Welcome to BookBoardz.com!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements?

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
   Book Forums (Home) -> David Weber RSS
Next:  DPRK and Emmanuel Goldstein...  
Author Message
dahak_ii

External


Since: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 132



(Msg. 46) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:39 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: alt>books>david-weber (more info?)

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:36:38 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
made Dahak write:

> Not being a field I know, I could believe an aggregate spectra for
>the entire field of view... I could believe the azimuth and elevation
>for every star in the FOV... but not both from a single exposure.

Replying to myself... bad form, I know.


Perhaps I should clarify that bit:

I could believe an aggregate spectra for the entire field of
view... I could believe the azimuth and elevation for every star in
the FOV... but not azimuth /and/ elevation /and/ complete individual
spectra on each individual star from a single exposure.


-JPB

 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dsample

External


Since: Jul 01, 2004
Posts: 312



(Msg. 47) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:10 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article ,
Dahak wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:31:34 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
> made Don Sample write:
>
> >In article ,
> > Dahak wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:49:49 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
> >> made Don Sample write:
> >>
> >> >Using existing real world technology you could build a digital camera
> >> >that would take the spectra of every star in the sky in under a second.
> >>
> >> I would find that difficult to believe for a random starfield.
> >>
> >> -JPB
> >
> >It doesn't matter how random the star field. One photograph gives you
> >the position and spectrum of every star in it.
>
> Perhaps you could provide some links to explain how this would be
> done.
>
> Not being a field I know, I could believe an aggregate spectra for
> the entire field of view... I could believe the azimuth and elevation
> for every star in the FOV... but not both from a single exposure.

You just need to put a diffraction grating into the optical path to
smear the light from the stars out into their spectra. For an example
of how it would work, you just have to take a look at the reflection of
a light in the non-label side of a CD or DVD.

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>

 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dahak_ii

External


Since: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 132



(Msg. 48) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 22:10:05 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
made Don Sample write:

>You just need to put a diffraction grating into the optical path to
>smear the light from the stars out into their spectra. For an example
>of how it would work, you just have to take a look at the reflection of
>a light in the non-label side of a CD or DVD.

Would that not give you an aggregate spectrum for the entire field
of view?

-JPB
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dsample

External


Since: Jul 01, 2004
Posts: 312



(Msg. 49) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:54 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article ,
Dahak wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 22:10:05 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
> made Don Sample write:
>
> >You just need to put a diffraction grating into the optical path to
> >smear the light from the stars out into their spectra. For an example
> >of how it would work, you just have to take a look at the reflection of
> >a light in the non-label side of a CD or DVD.
>
> Would that not give you an aggregate spectrum for the entire field
> of view?
>
> -JPB

Each star will make its own individual streak of colour.

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Lorenzo Micheletto

External


Since: Dec 31, 2007
Posts: 2



(Msg. 50) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:55 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Dahak wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:09:42 GMT, an orbiting mind-control laser made
> Lorenzo Micheletto write:
>
>> IMHO given their sensor and computer technologies, telemetry must be quite
>> advanced, it's just in the books Weber don't spend too much time on it.
>>
>> About upgrades ... there are a lot of things that could be improved, it's
>> only a matter of deciding what doesn't bend the rules too much.
>>
>> a) "Hyper submarines"
>
> Just a quibble:
>
> The actual physical transition between bands is, I believe,
> instantaneous.
>
> Hyper navigation as currently described by Weber is nothing more
> than really, /really/ well-refined dead-reckoning (if we go this fast,
> for this long, in this hyper band, we ought to be... HERE! Ironically,
> just like I imagine current submarine navigation.)
>
> Yes, you have the physiological effects of translation, but that
> varies by speed at translation.

Thank you for the correction, to me it looked like that the side
effect on humans implied side effect at least on the sensors.

> Traditional navigation rules reassert themselves upon emergence
> into realspace with a difficulty level dependent on the location at
> emergence. (Are you in interstellar space? Locating navigation
> 'landmarks' becomes time consuming. Are you in a heavily
> industrialized system? Then there should be plenty of navigation
> markers that make triangulating your location much, much, easier.)

