|
Post by srbrant on Jun 5, 2017 1:17:36 GMT
Another idea for shields is an inertial-dampening field like the one used to keep the crew from being turned into jam at high speeds or impacts. Acting as a quantum whipple shield, it can drastically reduce the velocity of projectiles. Though specialized "shieldbreaker" missiles can outright ignore them. But that's not the topic on this thread. Another idea for boarder traps are lattice-mounted armored shutters to turn the vestibule into a maze, buying the crew members inside enough time to escape or build up proper defenses. As for point-defense lasers, I'm certain that those will be the first things a boarding ship would destroy in order to protect their parties. Another issue that arises is the use of boarding craft as opposed to two ships stuck together with space harpoons or gigantic waldoes while boarders spacewalk between them. Because a lot of pirates are looking for luxury foods, vacuum-sensitive goods and "volunteers" to help them in their quest for plunder. Ramming a ship is suicidal and can be easily dodged, plus there's the gigantic risk of missing the crew module or depressurizing it. Why would the ship crew need such a complex system to delay borders? It should be very easy to spot a boarding pop/ship and the crew would have plenty of time to prepare beforehand. And how would they escape? Even if they manage to get out of their disabled ship they will be easy targets for the enemy ships. Your third statement seems to assume manned boarding teams, which is an absurd waste of mass and is less effective than an remote controlled drone. 1. Because of drag-tethers and numerous countermeasures on the boarders' part. 2. Escape pods and/or shuttlecraft. One mechanism is to have flares deploy alongside the escape vehicles to protect them from missiles. 3. As I said before, this is a universe where spacecraft is advanced enough to the point where payload and mass limits aren't as stringent.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 5, 2017 1:46:52 GMT
Why would the ship crew need such a complex system to delay borders? It should be very easy to spot a boarding pop/ship and the crew would have plenty of time to prepare beforehand. And how would they escape? Even if they manage to get out of their disabled ship they will be easy targets for the enemy ships. Your third statement seems to assume manned boarding teams, which is an absurd waste of mass and is less effective than an remote controlled drone. 1. Because of drag-tethers and numerous countermeasures on the boarders' part. 2. Escape pods and/or shuttlecraft. One mechanism is to have flares deploy alongside the escape vehicles to protect them from missiles. 3. As I said before, this is a universe where spacecraft is advanced enough to the point where payload and mass limits aren't as stringent. 1. Stealth in space isn't very possible, and countermeasures can't fool cameras. 2. How would the pods/shuttles escape? They would be even easier targets than exposed crew. Flares only work in CoaDE due to over simplistic game design and could not fool a well designed missile. 3. Even if mass constraints are not as significant remote drones are still more effective boarding tools than suited humans.
|
|
|
Post by srbrant on Jun 5, 2017 3:13:16 GMT
1. Because of drag-tethers and numerous countermeasures on the boarders' part. 2. Escape pods and/or shuttlecraft. One mechanism is to have flares deploy alongside the escape vehicles to protect them from missiles. 3. As I said before, this is a universe where spacecraft is advanced enough to the point where payload and mass limits aren't as stringent. 1. Stealth in space isn't very possible, and countermeasures can't fool cameras. 2. How would the pods/shuttles escape? They would be even easier targets than exposed crew. Flares only work in CoaDE due to over simplistic game design and could not fool a well designed missile. 3. Even if mass constraints are not as significant remote drones are still more effective boarding tools than suited humans. 1. I sure do know that. Which is why so many ships are very vibrant, using camouflage patterns with bold colors as if to mock that fact. 2. The pods burst out of small hatches in the hull. Shuttles are "towed" by the ships at docking racks like a remora. One idea could be a "scrambler" that distorts the sensors of homing missiles. Also, destroying or sabotaging escape pods is a very serious offense...then again, so is blowing up a civilian ship. 3. I'll have to explore that aspect a little more...
