The Physics of Space Battles
Page 1 of 7 • Share •
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 
The Physics of Space Battles
Read this...now
http://gizmodo.com/5426453/
http://gizmodo.com/5426453/

czar- Minion
-
Number of posts: 570
Age: 18
Location: ohio
Registration date: 2009-04-22
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
Awesome.

Nocbl2- Lord's Personal Minion
-
Number of posts: 3967
Age: 13
Location: California
Registration date: 2009-03-19
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
An interesting article. I'll finish reading it, and then comment further.
_________________


Rotaretilbo- Magnificent Bastard
-
Number of posts: 3811
Age: 22
Location: Arizona
Registration date: 2008-07-21

Re: The Physics of Space Battles
He raised some good points, but I find it hard to imagine that a slug fired from a rail gun could be more easily counteracted than a missile travelling many times slower than it.

Dud Doodoo- Minion
-
Number of posts: 1398
Age: 17
Location: Your room
Registration date: 2008-06-29

Re: The Physics of Space Battles
I haven't read it yet, so this may have been addressed, but since missiles keep accelerating while slugs do not, I'd think that for long range the missiles are better

BBJynne- The Lord's Blood Knight
-
Number of posts: 5046
Age: 19
Registration date: 2008-03-24
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
I don't get how either could be easily counteracted.Dud Doodoo wrote:He raised some good points, but I find it hard to imagine that a slug fired from a rail gun could be more easily counteracted than a missile travelling many times slower than it.

Nocbl2- Lord's Personal Minion
-
Number of posts: 3967
Age: 13
Location: California
Registration date: 2009-03-19
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
I don't think that he ever suggested either would be easy, just that kinetic weapons could be better countered than other types, and would be a factor that would play a role in the battle.

Dud Doodoo- Minion
-
Number of posts: 1398
Age: 17
Location: Your room
Registration date: 2008-06-29

Re: The Physics of Space Battles
okay so I read it
kinetic weapons would be easier countered because you can shoot them to move them off course (slugs) or blow them up (missiles)
this is a really good article though
I've never heard of the gyroscope thing before, which probably means I haven't been reading the proper kind of sci-fi but w/e
gyroscopes were really interesting, and so was the stuff about how it would have to follow orbits and stuff.
so yeah...
I liked it
kinetic weapons would be easier countered because you can shoot them to move them off course (slugs) or blow them up (missiles)
this is a really good article though
I've never heard of the gyroscope thing before, which probably means I haven't been reading the proper kind of sci-fi but w/e
gyroscopes were really interesting, and so was the stuff about how it would have to follow orbits and stuff.
so yeah...
I liked it

BBJynne- The Lord's Blood Knight
-
Number of posts: 5046
Age: 19
Registration date: 2008-03-24
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
Hmm...
I thought about this a while back, and I figured that a space conflict would be something like this:
1: Build orbital platforms that can accelerate a 10 ton mass to 1/10 the speed of light (in both directions).
2: set them in orbit around the moon, so they are always on the opposite side from your target planet (Orbiting once every 28 days.)
2.5: Give them a nudge so that they orbit a quarter of the distance around the moon, and are pointing at your target planet.
3: Fire off a dozen rounds.
4: Contact survivors and demand unconditional surrender.
Now, with intersystem war, things get dicier, but I imagine that planets would still be impossible to defend. If, for example, you can create a sort of missile that accelerates to 1/10 the speed of light in the four years it spends moving from Alpha Centari to Sol, and then fires off thousands of one-ton stealthed iron masses, you're doomed.
I thought about this a while back, and I figured that a space conflict would be something like this:
1: Build orbital platforms that can accelerate a 10 ton mass to 1/10 the speed of light (in both directions).
2: set them in orbit around the moon, so they are always on the opposite side from your target planet (Orbiting once every 28 days.)
2.5: Give them a nudge so that they orbit a quarter of the distance around the moon, and are pointing at your target planet.
3: Fire off a dozen rounds.
4: Contact survivors and demand unconditional surrender.
Now, with intersystem war, things get dicier, but I imagine that planets would still be impossible to defend. If, for example, you can create a sort of missile that accelerates to 1/10 the speed of light in the four years it spends moving from Alpha Centari to Sol, and then fires off thousands of one-ton stealthed iron masses, you're doomed.
_________________


Rasq'uire'laskar- Crimson Scribe
-
Number of posts: 2330
Age: 21
Location: Follow the cold shivers running down your spine.
Registration date: 2008-06-29
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
That makes sense, but if you don't want to risk destroying the planet, it becomes less viable.
It seems more like a total war solution than colonization or anything like that.
It seems more like a total war solution than colonization or anything like that.