Uhm! So the first real problem is to identify ASAP the new ship position.

Thinking in the context of "attack near the hyper limit"
the position of the stars nearby can give the "absolute" position
(in that stellar system) so at least a rough solution for jumping away
to escape is almost ready when the ship jump to normal space
(the "escape route" is not important as long as it's far enough
so the "hyper sub" can emerge safely into normal space to prepare
for its next "precision micro jump" against the target).

So after the "attack micro jump" the real problem is acquiring
the target faster than it can acquire the ship and shoot first
before performing the "escape jump".
The "hyper sub" knows ahead the approximate volume where
it will "emerge" in normal space, but on the other hand
because of the hyper footprint the target gets a warning of the
approximate volume of the "hyper sub" too.

Basically the first problem becomes a battle of sensors and ECM
at graser range, if the "hyper sub" has a suite of sensors
and ECM optimized for it (i.e. it does not have to worry about
avoiding missiles because in that case it's only defense is
the "escape jump") maybe it can have enough margin to shoot first
and jump away before the target's graser beams can reach its position.

> Unfortunately, there really aren't any better navigation systems.
> But what you want here is actually a faster way back into hyper.
>
> Once you drop back into realspace, your hyper generators need time
> to recycle. The time required depends on the volume of the required
> field (although David usually just says 'by mass,' which implies
> volume restrictions).
>
> Smaller ships can recycle faster than larger ones and David
> doesn't want to get too tied down to exact figures to give him some
> wiggle room for changes down the road.
>
> There is /also/ a minimum delay between the time you hit the
> button to start your boost into hyper and when the field builds high
> enough to actually translate.

What about the idea of trading missile and pods for
extra nodes/generators ?
Usually a ship has more nodes and generator power of the minimun
needed to translate back and forth of hyper bands.
As i previously wrote, an "hyper sub" does not have attack missiles
and launchers (just grasers for attack, plus lasers and countermissiles
for self defense), so expending part of that tonnage for more
nodes/generators/accumulators may be the answer.

If the "hyper sub" can jump with say half its nodes and keeps
the other half "hot" for starting to prepare to cycle back into hyper
as soon as it "emerges" into normal space, it can cycle faster
than the target, and has more redundancy to be able
to escape in hyper in case of battle damage when exchanging
graser shots with its target.

If the "hyper sub" is cheap enough (i.e. sort of light cruiser
on steroid, automated to the max to reduce the personel required
in combat) it may be utilized like WW2 submarines
(i.e. wolf pack tactics for attack and support ships to extend
its endurance in combat zone).

I'm thinking something like 3..4 "hyper subs" engaging
in partially overlapped sequence (or in parallel from different
directions) the same target to have an edge against it
so the first ones have at leat partial coverage when jumping
back to hyper, while the last one is likely to have to deal with
and already damaged enemy.

In the end it looks like the "hyper sub" looks sort of
shipkiller hyper-capable LAC on steroids that does not need
missile LAC protection while approaching the target
(because it micro-jumps on it).

>> b) fleet level gravitic phased arrays
>>
>> Or "if it works with electromagnetic waves ...".
>> Active phased array radars can perform some nasty tricks
>> on enemy avionics, think about its gravitic equivalent.
>> What may happen if lots of LACs or maybe all the ships in a task force
>> modulate in sync their impellers like a massive phased array to produce
>> focused "gravitic beam/pulses" ?
>> Just something capable to disturb enemy sensors could be terrific
>> because it traslates into less effective enemy defences
>> and degraded guidance for enemy weapons.
>
> It wouldn't surprise me if they already do something just like
> that, at least on a passive regime, although once the shooting starts,
> station-keeping becomes problematical.
>
> Otherwise, what you seem to be describing, as an active system, is
> a fleet-wide (god help us) grav lance.

