RE: Active vs Passive

I think that you are arguing against yourself.

If space is so large that you would not be able to pick a ship out from
the
background noise, then it is too big to know where to point your active
sensors. You have to have some idea of where to scan in order to ping
the
target with your sensors.

The above assumes directional active sensors. If you have
omnidirectional
active sensors, the power output to ping something at 52,000km (52tu)
would
be enormous. The background noise would only add to the problem. 

I do agree with your comment about range. Unless you or your opponenet
are
moving a significant amount, it would be difficult to determine range
using
passive sensors. This is why the closer you are to an object the easier
it
should be to deterine details.

I will have to think more about the superconductors for uni-directional
heat
dispersion.
Some random thoughts:
Superconductors conduct two ways. Ambient solar radiation will heat the
side
of the spacecraft facing the system's star greater than the background.
You
can't duct this with superconductors without the superconductors heating
and
defeating the purpose of using them to direct the heat. If you trail
them
into space to allow them to radiate the heat away, you have a glowing
arrow
pointing to your ship. If you keep them close to your ship, the heat
will
reflect off you your hull. In space, you have to rely on straight
radiation
(as there are not enough matter to help take away the heat in the way
that
air or water does on earth). The superconductor radiates heat at all
points
evenly, so it radiates the same amount of heat inside the ship as
outside.
If hit by radiation (solar or weapon) it would conduct the energy back
inside the craft.

I saw a show reciently about the Hubble telescope and the repairs on it.
When the astronaut was in the shadow of the Hubble, it was extreemly
cold.
When on the Sun side of the Hubble, it was extreemly hot. 

-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ft/	 
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Reen-Shuler [SMTP:saltpeanuts73@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 12:10 PM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: Active vs Passive
> 
> 
> 
> > I also think that stealth to the point that
> > "we don't know if
> > anything's there" is essentially impossible, because
> > you simply CAN'T
> > hide your waste heat (except by running your ship at
> > a 3K ambient
> > temperature, but that would probably degrade your
> > combat effectiveness).
> > I simply don't think that it's possible to hide
> > yourself effectively in
> > a space battlefield. 
[snip]
> > 
> > -Brian
> 
> I think you underestimate just how big space is.  
> Scanning all of visible space and then subtracting out
> all background noise would be very, very difficult. 
> 
> Also, only using passive sensors, it would be almost
> impossible to determine range without significant
> transverse movement by either the target or the
> detector.
> 
> Also, if you assume superconductors (and I think we
> have to in a space game) it would be fairly easy to
> sheild a ship so it would only emit EM radiation
> (light, heat, etc.) in one direction (say to the
> rear). It would be very difficult to detect such a
> ship with passive sensors (except perhaps with a mass
> detector).
> 
> -Adrian
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites.
> http://invites.yahoo.com