Re: Active vs Passive

"Robert W. Hofrichter" wrote:
> 
> One problem with EMCON, though--don't fusion piles produce neutrinos? 
(I
> seem to remember something of the sort from a physics --or was that
> astronomy?--class years ago.)

	I'm not trying to make fun of you, but I do find your
terminology
	amusing.  I believe that it either betrays your age or the
	age of the materials you have been reading.

	Specifically, "pile" is a rather obsolete term for a nuclear
	reactor.  It came from the original prototype reactor, which
	was literally a pile of graphite bricks with uranium slugs
	and cadmium damper rods threaded through it.
	They don't build them that way any more.

	Fusion reactors have not been created yet, but they are
	likely to include reaction chambers either shaped like
	donuts or spheres.  So they might be called a "fusion torus"
	or a "fusion ball", or something like that.

	But your original statement is correct, fusion reactors
	produce neutrinos.

> Hmm--it does suggest a cool scenario with some special house rules
though:
> 
> A low-tech force using chemical rockets for propulsion (advanced ones,
of
> course, but still limited thrust duration due to fuel requirements)
facing
> off against a super-high-tech force (which, having been trained in
fighting
> other super-high-tech forces doesn't recognize the threat in time)
using
> fusion piles for power and some high-tech propulsion.  Result?  Some
very
> stealthy ships that are easy to destroy but very hard to find fighting
very
> fast, hard to destroy ships that stand out like strobelights in a dark
room.

	Interesting scenario.  There was something vaguely related to
	this in David Mace's novel NIGHTFLIER. 
	In that novel, ships could always be detected when they
	used their propulsion systems.
	This precluded surprise.  You might not be able to see a ship
	running silent, but you could always calculate its current
position,
	based on the data from when it changed its vector.

	In the novel, a breakthrough occured.  It was a crude prototype
	of an artifical gravity drive.	The main point was that it 
	could change a ship's vector WITHOUT any betraying thermal
emissions.

	So you could send the ship to attack the enemy base on Ceres
using
	conventional thrusters.
	The enemy would see this, and send re-enforcements to Ceres.
	Then you (sneaky bugger that you are) use the silent gravity
	drive to alter your course to the enemy base at Vesta.

	The enemy sees no emissions.  So even though they cannot see
	your ship, they assume it will appear at Ceres at the appointed
time.

	Boy, are they surprised when you ambush them at Vesta!