No, my idea was that in "active mode" the "gravitic phased array"
"adds gravitic noise" to specific targets or to specific volumes
of space or "gives an extra push" to some of the missiles launched
against the enemy.

>> c) SESD MIRV (Suppression of Enemy Defense MIRV)
>>
>> Like multi stage missiles, but their third stage is 3..4
>> countermissiles-like warheads designed to gut the enemy defense system
>> (i.e. to damage sensors,laser emitters, countermissile launchers
>> and anything that's vulnerable on the outer parts of a ship).
>> Packing enough of them in the first wave of missiles will open the path
>> for the second wave.
>
> I'm not going to say this is a /bad/ idea, but what you've tasked
> these things to do is pretty much what the shipkillers are doing
> anyway: they poke holes in the target's defenses by... poking holes in
> the target. Then the follow-on waves generally have softer targeting
> environments.

Yes, basically the idea is what you wrote, the advantage is
that the enemy has limitations on defensive firepower and allocates
it based on what it knows/guess about the incoming missiles and LACs.

But they have other advantages.
Maybe MIRV is not the best definition, thinking about it they are
better described as MTM (Multiple Targetting Missile) because
when the "third stage missile pack" ignites, the "third stage missiles"
can be aimed against multiple targets, or perform a syncronized attack
against a single target or a mix of that.

Until third stage activation, an MTM looks like a standard capital missile
even if the enemy has been able to defeat ECM or if it guessed right
about the missile flight profile, so in the worst case the enemy allocated
a certain number of countermissiles already in flight to
intercept it or others nearby at the best odds it can guess.
Suddenly, when the third stage ignites and the MTM breaks cover
the enemy suddenly has to allocate new resources to stop the
extra (smaller and more agile) missiles that pop up on its sensors
and has less time available, both these things raise the probability
that at least one of the third stage missiles will be able to hit.
First and second stage of MTMs are the same of a three stage MDM
and MTM's "third stage missiles" are a lot like countermissiles
(the biggest difference is different programming and their warhead, but
they can be produced with lots of components in common).

One of the potential advantages of MTM missiles is in production
and logistics, plus flexibility in usage (i.e they may also serve
as an effective long range anti-LAC weapon, because a single MTM
in the proper context can engage multiple LACs).

Plus, as I said before, if the third stage missile separation
is designed to look like a failing MDM or a countermissile hitting
it, the odds of full multiple target hits further increase
because the enemy defenses will further delay the allocation
of defesive resources against the third stage missiles.

I guess the MTM idea lends itself for lots of interesting plots, for
example:
a) because of a successful enemy blockade of the wormhole to Manticore
a task force trapped on the Talbot side of the wormhole
and running low on missiles has to resupply ASAP to launch a
counterattack and retake the wormhole before it's too late, the
logistic base was alredy running low on inventory
and the local factories are not yet able to produce all the parts
needed but somebody tries to improvise a complete MDM with
a third stage made with a modified countermissile cannister;
the result is sort of poor man's MDM but the initial confusion
they create and the real MDMs mixed in the missile waves
will barely save the day;
b) Haven develops the MTM before Manticore because they
provide its SD(P) with improved long range anti-LAC defense;
c) Because they are more flexible (for example, the way the
third stage missile packs can be programmed to engage the enemy ships)
it is possible to use them in more creative ways, for example
reprogramming the MTMs to "launch" their third stage prematurely
as an additional antimissile defense when the ship
is desperately fighting to survive long enough to reach the hyper limit.

>> d) swarm pods with delayed activation
>
> Dropping pods on ballistic courses against a /mobile/ defensive
> force could be a mite... problematic.
>
> Despite all you do to try to chivvy the defenders onto the track
> you want, they may not cooperate. Then you've wasted all those pods.

They are "dropped" at relativistic speeds, with trajectories making them
escape from the stellar system if possible, so if they are not used
and when activated they stayed in passive mode, it is possible to put
them back in sleep mode, this way a cargo ship can recollect lots of
them once they are at safety distance some days later.