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 5, 2017 3:17:43 GMT
1. Stealth in space isn't very possible, and countermeasures can't fool cameras. 2. How would the pods/shuttles escape? They would be even easier targets than exposed crew. Flares only work in CoaDE due to over simplistic game design and could not fool a well designed missile. 3. Even if mass constraints are not as significant remote drones are still more effective boarding tools than suited humans. 1. I sure do know that. Which is why so many ships are very vibrant, using camouflage patterns with bold colors as if to mock that fact. 2. The pods burst out of small hatches in the hull. Shuttles are "towed" by the ships at docking racks like a remora. One idea could be a "scrambler" that distorts the sensors of homing missiles. Also, destroying or sabotaging escape pods is a very serious offense...then again, so is blowing up a civilian ship. 3. I'll have to explore that aspect a little more... 1. cool 2. home on jam (works better with rasberry less well with strawberries, do not attempt with jelly), why would you have escape pods, you could have more propellant and life support for the main ship 3. they are better until they are jammed
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 5, 2017 3:54:55 GMT
1. I sure do know that. Which is why so many ships are very vibrant, using camouflage patterns with bold colors as if to mock that fact. 2. The pods burst out of small hatches in the hull. Shuttles are "towed" by the ships at docking racks like a remora. One idea could be a "scrambler" that distorts the sensors of homing missiles. Also, destroying or sabotaging escape pods is a very serious offense...then again, so is blowing up a civilian ship. 3. I'll have to explore that aspect a little more... 1. cool 2. home on jam (works better with rasberry less well with strawberries, do not attempt with jelly), why would you have escape pods, you could have more propellant and life support for the main ship 3. they are better until they are jammed Response to 3, wires can't be jammed.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jun 5, 2017 6:59:42 GMT
The most basic problem is this: If you can shoot at an enemy vessel (where are you aiming that grappling hook?), you can also shoot at a boarding capsule, and point defense is looking pretty good (laser, kinetic, etc). The only real possibility for boarding is if the enemy can sneak up right to you without you noticing, which makes no sense in space (unless they're posing as civilians, which would be hard with traffic being monitored). Traffic does have to be monitored, because any average Joe can fly his spaceship into a colony otherwise, and that's the end of the colony. When the outcome of a regular battle is already decided at range (which currently CoaDE shows to be the case, and I really don't see that changing), why would the winning crew attempt to board an enemy ship? Just tell them "Surrender, leave, or die." If they refuse, you can dismantle a disabled ship from the outside, without your crew involved. Or fire at the expected location of their crew quarters, then wait for their suits' oxygen to run out. Or just irradiate the whole thing. If there's a problem, you can always shoot at it until it stops being a problem.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 5, 2017 8:07:47 GMT
The most basic problem is this: If you can shoot at an enemy vessel (where are you aiming that grappling hook?), you can also shoot at a boarding capsule, and point defense is looking pretty good (laser, kinetic, etc). The only real possibility for boarding is if the enemy can sneak up right to you without you noticing, which makes no sense in space (unless they're posing as civilians, which would be hard with traffic being monitored). Traffic does have to be monitored, because any average Joe can fly his spaceship into a colony otherwise, and that's the end of the colony. When the outcome of a regular battle is already decided at range (which currently CoaDE shows to be the case, and I really don't see that changing), why would the winning crew attempt to board an enemy ship? Just tell them "Surrender, leave, or die." If they refuse, you can dismantle a disabled ship from the outside, without your crew involved. Or fire at the expected location of their crew quarters, then wait for their suits' oxygen to run out. Or just irradiate the whole thing. If there's a problem, you can always shoot at it until it stops being a problem. Blowing of their radiators and waiting until the crew gets knocked out by asphyxiation or heatstroke seems easier than boarding IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 5, 2017 13:48:15 GMT
1. cool 2. home on jam (works better with rasberry less well with strawberries, do not attempt with jelly), why would you have escape pods, you could have more propellant and life support for the main ship 3. they are better until they are jammed Response to 3, wires can't be jammed. yep wires can't be jammed, they can be cut, spliced into and hacked, run out of length, torn, among other things
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 5, 2017 16:38:44 GMT
Response to 3, wires can't be jammed. yep wires can't be jammed, they can be cut, spliced into and hacked, run out of length, torn, among other things If you develop a friend or foe system, you can use something like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ygFeywrvjcNo human intervention needed. Considering AI already beats humans for image recognition, AI might actually make less mistakes than a human operator.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 5, 2017 18:51:13 GMT
yep wires can't be jammed, they can be cut, spliced into and hacked, run out of length, torn, among other things If you develop a friend or foe system, you can use something like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ygFeywrvjcNo human intervention needed. Considering AI already beats humans for image recognition, AI might actually make less mistakes than a human operator. limited LOS once you're in a ship
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 5, 2017 18:58:47 GMT
If you develop a friend or foe system, you can use something like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ygFeywrvjcNo human intervention needed. Considering AI already beats humans for image recognition, AI might actually make less mistakes than a human operator. limited LOS once you're in a ship Better reaction time than a human. Can easily integrate with a variety of sensors. Can be made lighter and/or more resilient to damage than human troops. Drones require electricity, while humans need water, food and oxygen. Drones can be more adaptable to zero-g combat.
