I hate to break it to the whole lot of you, but:
ANY Naval or Aerial parallel with Space will be STUPID
This includes:
- Runways
- Take-offs/Landings
- Fighters!
- Dogfights
- Heavy Armor
- Any unguided weaponry
- Ergo...GUNS
- Stealth
Recommended Reading:
- (Once again) Project Rho
- Attack Vector: Tactical!
(Boardgame with true 3D vector movement. Acceleration/Power ratings are probably only a single magnitude off-scale instead the typical several magnitude "overestimation" in sci-fi.)
- Books by David Weber
- The Apocalypse Troll
- Honoverse books
- Starfyre books
The prime reason, why its so, is that in space, big ships aren't any slower than small ones. For a given thrust-to-weight ratio you can build a big or small ship, their acceleration (and there is no such thing as "top speed") will be the same.
You could build a "fighter" - in practice it will be a small ship, with lower endurance on its life-support and engine. Actually if you go that way, a missile is better: no life-support, no squishy meat-bags who will be turned into purrey at a "mere 100-g" acceleration. It will have better acceleration. It will also turn faster (but not change course faster! I'm merely speaking of pivoting), so it could bring its weapons to bear faster.
A bigger ship can mount more point-defense, and stronger (with bigger antennas) radars and lidars. It can also mount more redundant systems (but not 'armor' as we know it!), so it can stay in the fight longer.
The best weapon in space is a big missile - heck, actually a big AI controlled torpedo or ship with an engine of its own - and a nasty nuclear warhead (fusion or even anti-matter in higher tech).
Unlike chemical or kinetic weaponry, a proximity kill (even in space) is very much possible with a nuke. It won't have a shockwave, and will output only minimal EMP (which it will still do, as the matter of the missile will be irradiated and emit strong Electromagnetic Radiation - which is what EMP really is) but sheer radiation pressure will be lethal within a couple of kilometers.
If that's far too close to beat the point-defense, then mount a bomb-pumped X-Ray laser on the missile, and you can a whooping couple of hundred (50-150) km. effective range.
This will be compounded by the fact, that you can't take armor into space - although in hindsight, you can, it would be just stupid - since armor that stops radiation (which incidentally also happens to be lasers when you speak of the EM variant) or high kinetic impactors takes a lot of mass.
High mass equals low acceleration for a given engine. Which is a very bad thing, since the guy with better acceleration will be able to "sling" his whole missile armament at you while actually staying out of the powered envelope of your own missiles.
Here is a key word: POWERED. Ergo, under controlled flight with propulsion to change course.
There is no such thing as "range" for missiles in space. They can shut off their engine and drift most of the way: there is only such a thing as powered envelope.
Once within a given range, they can go to powered intercept, and here only their acceleration versus your ships acceleration will matter. This range is an almost certain kill-zone (point-defense non-withstanding).
The reason why the missile will always win, is that it will have a lot lower mass, it won't carry life-support, FTL or intricate navigation equipment. It will also win, because its parts won't need the endurance a full blown spaceship needs. It can redline its engine, wear out all its parts and still intercept the spaceship with glee and tolerances to spare.
This is why it becomes a game of delta-v: the imparted impulse your engine impart by burning all your fuel.
In this game, the ship has an advantage - it can't accelerate that fast, but it can gain a higher final velocity; since high acceleration engines also usually have worse specific impulse. So if you start running soon enough, you can outrun the missile since it will burn out before reaching you.
If for some reason you point defense isn't saturated - which is the name of the game in such an engagement. The one mounting a sufficient number of missiles on a sufficient number of ships will saturate the other's defenses with missiles, jamming, decoys and pure and nasty radiation that blinds tracking radars - your next best bet is a light-speed weapon - either a MASER or a LASER.
This could happen if neither side has a numerical advantage. For this kind of fight, a lightsecond (300 km) is the absolute maximum range you can hope for a hit. Effective range is much less, a fraction of that. Highly focused lasers, don't drill but blow. The reason is the following: if a sufficient amount of energy is deposited in a small enough amount of matter it will immediately evaporate - explosively.
Given this, a good anti-laser cover could be porous, so it vents the gases without fragmenting. Mirror coverings won't work, as any mirror has microscopic faults that the laser will get down to and develop into massive ones. Metamaterials (with negative diffraction) may offset a lasers power somewhat.
Deploying gases, of chaff to diffuse the laser won't be viable either as it will scatter too fast to have any effect.
This 50-100 km range will be the "sword" range for ships.
If you want something harder hitting, put some mass into your beam. Particle beams won't have the range of lasers, since they will be only c-fractional (part lightspeed) weapons, but a range of 25-50 km (.5 c) doesn't seem all to far fetched.
