Re: Planetary defenses

The problem here is that with any non underground defence system, a
decent
EMP blast would knock it out. Or a nuke.

I would argue any planetary defence has to be off planet (keep off
planet
stupid : Howard Anderson TFN [Starfire]), with support ships (Monitors
and
Planetary Defence Cruisers). The problem here is big is vunerable, and
small
lacks firepower.

Also needed is lots of fighters to block any holes in your coverage.

Darryl
-----Original Message-----
From: Los <los@cris.com>
To: FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk <FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk>
Date: Saturday, September 26, 1998 2:04 AM
Subject: Planetary defenses

>OK I've noticed that many people on this list seem to assume that
>orbital strikes, ortillery and woning orbit means it's pretty much all
>over for a planet, that it might as well roll over and die.
>
>I'd like to throw it back at everyone and ask, if you had to design a
>planetary defense to counter such a situation what could be done? How
>effective would be ground based wepons? Obviously they could be very
>effective against atmospheric craft but what about Stuff in space?
>
>
>I know fixed defenses may be a problem but what about underground
>defense complexes connected by hundreds of kilometer of underground
rail
>where heavy weapons fuel with the vast power reserves available to a
>planet could pop up shoot and scoot? Any ideas? I'm thinking about
>defensing the planet here not subjugating it.
>
>Los
>
>