[z64555]

Aaaand we're back to stealth in space.

[Alex Heartnet]

as for missiles, it is likely they would receive sensor data from the ship that fired it. you could try jamming the signal (though this will make your ship look much brighter on the scopes).

And I would care about being brighter on the scopes why?  No point in trying to be stealthy anyway, the enemy starship will find me no matter what.  But at least I can actively do stuff to keep the enemy missile boat from being able to kill me.  (besides, if the enemy ship is shooting at me, then that obviously means I have been spotted, right?)

And depending on the time period, I may actually be looking at space warfare fought exclusively with missiles and electronic warfare.  Space lasers and railguns take time to develop, but missile technology would be relatively easy to adapt for use in space.

On the other hand, human stupidity can never be ruled out as a potential factor in not locating an enemy ship.  I can't rely on stupidity on the part of the enemy, but I can certainly take advantage of it.

[Nuke]

Aaaand we're back to stealth in space.

id say we stepped into the realm of electronic warfare, not stealth.

And I would care about being brighter on the scopes why?  No point in trying to be stealthy anyway, the enemy starship will find me no matter what.  But at least I can actively do stuff to keep the enemy missile boat from being able to kill me.  (besides, if the enemy ship is shooting at me, then that obviously means I have been spotted, right?)

no point in not turning on the jammers, but it may be a bad choice if you are trying to spoof the warhead with a fake target signature, like from countermeasures. you could also have deployable jammers as well so its not your ship that is lighting up the board. the possibilities here are endless. i feel that a lot of scifi neglects to dip into the electronic warfare concept.

And depending on the time period, I may actually be looking at space warfare fought exclusively with missiles and electronic warfare.  Space lasers and railguns take time to develop, but missile technology would be relatively easy to adapt for use in space.

we already have done considerable research in high powered lasers, coil and rail guns. and i figure these technologies will be in a far more developed state by the time we have established a major presence in space. and thats the research we know about, not the top secret stuff. so you never know what the military is developing right now. let alone what we will have in a few hundred years when we get enough of our species out of the gravity well to fight wars in space.

On the other hand, human stupidity can never be ruled out as a potential factor in not locating an enemy ship.  I can't rely on stupidity on the part of the enemy, but I can certainly take advantage of it.

sounds like something sun tzu would say.

[Alex Heartnet]

Just because hard sciences such as physics says that space-stealth is impossible doesn't mean that soft sciences like psychology will say the same.  If I can't hide my mission-critical commando transport through fancy technology, then I might have to take a more tactical approach.

There's a distinct difference in a ship's sensors being able to see my commando transport, and the ship's crew actually noticing AND responding to the transport's presence - fighters and other single pilot ships in particular suffer from a major drop in situational awareness when caught in a pitched or lengthy battle.  For ships with proper bridge crews, damaging the enemy's sensor systems might hinder their ability to notice and track every single ship in the system.  Ships that are already heavily engaged can't afford to break off towards my transport.

Being completely invisible and merely going unnoticed are two distinctly different things.  If something's that dang important, then it's worth expending other assets to ensure its survival, and there are ways of ensuring that it stays intact.

[Nuke]

now its all about psychological warfare. nice.

[Scotty]

I've always considered stealth in space to mean less "avoid all detection" than it is "avoid revealing your exact location to the enemy".  Once in range, detection is almost assured.  That does not mean that it is impossible to make yourself a very difficult target for enemy weapons systems.

[Ghostavo]

Question, is it possible for thermal radiation to be done point to point in a manner akin to lasers?

[z64555]

Question, is it possible for thermal radiation to be done point to point in a manner akin to lasers?

I do know it's possible to reflect, focus IR light/radiation, which is a primary product of thermal radiation.

[Klaustrophobia]

could you make an infra-red laser?  certainly.  channel all the isotropic IR radiation being given off by the hull in a single direction?  probably not.  to do it passively, you'd need some ridiculous system of mirrors/lenses/whatever else you use to focus IR (i'm envisioning a MASSIVE parabolic mirror "sail" kind of thingy with the ship at its focus).  if you just make an IR laser, you're not getting rid of heat, which i assume is where you were going with that thought.

