7 ms·

"no stealth in space"

• j9461701 3y ago
  That's actually one of my issues with atomic rockets, some of its conclusions are a bit....massaged to ensure the end result it wants in terms of space combat even if it doesn't super make sense. As an example, even as an undergrad in physics the definitiveness of 'no stealth in space' struck me as implausible given what I knew about long range detection mechanisms. http://toughsf.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-hydrogen-steamer-stealth-spaceship.html http://toughsf.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-hydrogen-steamer-ste... Very straight forward solution one person came up with, I'm sure there are dozens of other approaches to achieve the same result. Especially if you put military level budgets into figuring this out. The most logical form of space combat is, as boring as it sounds, undetectable suicide drones. Space battleships are both super cool sounding and also alas probably utterly impractical. Edit: "In terms of military tactics, introducing stealth ships is the equivalent of punching a hornet's nest. The standard fare of bright, bold warships pumping out gigawatts without care, streaking across the Solar System laden with weapons, are forced to become meek and paranoid affairs, as a stealth ship can dump a thousand tons of weapons out of nowhere, at any time." As an aside, this is something I wish scifi writers understood - don't include stealth ships in your stories without recognizing how they change the mechanics of war completely.
  • dsr_ 3y ago
    Nearly every use of the vehicle as described is more effective if it is never built, just widely publicized as being built and launched in large quantity.