Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What future space combat would really look like

forums.spacebattles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 235 posts

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#31

Post by sp332 »

yock wrote: post #19
rw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An example: Project Thor / "Rods from God": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

The linked article seems to mention re-entry friction as a problem yet-to-be-solved: The system would also have to cope with atmospheric heating from re-entry, which could melt the weapon. Then there's the question of whether or not heat is truly the most immediate issue. NASA and USAF had to actually fly an airplace near and past the speed of sound to see how the properties of the atmosphere changed when compressed.…

I don't think melting is that big a deal. It's still the same amount of mass, only now it's molten steel instead of steel rods.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#32

Post by gerggerg »

Why would space war ships be manned when we're already flying unmanned vehicles on earth? I think we've touched on a reality of intelligent species coexisting in the universe. Space war would consist of staying hidden and probably nothing else.

Plus, certainly people would be fighting over the planets or the technology (or maybe the amulet of Endor) so simply throwing comets and obliterating things wouldn't make much sense except maybe defensively or to help with a gennocide.

Terrestrial battles to take over usable land would probably continue to be the name of the game. Followed with setting up tonnes of drones and sensors for defense.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#33

Post by j_baker »

Avshalom wrote: post #12
j_baker wrote: post #2

I admit to skimming this, but there are a couple of things I see wrong with this. 1. You can see a spaceship from the next solar system for sure. But it would take years for you to see it. 2. I doubt the future of combat will involve humans. I envision giant fleets of spaceships that are too big for humans to control. Thus, I forsee space combat as being driven by complex algorithms.

As to 1: It would take years for the light to get there, it would also take several MORE years for the ship to actually get there. The important take away is distance can't be used to hide, there is no "Oh they won't notice us we're still outside the orbit of Pluto."

Well, now we're getting into the theoretical issues. For instance, if we develop wormhole technology, the ship could very well be there before the enemy can see it.

Otherwise, I just don't see interstellar space warfare as being that practical if it takes years to launch an attack.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#34

Post by sp332 »

talmand wrote: post #26
Avshalom wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As to 1: It would take years for the light to get there, it would also take several MORE years for the ship to actually get there. The important take away is distance can't be used to hide, there is no "Oh they won't notice us we're still outside the orbit of Pluto."

How can that be? Space is big, we cannot even properly comprehend how big it is. I'm talking just in our immediate vicinity. If I took, say, three of the world's largest ships, put them together to form one ship and then placed it in a random spot somewhere within the orbit of Pluto; how long would it take you to find it? Keep in mind I'm not talking within the orbital plane, I'm saying within the sphere of the solar…

Well yes, there are quite a few telescopes that constantly scan the sky for tiny changes. And it's not just the size of the ship, but the burning fuel from its engines as it navigates near our solar system.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#35

Post by j_baker »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #5
j_baker wrote: post #2

I admit to skimming this, but there are a couple of things I see wrong with this. 1. You can see a spaceship from the next solar system for sure. But it would take years for you to see it. 2. I doubt the future of combat will involve humans. I envision giant fleets of spaceships that are too big for humans to control. Thus, I forsee space combat as being driven by complex algorithms.

I imagine that the individual ships themselves will also be very small. In fact, if a fleet is big enough, the communications gap becomes a problem - space battles may end up looking like a fight between two ant colonies, with small independent ships working together as a swarm, without any central guidance.

You never know. I'm sure you could have a more "distributed leadership". I'm sure this could be accomplished with a clever enough application of paxos.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#36

Post by 51Cards »

Still only part way through and though I don't entirely agree with all the conclusions the thought experiment is proving to be fun.

This however is my favourite point so far as I had never really thought about it this way when watching popularized SciFi.

Another thing about motion in space is that changing your ship’s orientation does nothing to your speed and vector unless it is accompanied by firing your main engine, because there is no friction. This means that all those space dogfights where one fighter gets behind the other and the other one has to try and shake it like in air combat are very unrealistic. There’s no comprehensible reason why the pursued pilot can’t just turn his fighter around and blast the bugger.

Buck Rogers in the 25th Century TV series has just been ruined for me. Wait, no, it still had Wilma Deering, so all is not lost.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#37

Post by Avshalom »

talmand wrote: post #26
Avshalom wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As to 1: It would take years for the light to get there, it would also take several MORE years for the ship to actually get there. The important take away is distance can't be used to hide, there is no "Oh they won't notice us we're still outside the orbit of Pluto."

How can that be? Space is big, we cannot even properly comprehend how big it is. I'm talking just in our immediate vicinity. If I took, say, three of the world's largest ships, put them together to form one ship and then placed it in a random spot somewhere within the orbit of Pluto; how long would it take you to find it? Keep in mind I'm not talking within the orbital plane, I'm saying within the sphere of the solar…

It's two things basically:

-You can do a full survey in about 5 hours with one telescope these days.

-Ships are very bright, don't look anything like stars and CCDs are very sensitive.

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/spacewardetect.php has a good break down.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#38

Post by InclinedPlane »

gerggerg wrote: post #32

Why would space war ships be manned when we're already flying unmanned vehicles on earth? I think we've touched on a reality of intelligent species coexisting in the universe. Space war would consist of staying hidden and probably nothing else. Plus, certainly people would be fighting over the planets or the technology (or maybe the amulet of Endor) so simply throwing comets and obliterating things wouldn't make much…

Speed of light delay could be critical in space battles, especially when you consider that it goes both ways (sensor readings -> brain : decision making -> control signal). The real question is how smart you can make computers, if you can't make them as smart as a human then you need to have a meat-brain somewhere in the middle of the battle. If you can make them that smart then that opens up a whole host of questions on sentience and ethics.

Edit: Keep in mind that your manned "ship" might still be thousands or millions of kilometers away from the enemy and controlling a vast array of computerized drones. But when weapons are zipping around at 10s, 100s, or even 1000s of km/s the scope of the battlefield changes dramatically. You can be remotely operating missiles that are farther away than the moon is from the Earth and still be in the thick of it.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#39

Post by zeteo »

gerggerg wrote: post #32

Why would space war ships be manned when we're already flying unmanned vehicles on earth? I think we've touched on a reality of intelligent species coexisting in the universe. Space war would consist of staying hidden and probably nothing else. Plus, certainly people would be fighting over the planets or the technology (or maybe the amulet of Endor) so simply throwing comets and obliterating things wouldn't make much…

>Why would space war ships be manned when we're already flying unmanned vehicles on earth

Because the longest distance on Earth is only about 0.07 light-seconds.

Re: What future space combat would really look like

#40

Post by quanticle »

meric wrote: post #20
quanticle wrote: post #7

This essay isn't all that realistic. I found this one [1] to have a far more realistic view of what space war would look like. Tl;dr: it's much cheaper and much more effective to lob comets at your enemy's homeworld than it is to fight with ships. [1] http://www.gwern.net/Colder%20Wars

I postered a comment on the essay, I'll repost it here: You assume the interstellar species will be living on a planet . What if they hollowed out their planet of resources long ago and now live in a cloud of asteroids instead? Asteroids are hollowed out as giant fortresses in space, and a bio dome sphere thingy built inside. As they are living in an asteroid cloud, to prevent impact they would have to attach thruste…

What about a shotgun approach? Take a comet, accelerate it up to a significant fraction of lightspeed (after all, you you have lightyears in which to do so), and trigger a bomb in the comet to blow it apart into a few smaller pieces, each traveling at a significant fraction of c. Rinse and repeat.
Post reply on HN