[redsniper]

"Thermal radiation" isn't anything special, it's just lower frequency EM radiation, aka light. So like Klaus said, you could totally make an IR laser, as well as a UV laser, microwave laser, x-ray laser and so on. Everything emits EM radiation over a range of frequencies (unless it's at absolute zero, I guess) with most of the emitted radiation being at a certain "peak wavelength" depending on the temperature. So when something glows red hot, it's because it's temperature has increased enough that the spectrum of emitted radiation is overlapping the visual range, and as the temperature increases further and the peak wavelength gets into the visual range, the object will glow even brighter red, then orange, yellow, etc. So like, incandescent lightbulb filaments glow "yellow hot" and most of the stuff around you is only glowing "infrared hot."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien's_displacement_law

[Ghostavo]

Like Klaus was speculating, I was just wondering if you could redirect your heat signature in a specific vector.

I didn't want to simply build a laser that outputted infrared.

[LordPomposity]

There's a little something called inertia that can and will keep ships and missiles from doing zigzags in space.  A missile or ship that is moving at high speed will take some time to slow down or change trajectory.

Also, if the target ship is moving slowly relative to the missile, the target ship might be able to manage a major trajectory change, resulting in the missile not being able to correct its trajectory in time and overshooting its intended target.

Additionally, missile tracking systems just won't be as sophisticated as a starship sensor package (at least not without making the missile really expensive).  A missile could actually be spoofed by decoys and ECM.  Those same anti-missile systems won't spoof a sophisticated ship sensor package, but at least the missile didn't hit.

If I do have an FTL drive, I could always use that as a last-resort missile dodging technique.  All I need to do is jump a relatively short distance and all the missiles will be on a completely incorrect trajectory to hit me.

Inertia in one direction in no way inhibits ships and missiles from performing unpredictable acceleration in directions perpendicular to their direction of travel. They'll just keep moving toward their target at the same velocity as before they started their evasive maneuvers.

Decoys and ECM in space battles are largely BS for reasons relating to heat emissions, as already discussed.

If you have an FTL drive, my missiles have unicorn-powered death rays that can destroy your ship from the other side of the universe.

[Ghostavo]

If you have an FTL drive in the first place why not put it on missiles?

[NGTM-1R]

If you have an FTL drive in the first place why not put it on missiles?

Size and cost, probably. Violating physics ain't cheap.

[Alex Heartnet]

If you have an FTL drive in the first place why not put it on missiles?

Cost?  Same reason why you won't put starship-grade sensors on a missile.

[Ghostavo]

Why not? If we are to imagine magical devices is it that much of a stretch to imagine cheap magical devices?

[Alex Heartnet]

Inertia in one direction in no way inhibits ships and missiles from performing unpredictable acceleration in directions perpendicular to their direction of travel.

"Unpredictable" acceleration?  Huhwha?  Inerita is the sort of thing that should be predictable.  Do you mean that the missile will most likely be faster and more maneuverable then my ship, like air-to-air missiles currently are?  Probably, but that alone doesn't guarantee a hit.

They'll just keep moving toward their target at the same velocity as before they started their evasive maneuvers.

If the missile and the target ship are moving at a similar relative speed, yes.  But slow-moving missiles are more easily shot down then fast moving ones.  A faster moving missile runs the risk of overshooting its target due to inertia and relatively stupid navigation AI, but that might be the way to increase hit ratio.

Decoys and ECM in space battles are largely BS for reasons relating to heat emissions, as already discussed.

Again, a missile sensor system is NOT a complete sensor package by any means, nor does it have an intelligent human or advanced AI operating it.  Yes. my ship is lit up like a christmas tree, but just picture for a moment the kind of heat emissions that would result from dozens of ships duking it out with energy weapons.  Needle in a haystack, anyone?  A normal starship sensor system could probably sort through it, but a cheapy missile sensor system might have more difficulty.

Why not? If we are to imagine magical devices is it that much of a stretch to imagine cheap magical devices?

In other words, being able to blast anything from anywhere?  I could drop nukes onto the Shivan homeworld from Alpha Centuari?  Combined with the raw destrctive power future weapons would have, that...seems rather scary.

