RE: Wet Navy in the future was Re: Questions regarding NAC ground units, was SG IF morale

G'day,

>Now, if on your planet a significant portion of the
>population lives in underwater domes, there are large
>auqaculture (is this the right word for kelp farming
>and fish ranching??) stations, 

Yep, that and mariculture.... though I don't doubt the number of names
will
sky-rocket and get all fancy as the number of methods increases over the
next century etc.

>and your heavy industry
>is based around undersea mineral nodules, then things
>change signficantly.  You start having to take
>underwater cities and that leads to a whole new kettle
>of fish.

Nice little pun there ;)

>But surface ships are probably still right out for the
>reasons mentioned above.

Assuming the 'clines are comparable to earth's with respect to
penetrability
to the current level of sensors. If they're stronger (or internal waves
and
currents under the ocean surface are strong enough to cause severe cases
of
parallax error) then you may see more subsurface stuff. For instance, if
it
hadn't been for an improvement in sensors, subs and ship movement the
maps
of the Pacific would still be covered with shoal marks which were
actually
just the thermocline or large schools of fish fooling the early sonar
etc
operators ;)

>As a side note, what's the difference between a
>starship and a submarine?  Both have to be
>water/vacuum proof--what's to stop a streamlined ship
>from splashing into an ocean and hiding on the bottom
>of the sea for a while, then flying out to launch
>hit-and-run strikes on the enemy?

Well the guys have pointed out a few details, but personally I'd think
its a
valid tactic... and one the Sa'Vasku at least use apparently (according
to
St^3 Jon's background blurb at least) ;)

Beth