> Also, it'd be kinda tough to get a no- or low-acceleration pod
> into position several lightminutes inside the Limit when your primary
> 'stalking horse' will be employing several hundred gs of accel to get
> itself into position.
>
> Just like Thurston's problems with Operation Dagger, using a plan
> that /requires/ your enemy to do what you want is a great way to screw
> it up, fast.

The idea is that instead of using extra SD(P) you just need modified cargos
to deploy and recover the swarm pods, and then even a single light cruiser
posing as the "main task force" can selectively switch to active mode
multiple swarms and use them (in a more ineffective way compared
to a SD(P), but quantity becomes a quality on its own if it's high enough).

It's not a matter of requiring the enemy do what you want, it's more
a way to have either a "ballistic minefield" or a "protected route"
using just modified pods and cargo ships instead of using a bigger
task force with more SD(P) or using a real enormous minefield.

Plus if the objective is a "slow mover" (i.e. industrial infrastructure
in an asteroid belt, a military space station, etc. etc) and there
are no "Eridani sensitive" planets nearby, you just have to use
a modified courier ship for final targeting and activate
the pods with launch authorization, the same applies for the
first missile wave for surprise attacks against "fortified" wormholes.

After AAC, both Haven and Manticore and its allies have lost lots
of battleships, but they both have lots of cargos, plus pods
can be produced a lot faster and in bigger quantities
(and later they can be "recycled" for SD(P) ), plus there
are others like Torch that do not have "real" battleships
and may be looking for "creative stopgag solutions".

I know I'm not talking about new uberweapons, but they have a potential
at least for interesting plots in "desperate" scenarios.

L. Micheletto
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dsample

External


Since: Jul 01, 2004
Posts: 312



(Msg. 51) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:36 am
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article ,
"Robert A. Woodward" wrote:

> In article ,
> Don Sample wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > "Robert A. Woodward" wrote:
> >
> > > In article ,
> > > Don Sample wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article
> > > > ,
> > > > Ben H wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Jan 1, 4:21 pm, Dahak
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:39:01 -0500, an orbiting mind-control laser
> > > > > > made Don Sample write:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Recall that the /Harvest Joy/, a ship expressly designed
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> explore potentially random spots took a vague, but significant,
> > > > > > >> non-trivial amount of time to determine her position upon her
> > > > > > >> arrival
> > > > > > >> at Lynx.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Which was something that was patently silly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So... you'll ignore it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, how long do you expect it should take to do an all-sky
> > > > > > survey,
> > > > > > filter out the hundred brightest stars, then develop detailed
> > > > > > enough
> > > > > > spectrograms on each one to run against your database?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -JPB
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *shrug*
> > > > > I'm just an amateur astronomer, so there might be better informed
> > > > > heads in these lofty circles, but analyzing just the brightest
> > > > > _hundred_ stars shouldn't be difficult, or time consuming at all. The
> > > > > warships after all carry optics capable of picking up a mere
> > > > > spaceship
> > > > > at considerable ranges, running a spectrogram on a particularly
> > > > > bright
> > > > > star should be easy.
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem comes with figuring out just what the hell that means.
> > > > > Sure I can say "Betelgeuse is over there, and thirty degrees east of
> > > > > it there's Arcturus" but thats not significantly useful, without
> > > > > already having a strong indication of where you're at.
> > > > > You need to have a good idea of how far you are from these stars
> > > > > before their positions in the "sky" are of great use.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Two stars will put you somewhere on the surface of a shell. Add a
> > > > third,
> > > > and you've got yourself a point.
> > >
> > > You need FOUR stars. 2 stars and you define a plane. A third star,
> > > you, and the first star define another plane, which intersects the
> > > first plane to form a line. A fourth star, you, and one of the 1st
> > > 3 stars defines another plane, which intersects the line at a
> > > point. That's where you are.
> >
> > The angle between stars A and B gives you one plane
> > The angle between stars B and C gives you a second plane.
> > The angle between stars A and C gives you a third plane.
>
> Stars A, B, and C form a plane. There are two points that give you
> those angles; one "above" the plane and one "below".

