Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- From: "Stephen Horgan" <stephen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Apr 2006 10:33:21 -0700
Ordover@xxxxxxx wrote:
Well, real space combat would IMHO be short and sweet. The firstIt is likely that ships would be detectable well outside of the ranges
targeting computer to lock onto the other ship would immediately fire a
particle beam weapon capable of destroying the other ship (there are no
such things as "deflector" sheilds, of course), which particle beam
would move at near light-speed, much faster than any relativistic ship
can move (we're talking real physics, right) so the combat is likely to
be over before the humans involved ever know it's begun, since it will
all come down to whose sensors and weapons work at a longer range and
whose computers are faster.
of beam weapons. This means combat would probably be protracted.
But real space combat is unlikely to ever happen, since in the real
world there's nothing in space worth fighting over. Even orbital
bombardment from a ship in orbit is unlikely since particle beam
weapons would pick off the ships and let's face it, the planet being
attacked would have months if not years to prepare at relativistic
speeds.
Nothing is space worth fighting for? If there are spacecraft then there
are likely to be space and surface habitats, research and science
stations, factories and mines. All of the apparatus of economic
activity is there to defend and attack.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- From: James Nicoll
- Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- From: Ordover
- Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- References:
- SF rocket propulsion?
- From: Nyrath
- Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- From: Stephen Horgan
- Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- From: Ordover
- SF rocket propulsion?
- Prev by Date: Re: True "idiot" or "receipe" books needed (restart civilization, etc)
- Next by Date: Re: Synthetic Starch
- Previous by thread: Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- Next by thread: Re: SF rocket propulsion?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|