RE: Sensor Drones (was: Lasers can't be defended against?)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nyrath the nearly wise [SMTP:nyrath@clark.net]
> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 7:26 AM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: Lasers can't be defended against?
> 
> Popeyesays@aol.com wrote:
> > << Heh.  I remember in the old E.E."Doc" Smith LENSMAN novels
> >	(circa 1940) they use magnesium "star shells" in their space
> >	battles, in order to illuminate the combatants in the
> >	darkness of deep space.
> >   >>
> > "Doc"'s PhD was in Agricultural Chemistry - not physics.
> 
>	But he was on the right track.
>	If putting a searchlight on your ship makes the ship a
>	big fat target, you put searchlights on expendable drones
>	that can move away from your ship then illuminate the
>	battle area.
> 
>	Not only that, something like a star shell would be
>	harder for the enemy to extinguish than a mechanical
>	search light.  (trouble is, it is unidirectional.
>	Therefore it could very well illuminate *you* as well)
> 
[Bri] I believe you meant omnidirectional. Unidirectional is
one-directional.
The problem with omnidirectional sources, as you indicated, is that they
illuminate everything in their area of effect. The problem with
unidirectional source is that it needs to know where the enemy is before
it
illuminates them. Now you could use a conical-area source on a drone
(illuminating an area that the enemy is suspected to be in), but
launching
the drone may provide your location to the enemy or you may have to use
expensive stealth/ECM on the drone, making them less expendable. 
The above applies to detection rather than information gathering. If the
discussion is information gathering, please ignore the appropriate
comments.