That's only true if you can't tell the stars apart, but you can.

From one side you see:

A

B
C

From the other you see:

A

B
C

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Offbreed

External


Since: Apr 13, 2005
Posts: 440



(Msg. 52) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Ben H wrote:
> On Jan 1, 6:55 pm, a....RemoveThis@pobox.com (Aahz Maruch) wrote:
>> There's also the issue that because you don't know where you are, you
>> have no clue what your vector is and therefore you don't know what
>> red/blue shift to apply to each spectrogram.
>> --
>> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
>> <*> <*> <*>
>> Seventeenth Virtual Anniversary: 365 days and counting
>
> Presumably the entire spectra of the star would be shifted. You don't
> have to perfectly match the spectra, just show coorelated bands.

It'd be like reading a bar code with junk on one end or the other.
Absorption line /patterns/ are, AFAIK, unique.
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
user341

External


Since: Jul 11, 2004
Posts: 59



(Msg. 53) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Dahak wrote i

> Ship-launched capital missiles already have multiple 'MIRVed'
> warheads that do exactly that: they form a small array to improve
> their targeting.
>
> How they maneuver and stay in formation within a running missile
> drive wedge, has never been elaborated upon.

Has MIRV appeared other than in infodumps ?

I have always assumed that the missile goes ballistic, the wedge is
dropped, and then the MIRVs separate, optimise their positions, and
agree to go bang ("agree" so as to avoid fratricide). It may also be
possible to cease to accelerate but postpone dropping the wedge thus
giving a little more protection from laser point defense.

Assuming the traditional "missiles don't have compensators" I don't
think anything else is possible within canon. With a compensator field
since "tractored within the wedge" is possible so, IMO, is manoeuver.

--
Mike D
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dahak_ii

External


Since: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 132



(Msg. 54) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On 2 Jan 2008 12:08:56 GMT, an orbiting mind-control laser made
"Michael R N Dolbear" write:

>Has MIRV appeared other than in infodumps ?

It may have been alluded to once or twice, but I can't recall
where. At the moment, I'd have to say no.

>I have always assumed that the missile goes ballistic, the wedge is
>dropped, and then the MIRVs separate, optimise their positions, and
>agree to go bang ("agree" so as to avoid fratricide). It may also be
>possible to cease to accelerate but postpone dropping the wedge thus
>giving a little more protection from laser point defense.

But going ballistic at those ranges is suicide.

And even if they could keep the wedge up at zero accel (unlikely
as that would be 'varying the accel of a running missile,' explicitly
rejected by Himself.), at that point, the wide-open throat would be
bearing on all those lovely point-defense clusters.

>Assuming the traditional "missiles don't have compensators" I don't
>think anything else is possible within canon. With a compensator field
>since "tractored within the wedge" is possible so, IMO, is manoeuver.

I agree... I can't see how they could maneuver freely with an
accelerating warhead bus.


-JPB
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
user341

External


Since: Jul 11, 2004
Posts: 59



(Msg. 55) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:08 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Aahz Maruch wrote

> Ben H wrote:

> >I'm just an amateur astronomer, so there might be better informed
> >heads in these lofty circles, but analyzing just the brightest
> >_hundred_ stars shouldn't be difficult, or time consuming at all.
The
> >warships after all carry optics capable of picking up a mere
spaceship
> >at considerable ranges, running a spectrogram on a particularly
bright
> >star should be easy.
>
> There's also the issue that because you don't know where you are, you
> have no clue what your vector is and therefore you don't know what
> red/blue shift to apply to each spectrogram.

For the _Harvest Joy_ problem, the hundred brightest stars are not what
you want to start with since they will be brightest because they are
closest ("local dazzle"). Nor do you care about distances yet, just
angles for triangulation.

Thus locate a set of galaxies like Andromeda and/or pulsars and check
them in the catalogue. The angles will give you a starting position in
our galaxy and their spectra red shifts compared with catalogue your
current vector velocity.