This will be the "knife/dagger" range. Getting hit by a particle beam will be really nasty, as the decelerating particles emmit massive doses of radiation, frying electronics (and the crew) as well as explosivly evaporating anything in their path. They will be also armor piercing, since they will go through several meters of matter.
The in-your-face punches of ships will come from kinetic weaponry - these are likely mass drivers or railguns that shoot matter at c-fractional speed, but a lot lower than particle beams (.01 c or the like). Since closing velocity can impart a significant further energy (say a .005 c closure rate between the combatants) to these "bullets" these will be the weapon of choice for suicide charges.
These won't be dumb bullets though - to hit they will need a significant propulsion of their own.
You could also mount such weapons on missiles, and missiles can be fired from such mass drivers.[/list]
Why runways or take-offs are stupid: there is no such thing as 'rest' in space (You are at rest compared to what?!) You will be pulling several g-s and accelerating all the while you deploy your gunboats (okay, fighters!), so they WON'T be stationary targets for the enemy.
Further more there is no stall speed in space, so you can simply match course with your mothership, and a simple waldo can grab you and pull you into the bay - or you can simply drift into the bay with maneuvering thrusters.
Final word:
The reason why sci-fi is full of close-range combats, and dashing 20-something fighter pilots, is that the life-and-death of a nuclear missile is nowhere near as interesting as the life-and-death of a 20-something fighter pilot.
I hate to break it to the whole lot of you, but:
ANY Naval or Aerial parallel with Space will be STUPID
This includes:
- Runways
- Take-offs/Landings
- Fighters!
- Dogfights
- Heavy Armor
- Any unguided weaponry
- Ergo...GUNS
- Stealth
Recommended Reading:
- (Once again) Project Rho
- Attack Vector: Tactical!
(Boardgame with true 3D vector movement. Acceleration/Power ratings are probably only a single magnitude off-scale instead the typical several magnitude "overestimation" in sci-fi.)
- Books by David Weber
- The Apocalypse Troll
- Honoverse books
- Starfyre books
The prime reason, why its so, is that in space, big ships aren't any slower than small ones. For a given thrust-to-weight ratio you can build a big or small ship, their acceleration (and there is no such thing as "top speed") will be the same.
You could build a "fighter" - in practice it will be a small ship, with lower endurance on its life-support and engine. Actually if you go that way, a missile is better: no life-support, no squishy meat-bags who will be turned into purrey at a "mere 100-g" acceleration. It will have better acceleration. It will also turn faster (but not change course faster! I'm merely speaking of pivoting), so it could bring its weapons to bear faster.
A bigger ship can mount more point-defense, and stronger (with bigger antennas) radars and lidars. It can also mount more redundant systems (but not 'armor' as we know it!), so it can stay in the fight longer.
The best weapon in space is a big missile - heck, actually a big AI controlled torpedo or ship with an engine of its own - and a nasty nuclear warhead (fusion or even anti-matter in higher tech).
Unlike chemical or kinetic weaponry, a proximity kill (even in space) is very much possible with a nuke. It won't have a shockwave, and will output only minimal EMP (which it will still do, as the matter of the missile will be irradiated and emit strong Electromagnetic Radiation - which is what EMP really is) but sheer radiation pressure will be lethal within a couple of kilometers.
If that's far too close to beat the point-defense, then mount a bomb-pumped X-Ray laser on the missile, and you can a whooping couple of hundred (50-150) km. effective range.
This will be compounded by the fact, that you can't take armor into space - although in hindsight, you can, it would be just stupid - since armor that stops radiation (which incidentally also happens to be lasers when you speak of the EM variant) or high kinetic impactors takes a lot of mass.
High mass equals low acceleration for a given engine. Which is a very bad thing, since the guy with better acceleration will be able to "sling" his whole missile armament at you while actually staying out of the powered envelope of your own missiles.
Here is a key word: POWERED. Ergo, under controlled flight with propulsion to change course.
There is no such thing as "range" for missiles in space. They can shut off their engine and drift most of the way: there is only such a thing as powered envelope.
Once within a given range, they can go to powered intercept, and here only their acceleration versus your ships acceleration will matter. This range is an almost certain kill-zone (point-defense non-withstanding).
The reason why the missile will always win, is that it will have a lot lower mass, it won't carry life-support, FTL or intricate navigation equipment. It will also win, because its parts won't need the endurance a full blown spaceship needs. It can redline its engine, wear out all its parts and still intercept the spaceship with glee and tolerances to spare.
This is why it becomes a game of delta-v: the imparted impulse your engine impart by burning all your fuel.