BBJynne- The Lord's Blood Knight
-
Number of posts: 5046
Age: 19
Registration date: 2008-03-24
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
Against a planet with an established ecosystem, yes.
Against a planet best stripped of it's resources and constructed upon, no. Essentially, the planet will be the same, minus any major landmarks and/or stable climates.
Against a planet best stripped of it's resources and constructed upon, no. Essentially, the planet will be the same, minus any major landmarks and/or stable climates.
_________________


Rasq'uire'laskar- Crimson Scribe
-
Number of posts: 2330
Age: 21
Location: Follow the cold shivers running down your spine.
Registration date: 2008-06-29
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
BBJynne wrote:okay so I read it
kinetic weapons would be easier countered because you can shoot them to move them off course (slugs) or blow them up (missiles)
this is a really good article though
I've never heard of the gyroscope thing before, which probably means I haven't been reading the proper kind of sci-fi but w/e
gyroscopes were really interesting, and so was the stuff about how it would have to follow orbits and stuff.
so yeah...
I liked it
Allow me to rephrase that: If I remember correctly he mentioned that missiles are a preferable alternative to unguided weapons (bullets) due to such weapons being easily countered with point defense than missiles. Seeing as slugs fired from a large rail gun (MAC) would be travelling at nearly relativistic speeds, I highly doubt it would be easier to shoot them down than it would be to destroy a missile.

Dud Doodoo- Minion
-
Number of posts: 1398
Age: 17
Location: Your room
Registration date: 2008-06-29

Re: The Physics of Space Battles
He said that missiles are preferable to large kinetic slugs, because they're course can easily be calculated, whereas missiles can actually alter their course and are potentially much smaller, while still making a larger impact than similar sized kinetic weapons.
_________________


Rotaretilbo- Magnificent Bastard
-
Number of posts: 3811
Age: 22
Location: Arizona
Registration date: 2008-07-21

Re: The Physics of Space Battles
Missiles would likely travel much slower than kinetic rounds, and ocne they run out of fuel, they could no longer change course, so they could be using simple kinetic ponit defense systems and possibly just cause a missile to run out of said fuel o destroy.
A Heavy kinetic slug on the other hand would be VERY difficult to stop once its in motion, not to mention hit when its moving within even something like a tenth the speed of light(it has to be detected, tracked and point defense needs to be fired off... if these are ships that are relatively close to each other, then it would be near impossible to stop
A Heavy kinetic slug on the other hand would be VERY difficult to stop once its in motion, not to mention hit when its moving within even something like a tenth the speed of light(it has to be detected, tracked and point defense needs to be fired off... if these are ships that are relatively close to each other, then it would be near impossible to stop
_________________
I AM THE LAW

[00:17:22] @ KrAzY : new law.
[00:17:28] @ KrAzY : the law can now be a person.
[00:17:28] @ XNate02 : The Law, can only be The Law.
[00:17:32] @ Gauz : I'd kick everyone....
[00:17:37] @ KrAzY : and that person is seath
[00:17:39] @ kasrkin seath : YES
------------------------------------------
[02:22:43] @ KrAzY : the reason we all come to TCF is because Seath is too Lord Pheonix damn sexy to stop.
R.I.P. EERC Tree
http://www.mtulode.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/eerctreeonline.jpg

Kasrkin Seath- The Law
-
Number of posts: 2774
Location: Michigan
Registration date: 2008-07-12
Re: The Physics of Space Battles
The problem is a Kinetic Slug would fly in a straight line, so say you used a MAC, you have to calculate the enemy's ships speed and trajectory and factor them into the shot.
Missles don't have that problem, they are much slower, but if the ship makes an unexpected course correction, you can quickly compensate with a short burst of it's engine.
Missles don't have that problem, they are much slower, but if the ship makes an unexpected course correction, you can quickly compensate with a short burst of it's engine.

Vigil- Dark Knight of the Flames
-
Number of posts: 4096
Age: 22
Location: Unknown.
Registration date: 2009-01-12
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 
Similar topics» REG BATTLES POST THEM HERE
» Lumpy Space Princess Quotes
» kerbal space program download ships
» Babylon 5 space battles
» Gratutous space battles now has a demo avalable.
» Lumpy Space Princess Quotes
» kerbal space program download ships
» Babylon 5 space battles
» Gratutous space battles now has a demo avalable.
Page 1 of 7
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum