuverable enough to dodge the debris heading its way.

	04-06-2003 15:14									#54
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Colon Yes but can you also turn around like that? Those sails seems very sluggish to me. Neither does it seem very practical for small fighters and the like. Is there any way to harness photons by other means than sails? (even if it's purely theorethical)

Perhaps I should try a different way of explaining. Here's a way you could simulate the sail principle I'm talking about :

Get a shallow container, like a retangular cookie pan, and fill it with water. Place a float (maybe a soda cap with a piece of paper as a sail) at one end of the pan. Lightly blow the float towards the opposite end of the pan. As it approaches, go to the other side of the pan and again blow air at it, this time in an attempt to slow and stop its approach.

The analogy is that you play the role of both the originating star system and the target star system. The air you blow is the force of photons and of course the float is the solarsail. So yes, you could journey in this fashion, similar to sailing the ocean blue.

And you're right, solarsails would make awful combat ships. Not to mention battles would be veeerrry slllooow as the ships try to move around...

Could photons be used in means other than propulsion? I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe lasers are simply photons that have been excited into certain energy states by specific catalysts (<- things that cause other things to happen ). Lasers are photons travelling in highly-focused streams, with every particle moving exactly in the same direction.

Lasers have been tested for weapons applications and have succeeded...to an extent. The US has been trying to develope a Anti-Ballistic Missile defence system, partly involving lasers. They are trained on a target, like an inbound ICBM, and cook it until its fuel heats enough to go boom, long before the missile reaches its target.

	04-06-2003 15:24									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

A couple of people have mentioned use of nuclear weapons in space. My feeling is this would be a bad idea for close-quaters combat. Longer range combat might be ok, but you'd have to detect the enemy and calculate his position at the projected intercept point before launching. The further away you are, the harder it is to do this 'cause the distance gives your target time to detect the attack a perhaps move out of range or deploy counter measures. Closer range combat would increase your own risk as you'd be nearer the explosion, which would radiate out in all directions regardless of who fired the missile. You'd be at risk of both the EM pulse and the radiation.

	04-06-2003 15:24									#56
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DRoseDARs One correction before I answer: Not PROtons, but PHOtons. Important difference: protons are one of three particles that make up atomic elements, while photons are free particles in their own right. Perhaps I should try a different way of explaining. Here's a way you could simulate the sail principle I'm talking about : Get a shallow container, like a retangular cookie pan, and fill it with water. Place a float (maybe a soda cap with a piece of paper as a sail) at one end of the pan. Lightly blow the float towards the opposite end of the pan. As it approaches, go to the other side of the pan and again blow air at it, this time in an attempt to slow and stop its approach. The analogy is that you play the role of both the originating star system and the target star system. The air you blow is the force of photons and of course the float is the solarsail. So yes, you could journey in this fashion, similar to sailing the ocean blue. And you're right, solarsails would make awful combat ships. Not to mention battles would be veeerrry slllooow as the ships try to move around... Could photons be used in means other than propulsion? I'm not an expert by any means, but I believe lasers are simply photons that have been excited into certain energy states by specific catalysts (<- things that cause other things to happen ). Lasers are photons travelling in highly-focused streams, with every particle moving exactly in the same direction. Lasers have been tested for weapons applications and have succeeded...to an extent. The US has been trying to develope a Anti-Ballistic Missile defence system, partly involving lasers. They are trained on a target, like an inbound ICBM, and cook it until its fuel heats enough to go boom, long before the missile reaches its target.

Yes, I know we're talking about photons. That was a typo I had already corrected before you replied.

And I actually meant to ask whether there's any other way to use photons as a propulsion, other than sails.
Do those highly focused lasers you mentioned have a lot of potential for a more agile means of propulsion?

	04-06-2003 15:32									#57
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Colon Yes, I know we're talking about photons. That was a typo I had already corrected before you replied.

I'll fix mine to reflect that in a moment.

quote: And I actually meant to ask whether there's any other way to use photons as a propulsion, other than sails. Do those highly focused lasers you mentioned have a lot of potential for a more agile means of propulsion?

Well, with the lasers the main idea I've heard is to use huge satelites to collect sunlight and focus it into a much tighter beam (microwaves I believe). This beam would then be directed at the business end of a modified solarsail. Think of it as going from a passive sail to a mud-bogger(?) (one of those boats with the big fan on the back). Would wouldn't rely on the gentle nudge of the sun to speed up to your target, instead you'd get a stronger shove from a concetrated beam. I forget what you'd do once you got to your target...

	04-06-2003 15:34									#58
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by DRoseDARs re: Propulsion Well, we've already designed, built, tested, and used Ion drives. They require far less fuel than traditional chemical rockets. Combined with modest nuclear fission, or preferably fusion, powerplants they should be reasonably effective at moving ships through space. Using magnetically charged conduits, drive plasma might even be used for attitude adjustments, further lessening reliance on chemical reactants. Before you say that Ion drives that have been used are very slow, bear in mind that these probes are little larger than breadboxes (<-cliche for those that missed it). Their powerplants have to power the engines AND instruments AND communications. A larger vessel might have room enough for multiple powerplants dedicated to different subsystems.

Sorry, I totally missed this post. These can also be used for thrust in space, right?

	04-06-2003 15:37									#59
	Inflate your Upload Space

Besides, anyone considered the danger of a "stray bullet" in space? On earth, when you're at a large distance from a battlefield, you're usually safe from stray bullets. (although missiles have increased the danger) But in space a stray bullet could hit a target lightyears away. I wouldn't want to know what happens if you start firing nukes in space.
And what when you use missiles that accelerate? If such a missile goes astray it could end up hitting something (eg a planet) at enormous speed.

	04-06-2003 15:37									#60
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

EDIT: I was too slow in posting this. This post reponds to the one before the one above.

Yeah, the first such probe was launched a few months back...maybe even back in 2001, I can't remeber specifics anymore. I think its primary mission was an asteroid/comet that passed near Earth. The Ion drive was just added to see if it would work. I believe it did quite well.