In this game, the ship has an advantage - it can't accelerate that fast, but it can gain a higher final velocity; since high acceleration engines also usually have worse specific impulse. So if you start running soon enough, you can outrun the missile since it will burn out before reaching you.
If for some reason you point defense isn't saturated - which is the name of the game in such an engagement. The one mounting a sufficient number of missiles on a sufficient number of ships will saturate the other's defenses with missiles, jamming, decoys and pure and nasty radiation that blinds tracking radars - your next best bet is a light-speed weapon - either a MASER or a LASER.
This could happen if neither side has a numerical advantage. For this kind of fight, a lightsecond (300 km) is the absolute maximum range you can hope for a hit. Effective range is much less, a fraction of that. Highly focused lasers, don't drill but blow. The reason is the following: if a sufficient amount of energy is deposited in a small enough amount of matter it will immediately evaporate - explosively.
Given this, a good anti-laser cover could be porous, so it vents the gases without fragmenting. Mirror coverings won't work, as any mirror has microscopic faults that the laser will get down to and develop into massive ones. Metamaterials (with negative diffraction) may offset a lasers power somewhat.
Deploying gases, of chaff to diffuse the laser won't be viable either as it will scatter too fast to have any effect.
This 50-100 km range will be the "sword" range for ships.
If you want something harder hitting, put some mass into your beam. Particle beams won't have the range of lasers, since they will be only c-fractional (part lightspeed) weapons, but a range of 25-50 km (.5 c) doesn't seem all to far fetched.
This will be the "knife/dagger" range. Getting hit by a particle beam will be really nasty, as the decelerating particles emmit massive doses of radiation, frying electronics (and the crew) as well as explosivly evaporating anything in their path. They will be also armor piercing, since they will go through several meters of matter.
The in-your-face punches of ships will come from kinetic weaponry - these are likely mass drivers or railguns that shoot matter at c-fractional speed, but a lot lower than particle beams (.01 c or the like). Since closing velocity can impart a significant further energy (say a .005 c closure rate between the combatants) to these "bullets" these will be the weapon of choice for suicide charges.
These won't be dumb bullets though - to hit they will need a significant propulsion of their own.
You could also mount such weapons on missiles, and missiles can be fired from such mass drivers.[/list]
Why runways or take-offs are stupid: there is no such thing as 'rest' in space (You are at rest compared to what?!) You will be pulling several g-s and accelerating all the while you deploy your gunboats (okay, fighters!), so they WON'T be stationary targets for the enemy.
Further more there is no stall speed in space, so you can simply match course with your mothership, and a simple waldo can grab you and pull you into the bay - or you can simply drift into the bay with maneuvering thrusters.
Final word:
The reason why sci-fi is full of close-range combats, and dashing 20-something fighter pilots, is that the life-and-death of a nuclear missile is nowhere near as interesting as the life-and-death of a 20-something fighter pilot.
So space battle would it be a whole lot of satellites, planetary or stellar, with solar panels, a tough but not necessarily strong, or armoured, skin, a transmitter (for relay and commands back to a base), and a. missile banks and missile launchers, b. a reactor and a laser gun. More expensive ones could have bigger missile banks and/or bigger missiles or bigger and better lasers. Some could have both. A planetary or large space instillation would be created in space (so it wouldn't be lifted up from a planet) and heavily armed, with long range missiles, lasers, particle lasers, high recharge anti-warhead lasers, and bigger missiles. They would have big gun banks and large 'gunships' about 50-100 m long, or small remotely controlled would be sent to intercept incoming craft. This sort of weaponry is far underpowered compared to freespace warships and fighters, for these are more prepared to taking out lots a small craft, not sure what offensive would be like...
Hmm... this is what i think
Ships would be similar to GTA ships, the fenris is the powerfull ship, the leviathan is a rare, super powerfull ship, and the Orion is the mother-of-all-superhuge-ships!!!
Ergo.
They would have mostly small ships about the size of a modern day space shuttle. They would act as gunships with an assortment of lasers. They would have tough armour (though not freespacey thick!!), sort of, able to stand a couple of shots, or a drill laser for a few seconds. It would be able able to shut off compartments so would stay in a fight for a while longer (using his theory of littleburn, no flood, long time for crash) and would use high accuracy, high concentration, long ranged lasers as primaries, and secondary would concentrate more on damage. small crew
And larger ships which have heavy armour and more numerous, more powerfull weapons, and be a lot bigger, more of a very large threat to enemies.
And super instillation/destroyer class, which have massive weapons, massive size, and massive armour. bear in mind items do not have to be launched in space, rather, thay can be created in space!!!