|
|
|
Post by princesskibble on Jun 5, 2017 19:12:36 GMT
Drone boarding vehicles are bad for the same reason any kind of military drone is evil! It doesn't matter that it's more efficient, when the drone pilot is behind a computer screen they are detached from the situation and much more merciless. They have said horrible things about dispassionate they are toward human lives in interviews all the time, and it would be the same for people piloting the boarding machines.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 5, 2017 19:21:43 GMT
Drone boarding vehicles are bad for the same reason any kind of military drone is evil! It doesn't matter that it's more efficient, when the drone pilot is behind a computer screen they are detached from the situation and much more merciless. They have said horrible things about dispassionate they are toward human lives in interviews all the time, and it would be the same for people piloting the boarding machines. The same could be said for the people launching long-range missiles. I'm not talking about what should happen, I'm talking about what I think will (probably) happen. And you're argument about drone operators is incorrect. They tend to be emotionally much more involved and traumatized than any other type of soldier. Infantrymen have self-preservation instincts kicking in, and pilots of conventional aircraft do quick flyby's while dropping bombs. Drones loiter for extended periods of time, observing their target dozens of minutes before and after their strike. They are forced to witness the aftermath of their strike. This is why they talk dispassionately about it, it's an attempt to distance themselves from what they've seen and done, and why substance abuse is higher among drone operators than any other type of soldier.
|
|
|
Post by princesskibble on Jun 5, 2017 19:29:50 GMT
Drone boarding vehicles are bad for the same reason any kind of military drone is evil! It doesn't matter that it's more efficient, when the drone pilot is behind a computer screen they are detached from the situation and much more merciless. They have said horrible things about dispassionate they are toward human lives in interviews all the time, and it would be the same for people piloting the boarding machines. The same could be said for the people launching long-range missiles. I'm not talking about what should happen, I'm talking about what I think will (probably) happen. And you're argument about drone operators is incorrect. They tend to be emotionally much more involved and traumatized than any other type of soldier. Infantrymen have self-preservation instincts kicking in, and pilots of conventional aircraft do quick flyby's while dropping bombs. Drones loiter for extended periods of time, observing their target dozens of minutes before and after their strike. They are forced to witness the aftermath of their strike. This is why they talk dispassionately about it, it's an attempt to distance themselves from what they've seen and done, and why substance abuse is higher among drone operators than any other type of soldier.Then maybe that's the reason not to use drones -.- I just can't imagine any sensible future society would use something that even us savages from a thousand years ago thought was wrong. Besides boarding isn't just about efficient enemy incapacitation, you need to find any non-combatants and talk to them, or negotiate with combatants who might want to surrender. Nobody is going to talk to or surrender to a piece of metal covered in guns without a face, using drones might create more enemies than it incapacitates. Most boarding will probably go off without a bullet fired!
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 5, 2017 19:42:35 GMT
Then maybe that's the reason not to use drones -.- I just can't imagine any sensible future society would use something that even us savages from a thousand years ago thought was wrong. Besides boarding isn't just about efficient enemy incapacitation, you need to find any non-combatants and talk to them, or negotiate with combatants who might want to surrender. Nobody is going to talk to or surrender to a piece of metal covered in guns without a face, using drones might create more enemies than it incapacitates. Most boarding will probably go off without a bullet fired! There already is precedent for people surrendering to a drone. And if you manage to board someone, they probably already surrendered through radio, and have their weapons and propulsion disabled or they are vastly outmatched. Letting humans board gives them hostages or means you lose people if they blow themselves up. Such behaviour is not unprecedented. Warfare is utilizing force to achieve your strategic goals. While countries (occasionally) attempt to minimize unnecessary harm, pragmatism tends to triumph, and many 'cruel' weapons get outlawed only after they lose most of their effectiveness. Boarding is indeed not about effective incapitation of the enemy, blasting them away with missiles is easier, both now and then.
|
|