Re: SV: FTL Mines

John Leary wrote:

> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> >
>
> > > 1) Lets face it, where/how do you hide a mine in space?
> >
> > How long engagement envelope does the mines have? How good stealth
can you
> > equip them with - ie, can you make them difficult to detect at
ranges
> > longer than their own engagement range? If so, you might be able to
hide
> > them.
> >
> > But you miss the main point with mines: they're there not as much to
harm
> > the enemy as to make him go somewhere else - ie, either where your
heavy
> > guns are waiting for him, or where your vulnerable units aren't :-)
> >
> > > 2) If you can hide a mine in space, the same tech that hides the
> > >	 mine from detection can be used to hide a ship from the mine!
> >
> > Except, perhaps, that the ship has more active emissions than the
mine -
> > especially if it is trying to maneuver...
> >
> > > 3) Mines in orbit around a planet can cause a lot of bad PR when
> > >	 the mine falls out of orbit.
> >
> > Not if they don't have warheads. These FTL mines cause damage by
jumping
> > into hyper, not by a bomb - and if you program them to engage
targets in a
> > certain size bracket (or have IFF gear on your planet <g>) they'll
simply
> > burn up when they fall out of orbit. I doubt they'll accidentally
drift
> > away from the planet :-/
> >
> > > 4) Consider the amount of mass that would have to go into a mine-
> > >	 field around the solar system (or even a few planets) and
buying
> > >	 a few thousand superdreadnaughts is much more cost effective.
> >
> > Again, how long engagment range does the mine have? I see no real
point in
> > surrounding an entire star system with a mine shell (...the enemy
might
> > jump to a point inside the mines, depending on your background...)
but as a
> > deterrent from getting too close to a planet, fine. You wouldn't
need that
> > many either, I think - a couple of hundred, provided they can damage
ships
> > far enough away... and don't tell me the mines cost more than ten
> > superdreadnoughts each <g>
> >
> > Oerjan Ohlson
> > SDS Minefield expert :-)
> >
> > "Life is like a sewer.
> > What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
> > - Hen3ry
>
> Oerjan,
>      I will try to address some of the points you have brought up,
> but the bottom line from a personal point of view is 'MINES IN SPACE
> ARE SILLY...	 Now back to a somewhat more rational discussion.
>      Presumptions on the construction of a mine:
> 1) The mine has an active power source.
> 2) The mine has one mass or close to it.
> 3) The mine by its very nature does not have standard sensors or
>    IFF, some type of passive sensor (Mass detector) is the sensor
>    of choice for the mine.
>
> POINT 1)
> The mine must have an active power source or it would freeze in
> space.   This means the stealth aspect becomes meaningless, even
> if the mine were totally (normal active) sensor invisable the mine
> would light up like a candle in the dark on a IR sensor.
> POINT 2)
> You might be able to make an argument against this but I like it.
> Point 3)
> Standard or advanced sensors and IFF will not be found on a mine
> because they are active devices which would pinpoint the location
> of the mine instantly.
>
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> > But you miss the main point with mines: they're there not as much to
harm
> > the enemy as to make him go somewhere else - ie, either where your
heavy> guns are waiting for him, or where your vulnerable units aren't
> XXXXXXX
>      Your theory on the use of mines is from a different text than
> mine.   My rules state that the minefield is placed to prevent or
> slow the closure of the enemy to some stratigic objective that cannot
> be bypassed.	(If I have done my job as a commander, the enemy will
> be forced to cross the minefield under fire of my fleet.)  JTL
> XXXXXXXX
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> > Not if they don't have warheads. These FTL mines cause damage by
jumping
> > into hyper, not by a bomb - and if you program them to engage
targets in a
> > certain size bracket (or have IFF gear on your planet <g>) they'll
simply
> > burn up when they fall out of orbit
> XXXXXXXXXX
> By the way, the 'jump mine' is a completely useless concept,
> everyone (included myself) has forgotten that the jump engine
> must be primed the turn before it is enguaged.
> (Needless to say the mine will not survive to jump if facing
> a warship.)	JTL
> XXXXXXXXX
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> > Again, how long engagment range does the mine have? I see no real
point in
> > surrounding an entire star system with a mine shell (...the enemy
might
> > jump to a point inside the mines, depending on your background...)
> XXXXXXXXXX
>      If the enemy jumped into the system, they have jumped into
> a gravity well and will suffer accordingly.
>      I realize that I did not bother to compute the number of mines
> necessary to surround a planet with mines, I didn't have that much
> interest.
>      To deter an attacking force with a planetary minefield you must
> set the outer limit of the mines beyond the range of the enemy fleets
> weapons.   In FT this is a minimum of 54", but lets say 60" for fun.
> The minefield would have to be at least 10 rows deep, and a minumum
> of of 6" between mines.   The minefield now stretches from 30" to 90"
> above the planets surface, and if one does Pie*D for each ring the
> number of mines cn be determined.   Or calculate the surface area
> of all mine shells and divide by the surface area of a single mine
> area to determine the total number of mines. (No way I am going to
> do this.)
>      Minefields in space simply have to many holes in both theory
> and practice (Yes the pun was intended.) for them to be of any
> value. (Other than as a game device to play navy.)
>
> This may come across more harshly than intended, if so, I am sorry.
>
> Bye for now,
> John L.

  What about gun mines...

assuming you can make the mines stealthy enough...
and use some sort of passive sensor system to detect ships...when a ship
comes with in gun range the mine goes active and begins firing...this
also gives the mine an engagement range, thus requiring less mines