A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Space Navies" - articles by Stephen den Beste



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 20th 04, 06:08 AM
Reed Snellenberger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Space Navies" - articles by Stephen den Beste

I just ran across this series of articles on his blog, and thought some
of you might be interested. Links:

http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entrie...ceNavies.shtml

and

http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entrie...eNavies2.shtml

The opening paragraphs of the second article (the one that first caught
my eye) a


So if the characteristics of ships and weapons dictate strategy and
tactics used in naval encounters, then what would be the critical
characteristics of space warships which would be critical?

It depends entirely on what assumptions you make. In most of science
fiction, it's convenient to toss the known laws of physics out the
window, to a greater or lesser extent, and once you do that the door
is wide open and anything can result. My intent is to try to stay more
realistic. So I will assume that space navies would still be bound by
such tiresome limitations as conservation of momentum, the theory of
relativity, and the laws of thermodynamics. I will assume no major
changes in our understanding of the universe. That means no "faster
than light" drives, no "space warp" or "inertialess" drives, no
"subspace" or "hyperspace", and so on.



--
Reed
  #2  
Old April 20th 04, 06:27 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Space Navies" - articles by Stephen den Beste

So if the characteristics of ships and weapons dictate strategy and
tactics used in naval encounters, then what would be the critical
characteristics of space warships which would be critical?


A space thinker I think highly of once speculated that since space is a
medium with no drag or resistance, life-sized but hollow decoys might enter
into the picture.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We should ask, critically and with appeal to the numbers, whether the
best site for a growing advancing industrial society is Earth, the
Moon, Mars, some other planet, or somewhere else entirely.
Surprisingly, the answer will be inescapable - the best site is
"somewhere else entirely."

Gerard O'Neill - "The High Frontier"


  #3  
Old April 21st 04, 01:53 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Space Navies" - articles by Stephen den Beste

Reed Snellenberger wrote:

I just ran across this series of articles on his blog, and thought some
of you might be interested. Links:

http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entrie...ceNavies.shtml
and
http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entrie...eNavies2.shtml


He should stick to politics, the bulk of both pages is aptly described
by the site title, 'clueless'.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #4  
Old April 21st 04, 04:22 AM
MSu1049321
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Space Navies" - articles by Stephen den Beste

Assuming we use only known/ understood physics, space navies would be boring
and generally weak things, and no fun to join. Even with efficient reaction
drives, their range would be so limited that "manuevers" would look like
slow-motion chess matches. And what would be the point, at the kind of
accellerations we can visualize achieving , no ships would ever get into
shooting range of any worthwhile or understood weapons unless they both
conspired to do so. Low-energy transfer orbits or higher-energy intercepts
would still take days to months to get anywhere useful, then they'd have to
repeat the long trip to ge back, shoudl they survive a battle. And the scales
of movement we're talking about mean flight times would take so long the ships
would have to be autonomous or remotely-piloted, because live crews would run
out of consumables way before the ship could really be effective. Yep, forget
live crew, that M-5 computer is the way to go;-)

Anything resembling a space fleet, until we make some sort of physics
breakthru, will of necessity be strictly an orbital force, most likely a
bombardment component (using something like the THOR system) and an intercept/
CAP element to stop the other guys from doing the same thing. None of these
need live crews. They'd just be sophistcated satellites.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
European high technology for the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 May 10th 04 02:40 PM
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 18 February 14th 04 04:28 AM
Space Access Update #101 12/13/03 Henry Vanderbilt Policy 0 December 14th 03 06:46 AM
International Space Station Marks Five Years In Orbit Ron Baalke Space Station 9 November 22nd 03 01:17 PM
SPACEHAB Declared Finalist On $100 Million Space Station Contract Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 August 15th 03 07:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.