Prev: RE: [Not so OT]Military discipline problems Next: RE: Close Orbit Support (COS) a.k.a. CSS (Close Space Support)

RE: Close Orbit Support (COS) a.k.a. CSS (Close Space Support)

From: Beth.Fulton@c...
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:04:34 +1100
Subject: RE: Close Orbit Support (COS) a.k.a. CSS (Close Space Support)

G'day,

One question (once again sorry if I've missed this already due to the
sodding link being down), but...

Why are we assuming that ortillery will have to have a nuke like
radiation
signature with it? Wouldn't kinetics alone have enough energy to do
MAJOR
damage and thus not require you to "waste" stuff by actually using a
nuke? I
can understand that using a beam weapon may have some radiation
signature,
but how like a nuke would it be (sorry its been a long time since I did
physics of that kind and I can't remember much of it)? As for things
just
hitting the ground at speed that shouldn't have much of a nuclear like
radiation signature after the initial shockwave/heat etc passed right
(at
least the idea of the dinosaurs glowing in the dark as a result of a KT
event has never come up in the stuff I've read)?

Cheers

Beth


Prev: RE: [Not so OT]Military discipline problems Next: RE: Close Orbit Support (COS) a.k.a. CSS (Close Space Support)