Prev: RE: Fleet Control System Next: Re: Fleet Control System

Re: [FT] SOF Insertion

From: Tony Christney <acc@q...>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1998 12:11:13 -0800
Subject: Re: [FT] SOF Insertion

Thomas Barclay wrote:
>> Assuming the enemy is as intelligent as you (and of a similar Tech
level) are
>> they would very soon be analyzing meteor showers in an attempt to
>> their target discrmmination. I would.
>I think you'd find 
>1. They are randomly distributed with little pattern

Not exactly. The term meteor shower is usually reserved for above 
background levels of meteor activity. This is usually caused by 
the Earth's orbit intersecting regions of interplanetary debris. 
The debris is most commonly attributable to comets, which are 
quite localized.

>2. They are inherently unpredicatable in density

This may be true for a first observation of a meteor shower. Over 
time density predictions improve in accuracy. I would say that 
meteor activity is more predictable than say, seasonal weather

>3. Monitoring every small object in nearspace is prohibitive

Agreed. The ability to predict does not imply that someone 
will spend the time and money to actually make any.

>4. You'd tend to have your monitors (even if you could watch for 
>them) only pay attention to things that are either big enough to be a 
>problem wherever they hit or any sized object aimed at a population 
>centre. Well your SOF knows this, and they insert into the water (for 
>cushioning and dissipation of heat from the drop).

This would depend on the target of your monitoring operations. You 
may only be interested in objects within a very narrow size restriction.
For example, it isn't possible to fit a PA trooper in a meteor less than

3m, and it isn't necessary to put one in a pod that's 10m across. 
Also, you may further limit your search to objects that should burn up 
in the atmosphere, but don't. Of course, any such monitoring project 
would be expensive in terms of satellite production and maintenance, 
computer hardware and software development as well as personnel to 
keep it running. This aside, it may be that colony ships deploy such 
sensors as part of their SOP. Also, things may be made simpler if you 
just destroy every meteor bigger than some threshold size out of hand.

>> 1. Clandestine Example: Canada and US are at peace. Tom's unit
>> infiltrates the US posing as Montreal Canadiens fans heading to a
>> Avalanche Game.
>Never happen. Ottawa Senators fans. 
> Their misison is to destroy the Budweiser corporate headquartes
>> for the blight they've left on the name of North American beer.
>Don't use the word Beer in that Context. It insults real beer.

This seems to be right out of "Canadian Bacon"...

>(Except for the suspicious presence of slogans like "Remember the 
>White House" scrawled on bits of the rubble). (And an apology note, 
>unsigned but polite and using real English spelling, left to the 

"We are terribly sorry that you must be punished for crimes against 
humanity. Real beer must have a darker colour, and be drinkable 
without being toxic."

       Tony Christney

  "If the end user has to worry about how the program was 
   written then there is something wrong with that program"
				  -Bjarne Stroustrup

Prev: RE: Fleet Control System Next: Re: Fleet Control System