/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5329466]

Are space battles:
a) possible
b) plausible

[Anonymous No.5329498]

A) Yes
B) Subjective

This is a dumb thread, just so you know.
Take a basic physics course and learn about vacuum.

[Anonymous No.5329505]

>>5329466
c) all of the above

[Anonymous No.5329510]

>>5329498
>learn about vacuum
What's one thing got to do with the other.

[Anonymous No.5329535]

>>5329510
>implying you can shoot lasers in a vacuum

[Anonymous No.5329541]

>>5329535
>implying you can't

[Anonymous No.5329539]

they won't be very fun and won't last long. The idea of having huge ships bombard eachother just doesn't work.
If anything it would be small, agile craft firing kinetic rounds at eachother.

[Anonymous No.5329545]

>>5329541
Not if it doesn't have the proper amount of suction

[Anonymous No.5329548]

>>5329535
>implying you're a good troll

[Anonymous No.5329554]

>>5329545
>abandon thread

[Anonymous No.5329556]

>>5329548
>implying you're a troll

[Anonymous No.5329715]

Considering the U.S. (and some other countries) have the capability to launch ICBM's from Earth into space or from orbiting satellites I would think that proves you could fire a missile from a space ship. Plausible? I don't see any reason in the near future why there might be a dog fight in space.

[Anonymous No.5329736]

Yes its possible, but don't forget, space isn't a sea, space ships aren't actual fucking ships, "fighter" planes are useless in space combat unless they are meant for planetary entry, lasers can't form in a vacuum, but can be shot into a vacuum (any clarification on this?)

[Anonymous No.5329744]

>>5329539
No it wouldn't be. There is no way to be agile in space, takes way too much energy. And it won't be small, because you can't produce such quantities of energy even if you would want to be agile. Missiles would detonate in space and have the blast radius destroy other space ships.

Thing is, space ships just wouldn't get close to each other in the first place, since there is no reason to do so.

[Anonymous No.5329785]

>>5329744
Set shields to maximum capacity

[Anonymous No.5329788]

If FTL is impossible: massive heavily armoured space stations with massive CIWS grids to defend against missile attacks and kinetic energy weapons (big cannons with whatever propulsion method works best at the time). These weapons would be mounted on swarms of small drone ships designed to overwhelm the CIWS. Putting asteroids on a collision course would also work if you used your own CIWS to prevent any attempts to deflect or break up the asteroid.

If FTL is possible: the space stations would move and instead of small ships attacking one would just jump in and pummel the enemy with your own “ship”. They would not mauver like on tv because everyone inside would get pancaked.

If some kind of inertial dampening is possible: you may actually get scifi battles.

[Anonymous No.5329807]

>>5329788

>everyone inside would get pancaked.

I guarantee you, the vast majority of 'combat' would be done by remotely operated or AI controlled drones.

[Anonymous No.5330380]

>>5329807
I am talking about established, stationary space stations (or moveable ones if FTL is possible). People have to live somewhere. But yes there would be massive use of unmanned drones and computer controled atack and defence systems.

The hard points, the places that actually NEED defending, will be habitats though.

[Anonymous No.5330400]

>>5329788
And inertial dampening was possible inStar Trek NG.
So, y'know.

[Anonymous No.5330401]

>>5329498

It just wouldn't be /sci/ without the smarmy, cock-sucking first reply. Well done.

[Anonymous No.5330402]

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacewarintro.php

[Anonymous No.5330414]

>>5330400
Even then the distances would be much more massive and the ships would be unmanned would not make for good TV.

But the question must then be asked, what are they fighting over? Why not go right for the space station where the worthwhile targets are.

[Anonymous No.5330582]

>>5329466
a) yeah
b) yeah
c) even duller than submarine warfare

I mean, seriously.

[Anonymous No.5330635]

So would space battles between two ships usually be 1000s of miles away?

[Anonymous No.5330636]

I really really hope i live 1000 years to see cool shit

[Anonymous No.5330641]

>>5330635

given that projectiles would have near zero friction, without shields and cloaking there'd be no way of getting close enough.

If humans ever get legit spaceships, they would probably have long developed gauss weaponry, essentially nullifying any non-magical armor.

[Anonymous No.5330647]

>>5329466
a) yes
b) yes but weapons would be limited to ether fast delivery weapons (i doubt it would be lasers though), homing weapons or large area of effect weapons. the reason for this is the fact that things move MUCH faster in space and the distances would be greater

[the fucking angry guy No.5330651]

>>5330641
its hard to aim an aircraft cannon , imagine what kind of aiming systems ull have to carry...

i bet it would be again stealth drones or missiles, and ships would probably carry rail guns or smth else for asteroid or other more casual threats

[the fucking angry guy No.5330653]

>>5330635
>>5330641

yes basically rendering railguns (gauss weapons are a joke) useless unless you use them since by the time the gun fires the ship can adjust course

[Anonymous No.5330654]

c) Unavoidable
If spacecraft ever become common place then space battles will happen, just like sea battles happen.

