Talk-Polywell.org

D Tibbets wrote:... these ships are much more ... and survivable than their predecessors.

Highly debatable.

.

KitemanSA wrote:

D Tibbets wrote:... these ships are much more ... and survivable than their predecessors.

Highly debatable.

No really, it's not. The Avenger class it replaces made 14 knots and had a pair of 50 BMG's aboard. Dan is completely correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avenger-cl ... sures_ship

GIThruster wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:

D Tibbets wrote:... these ships are much more ... and survivable than their predecessors.

Highly debatable.

No really, it's not. The Avenger class it replaces made 14 knots and had a pair of 50 BMG's aboard. Dan is completely correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avenger-cl ... sures_ship

Except he quoted the Osprey Class, not Avenger. The Osprey was substantially better shock hardened.

Aircraft Carriers in Space
Naval analyst Chris Weuve talks to Foreign Policy about what Battlestar Galactica gets right about space warfare.

t month, Small Wars Journal managing editor Robert Haddick asked whether new technology has rendered aircraft carriers obsolete. Well, not everyone thinks so, especially in science-fiction, where "flat tops" still rule in TV shows like Battlestar Galactica. So FP's Michael Peck spoke with Chris Weuve, a naval analyst, former U.S. Naval War College research professor, and an ardent science-fiction fan about how naval warfare is portrayed in the literature and television of outer-space.

Foreign Policy: How has sci-fi incorporated the themes of wet-navy warfare? How have warships at sea influenced the depiction of warships in space?
Has sci-fi affected the way that our navies conduct warfare?
How do these different space warfare models differ from their oceanic counterparts?
How would actual space war differ from naval warfare?
...

Laser Weapon System (LaWS)

Published on Dec 10, 2014

The Afloat Forward Staging Base (Interim) USS Ponce (ASB(I) 15) conducts an operational demonstration of the Office of Naval Research (ONR)-sponsored Laser Weapon System (LaWS) while deployed to the Arabian Gulf.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... 0DbgNju2wE

Betruger wrote:Aircraft Carriers in Space
Naval analyst Chris Weuve talks to Foreign Policy about what Battlestar Galactica gets right about space warfare.

t month, Small Wars Journal managing editor Robert Haddick asked whether new technology has rendered aircraft carriers obsolete. Well, not everyone thinks so, especially in science-fiction, where "flat tops" still rule in TV shows like Battlestar Galactica. So FP's Michael Peck spoke with Chris Weuve, a naval analyst, former U.S. Naval War College research professor, and an ardent science-fiction fan about how naval warfare is portrayed in the literature and television of outer-space.

Foreign Policy: How has sci-fi incorporated the themes of wet-navy warfare? How have warships at sea influenced the depiction of warships in space?
Has sci-fi affected the way that our navies conduct warfare?
How do these different space warfare models differ from their oceanic counterparts?
How would actual space war differ from naval warfare?
...

I wanted to comment about this the other day but my link froze on me. This is a good piece, but it is not as good as could be. I appreciate the distinction made by the author between aircraft carriers forming a union of sea and sy operations, and space carriers not fitting this same function since both carrier and carried ships are in space. he notes there's no flight deck and presumes carried ships would simply be docked and a pilot would climb through a hatch--no flight deck. I think this is unlikely. Were one to have reason to carry fighters abaord, one would likely need to service them on their carrier, which means they need to be brought inside where a mechanic can work without an EVA suit. Probably the author is unfamiliar with the function of a plasma window:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_window

Which can allow bays open to space to hold back atmo while smaller craft pass the window. So these carriers we find in Battlestar Galactica, and the bays aboard the Deathstar in Star Wars are actually pretty darn accurate. What is missing is a mechanism to easily lock down everything for when gravity leaves (the ships tips accelerating). Probably most items will have metallic feets and a way to magnetize the deck. Given this, wireless recharging would be expected as well.

Given high enough thrust efficiency in a MET but not in situ M-E power generation, most ships will likely fly on batteries, so small fighters will use wireless recharging or not have to charge/fuel at all.

They would probably use something similar to how modern carriers secure aircraft for bad weather to deal with securing space fighters while under acceleration.

williatw wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... 0DbgNju2wE

Detonating ordnance stacked in view is a useful test, but where the pedal hits the metal is when the laser can hull the boat to get at ordnance that's not in the line of sight...

krenshala wrote:They would probably use something similar to how modern carriers secure aircraft for bad weather to deal with securing space fighters while under acceleration.

One MC
"All hands secure for heavy acceleration, twelve point tied-downs in effect"

If anyone here is going to the EXPO it would be great to hear what was on show:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/us-navy-to-pu ... socialflow

proposed 10X increase in Navy laser power:

http://breakingdefense.com/2015/02/are- ... f-reality/

http://www.neatorama.com/2015/02/28/The ... ilet-Bomb/

Now that story is a load of ... well, it is, even if true.

Less believable, but quite true, is that Sandy could also take out Migs. I personally get a kick out of this, because one of my favorite engagements in computer combat flight simulators is to take a Mustang up against jets. The only way this works is to take the engagement down to the treetops, which is where Skyraiders lived.

http://theaviationist.com/2015/01/14/th ... e-mig-17s/