But hey, it could be used to eradicate any pirate problem, as you would be able to blast their base while sitting at home.  It could also be used to eradicate ANY form of armed resistance, which is rather scary as that has loads of potential for abuse.

This is why we don't normally see cheap magical devices in sci-fi.  Technological improvement radically alters both society and warfare, moving the plot away from big space battles towards something entirely different.

[Ghostavo]

Why not? If we are to imagine magical devices is it that much of a stretch to imagine cheap magical devices?

In other words, being able to blast anything from anywhere?  I could drop nukes onto the Shivan homeworld from Alpha Centuari?  Combined with the raw destrctive power future weapons would have, that...seems rather scary.

But hey, it could be used to eradicate any pirate problem, as you would be able to blast their base while sitting at home.  It could also be used to eradicate ANY form of armed resistance, which is rather scary as that has loads of potential for abuse.

This is why we don't normally see cheap magical devices in sci-fi.  Technological improvement radically alters both society and warfare, moving the plot away from big space battles towards something entirely different.

See the Lensman series for how ridiculous you can make things up in sci-fi.

[Alex Heartnet]

Quick thought about shielding systems and cloaking devices.  Instead of using them for protection or stealth, what if I used them to mask my ship so you can't identify what type of ship I am in?  That way I appear as a giant blue bubble instead of an identifiable ship.

While a setup like this would have too much of an energy output to possibly hide, there's a distinct advantage in the enemy not knowing if my ship is a cruiser, carrier, freighter, or corvette wolfpack.  In fact, you won't even be able to target individual components on account of not being able to see them!  No more torpedoes taking out the flight deck or main guns.  Only when I start shooting do you get a rough idea of what ship I am, and even then you won't know if I am using all my weapons.

The bubble's geometry will be randomized, so you can't just fire into the middle and expect a hit.  My ship could easily be off to one side, and there might be multiple ships in the bubble.  If/when a lucky shot DOES hit, I move my ship to a different position within the shield in order to avoid getting hit with follow-up shots aimed at the same spot.  Weapons that don't rely on a direct hit will still damage me, but you won't know how much damage I have taken.

The shield doesn't even need to block projectiles to be effective.  In fact, I would prefer it if it didn't block projectiles, as that means you can't just take it offline with conventional weapon fire.

Knowing where my ship is and knowing what kind of ship I am are two distinctly different things.

[MarkN]

I would expect to see disguised warships. A warship that looked like the asteroid miners that are already common in the system would be able to get to it's target relatively easily.
An alternative would be an equivalent of dazzle paint, where the sensor returns identify that there is something out there, but some of the information returned (usually heading, range or speed,, as these would cause weapons to be inaccurate) is confused or erroneous. In a high ECM environment, such as when fleets are already engaged in combat, this could be as effective as being invisible.

As for my choice of weapon, it would have to be guided. I would expect space combat to take place at extremely long ranges.
For example at a combat range of 3 times the distance to the earth to the moon. This is four light-seconds away. But due to the time that the sensor light takes to get from the target to the attackers sensors, the attacker is effectively firing at where the target was 8 seconds ago. If immediately after being detected the target initiates a 1G burn (after detection so that the firing ship knows nothing about it), it will have moved 313 metres away from the position estimated from it's state when detected. As it is likely that the ship is smaller than twice this in length, the laser would not only be guaranteed to miss in this case, but also be highly likely to miss at any time, as a ship in combat would be expected to be constantly changing it's acceleration to avoid being hit.

There would be a place for other weapons to defend against missiles and to get first strike against ships that are not evading (although how are you going to suprise them? This goes back to the lack of stealth is space again).
For these I would prefer Lasers as they are almost inertialess, and if a weapon has recoil then firing a particular pattern of missiles against it would result in a particular acceleration which a good captain would take advantage of.

In this combat there would be one method of dazzle which would be very effective. Fit engines in multiple directions, and set them up to give the same signiature whether they are producing thrust or not. Now approaching missiles cannot predict your ships acceleration even at close ranges. This could be enough to cause them to miss.

The really scary form of this combat would happen when the combatants have been fighting for centuries, and relativistic asteroids start hitting planets, having been fired from other star systems.