[Anonymous No.5330656]

>>5329807
>I guarantee you, the vast majority of 'combat' would be done by remotely operated or AI controlled drones.

[Anonymous No.5330666]

>>5329466
why would i fight in space?
it requires tremendous energy just to get shit up there
and i could easily take enemy space ships out from the ground
what do i gain here? nothing no advantage
what does it cost me? a lot

[Anonymous No.5330669]

>>5330666
>and i could easily take enemy space ships out from the ground
Yeah, suuuuuuure.
You're floating around pluto and along comes someone who wants to turn you into dust. I'll just call in a few surface to air missiles from earth, it should only take half a year for them to arrive.

[Anonymous No.5330676]

>>5330669
what am i doing at pluto?
am i a satellite?

[Anonymous No.5330679]

>>5330656
The late game in SupCom was so fucking slow unless you had an army of engineers.

[Anonymous No.5330680]

>>5330676
It was just an example. The point is that if space travel is common and well developed enough to have space battles then you're not going to be close enough to earth 99% of the time.

[Anonymous No.5330681]

>>5330679
The whole game slowed down due to bad programming. Still an awesome game.

[Anonymous No.5330683]

There is no war in space, if you have problem with some group you can just destroy them from the comfort of your home system.
If there is a technology that can bridge the void, then that technology can be used to destroy what ever is at the other end. The more powerfull and technologically advanced a species gets the easier it gets to annihilate your opponents.

[Anonymous No.5330684]

>>5330683
the difficulty is not exterminating all life
thats the challenge
how do you NOT absolutely annihilate a planet and blow it into space dust?

[Anonymous No.5330708]

its not a matter of plausibility or possibility, is killing each other in space really necessary? I mean, until we have sovereign colonies and nations on individual planets and space stations, i dont think there will ever be traditional combat in space.

[Anonymous No.5330738]

>>5330708
Is killing each other on earth necessary?

[Anonymous No.5330744]

>>5330738
if a nation has necessity to defend themselves, killing may be necessary until hostile action is diminished.

[Anonymous No.5330765]

>>5329466

a) yes
b) no

Unless you fight over an uninhabited world with a gravity well to catch everything, or near a star, fighting in and around a populated planet would cause major problems when the debris of exploded errything begins to crash into satellites, rain down onto the planet, or fly into the victorious ships.

[Anonymous No.5330784]

A note:
Fighters would only be useful if used in planetary re-orbiting, attempting to achieve air-dominance.

The only realistic space war that could happen anytime in the next 200-500 years would be between corporations, or earth and mars. Impossie to predict future political settings.

[Anonymous No.5330789]

...i used to be a spaceship...

...until I took a laser to the knee.

[Anonymous No.5330791]

Ender's game is a good book.

[Anonymous No.5330797]

>>5330789
How did you even manage to conjure this terrible, terrible joke?

fuck

[Anonymous No.5330867]

We would only be able to fight as long as the weapon systems dont overheat since heat doesnt disperse well in a vacuum, as it does in atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.5330880]

the designs of spaceships in TV seem very inefficient for battle which can take place from absolutely all directions. The best shape would either be oval or spherical, so the ship can open fire from all directions and easily change direction. The structure would also be very stable and the shape would make any sort of armour plating more efficient.

[Anonymous No.5330885]

>>5330880
It would also be a good way to pack all those systems together so when you get hit, the damage will very efficiently be allocated to as many systems as possible.

So instead of losing emergency batteries, you can make a spherical ship and lose emergency batteries, life support and weapons control all from one hit.

[Anonymous No.5330897]

>>5330885

and this isn't possible with an irregular shape? I could split voyager in half with a single hit and it would be the end of it

[Anonymous No.5330901]

>>5330635
By thousands, try millions.

[Anonymous No.5330941]

what a stupid waste of money

[Anonymous No.5331000]

>>5330797

Well you see, there is this rather popular video game called Skyrim where, in this game, the town guards areboften quoted as saying "I used to be an adventurer like you, until I took an arrow in the knee"
And that one.sentence.somehow become a bit of an internet sensation. But what I did there was replace the word adventurer with spaceship and I also replaced the word arrow with laser... Do to this thread's subject content.

I got.a.rather.good.jolly.out of it myself.

[Anonymous No.5331829]

>>5331000
i thought it was funny

[Anonymous No.5331887]

Yes and for the following reasons.

There is no way to be agile in space. The only way to be able to take a hit is to be fucking huge.

Despite how plentiful resources are in space it takes a fucking long time to get to them and accessibility is a HUGE issue. So there definitely is a reason to go to war in space.

Lasers are dumb. You can impart energy more efficiently with relativistic kinetic weapons.

Stealth isn't possible in space. Thermals look like flairs against the cold of space.

So basically space battles would look similar to this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdkCpnGMyGw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwF67bhdXfk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPbEvezZrWs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcTosD8oNc

- the artificial gravity OFC