Prev: Re: [OT]UN operations Next: Re: [OT]UN operations

Re: Air Power was: REALITY CHECK TIME!

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 09:40:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Air Power was: REALITY CHECK TIME!

At 7:17 AM -0400 7/23/02, Imre A. Szabo wrote:
>
>Why do you need space control?  Space denail is a great way to level
the
>playing field, unless you opponent doesn't practice non-space base
>communications.  Then space denail is a great way to get an advanatage.
>Space denail is much cheaper and easier then space control.

Thats denial btw.

In order to deny the use of space based systems you have to control 
it. Controlling low orbit areas is going to be difficult. That's the 
whole point. Surface to space isn't surface to littorial. You can't 
sit on a section of beach and see close to a third of your coastal 
littorial. You can see a significant section of space from the 
surface of a planet. Add in

Additionally, what about all that junk up there? An important planet 
would likely have a good bit of space junk. Are you going to check 
every bit of random junk in orbit to make sure it's not a recce sat 
that I activate when they need it? There could be hundreds of them 
disguised as older satellites that get activated when needed.

>Why use active sensors?  Put up several dozen football sized IR
satelites
>and use passive sensors...  Of course an Earth like planet has a lot of

In space these passive IR sats are going to transmit their data to 
your fleet how? ESP? Telepathy? They have to transmit their data. 
Besides, you have to deploy them. Deploying them into an orbit 
requires you to expend energy, expending energy will show up on 
reasonably sensitive ground based sensors that are passive and can 
transmit their data via underground cables to the various CPS that 
are buried deep deep deep.

Additionally, active sensors are required to do things like ground 
mapping and such.

>ground to defend about 5,511,185,932.5 sq. km's.  Were getting into the
>classic arguement of fortification versus mobile fleet/army debate. 
Sure,
>you can build a huge, massive fortification that will take several
times
>your fortress's cost to destroy, but that fortress can't move...
>

But, the ground based defenses can be composed of mobile and immobile 
units. I could park some nice heavy submersibles on the continental 
shelf and use those as launch platforms. And again, I'll have far 
more power to throw at you than you'll have to throw at me based on 
my ability to dump any excess heat into a nice medium absorbing that 
heat. Your ships will glow like the night

>
>That's the problem.  You can bombard any place to defeat, but then
there's
>nothing but worthless wasteland to conquer...

Thats the whole point. So you've really got to want to take the place.
-- 
--
Ryan Gill			  rmgill@mindspring.com
	|	 |
	| O--=-  |	       |	   |
	|_/|o|_\_|	       | _________ |
	/ 00DA61 \	       |/---------\| 
     _w/^=_[__]_= \w_	       // [_]  o[]\\ 
    |: O(4) ==	  O :|	      _Oo\=======/_O_
    |---\________/---|	      [__O_______W__]  
     |~|\	 /|~|	      |~|/BSV 575\|~|
     |~|=\______/=|~|	      |~|=|_____|=|~|
     |~|	  |~|	      |~|	  |~|


Prev: Re: [OT]UN operations Next: Re: [OT]UN operations