3 ms·

The author underestimates guns while overestimating "kinetic missiles". Speed imparts a lot of energy, but it wont transmit all of that energy to the target. Yo

The author underestimates guns while overestimating "kinetic missiles". Speed imparts a lot of energy, but it wont transmit all of that energy to the target. You'll have a <missile diameter> hole in the ship. Your ships are closing at 1000km/s and your cloud of missiles have a 10km/s Delta? A cloud of slugs would be almost the same, and you could put up a lot more of them. Of course a hybrid approach is likely, with shrapnel filled missiles. Better to impact like a shotgun than a needle. Edit: Also gets it wrong on point defense. If you have enough energy weapons to mount an effective defense you'd make yourself such a large/vulnerable target that you'd be impossible to miss. Once again putting a cloud of slugs in the path of an inbound missile would be easier and more effective. With the speeds/distances involved all of the missiles would be approaching from a very narrow cone, and a small deflection would mean a miss.

electromagnetic 15y ago
Railguns are worthy of note, but would likely only be worthy of PD weapons. The problem with guns is that your target moves. With the exception of missiles, every fraction of the speed of light slower your weapon is, the bigger chance you take of missing. With a round fired at .1C over 300,000KM (1 light second) you need to account for about 11 seconds of lead on your target. That's 11 seconds that they don't change their course enough for you to miss. Compare this to a laser where it's 1 second of lead. > With the speeds/distances involved all of the missiles would be approaching from a very narrow cone, and a small deflection would mean a miss. Not necessarily. Unless space battle becomes solely a chasing game (which would favour the defender as if you know you're a runner the majority of your PD's will be aimed out your ass). A missile can sit for any amount of time after being dropped before firing. This means you can distribute a missile or approach from opposing angles. If your ship uses turrets for PD then you know it cant easily shoot two different angles at once. If you're fighting well within your missiles ranges (because fighting at maximum range gives too much time for PD's) then it'll be very easy to launch your missiles around your target in a flank attack.

electromagnetic 15y ago

Railguns are worthy of note, but would likely only be worthy of PD weapons. The problem with guns is that your target moves. With the exception of missiles, every fraction of the speed of light slower your weapon is, the bigger chance you take of missing. With a round fired at .1C over 300,000KM (1 light second) you need to account for about 11 seconds of lead on your target. That's 11 seconds that they don't change their course enough for you to miss. Compare this to a laser where it's 1 second of lead. > With the speeds/distances involved all of the missiles would be approaching from a very narrow cone, and a small deflection would mean a miss. Not necessarily. Unless space battle becomes solely a chasing game (which would favour the defender as if you know you're a runner the majority of your PD's will be aimed out your ass). A missile can sit for any amount of time after being dropped before firing. This means you can distribute a missile or approach from opposing angles. If your ship uses turrets for PD then you know it cant easily shoot two different angles at once. If you're fighting well within your missiles ranges (because fighting at maximum range gives too much time for PD's) then it'll be very easy to launch your missiles around your target in a flank attack.