You then repeat selecting a set of intrinsically bright stars based on
your estimated position and finally calculate what stars should be the
"hundred brightest" *here* and compare with the actuals. Problems will
include variable stars, flare stars, stars that have gone nova but no
one has updated the catalog yet, dim stars that are close to you but
are so dim as to be missing from the catalogue etc etc.

Time taken for the last stage would depend on how such many problems
needed a manual check, for the first stage on how many parallel
channels can work on the "find a galaxy" survey.

Actually _Harvest Joy_ had two problems, The first was "where are we
galactically", answer 4 lightyears from Lynx, direction vector such and
such.

The second was to locate the local terminus wormhole accurately enough
to be able to return. The accuracy needed for that, especially in a
planetless system, is probably beyond us today (I assume the terminus
is bound in some way to the nearest star).

Note that ordinary inerstellar navigation doesn't need either of these
techniques; a ship drops out at the hyper limit, checks the brightness
and doppler shift of the really bright stars that show a disc then sets
a course for the planet and a terminus has beacons.











--
Mike D
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
user341

External


Since: Jul 11, 2004
Posts: 59



(Msg. 56) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:09 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Dahak wrote

> There is /also/ a minimum delay between the time you hit the
> button to start your boost into hyper and when the field builds high
> enough to actually translate.

Textev ? Infodump ?

The sole account of a junction transit that mentions "Hyperspace now!"
doesn't have any apparent delay.

SoSag has "There was a safety margin of almost fifteen seconds on
either side of the critical threshold" ?

--
Mike D
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dahak_ii

External


Since: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 132



(Msg. 57) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:09 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On 2 Jan 2008 12:09:03 GMT, an orbiting mind-control laser made
"Michael R N Dolbear" write:

>Dahak wrote
>
>> There is /also/ a minimum delay between the time you hit the
>> button to start your boost into hyper and when the field builds high
>> enough to actually translate.
>
>Textev ? Infodump ?
>
>The sole account of a junction transit that mentions "Hyperspace now!"
>doesn't have any apparent delay.
>
>SoSag has "There was a safety margin of almost fifteen seconds on
>either side of the critical threshold" ?

There was a posting by DW to the Bar detailing hyper generators in
relation to Chin's failure to escape into hyper at the end of /At All
Costs./

Oddly, I don't see it on the Infodump.

I'll add it tonight.

And, now that I think about it, it does tend to conflict with the
bits regarding Junction Transits.



Another example of a laggardly boost into hyper would be
Darlington's attack on the Basilisk Terminus.

-JPB
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
dahak_ii

External


Since: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 132



(Msg. 58) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On 2 Jan 2008 12:09:03 GMT, an orbiting mind-control laser made
"Michael R N Dolbear" write:

>
>Dahak wrote
>
>> There is /also/ a minimum delay between the time you hit the
>> button to start your boost into hyper and when the field builds high
>> enough to actually translate.
>
>Textev ? Infodump ?
>
>The sole account of a junction transit that mentions "Hyperspace now!"
>doesn't have any apparent delay.
>
>SoSag has "There was a safety margin of almost fifteen seconds on
>either side of the critical threshold" ?



http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/Harrington/hh_climax_to_the_battl...f_manti


-JPB
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Loren Pechtel

External


Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 428



(Msg. 59) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:58 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:49:33 GMT, Brian McDonald
wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:02:35 -0500, Don Sample
>wrote:
>
>
>>> At detonation ranges, any missiles with a decent chance of hitting
>>> the target are no longer actually maneuvering defensively: they're
>>> busy settling into a direct approach so that they can sight their
>>> target, which simplifies the PD firing solution immensely - there's
>>> little to no bearing change.
>>
>>Even if it can't change its vector by much, just cutting the drive at
>>some point during that 1/10 of a second makes it a pretty much
>>impossible targeting problem.
>>
>>And a tenth of a second is a very long time, even for current computers.
>>The missile can make a random vector change, and then spend the next
>>.099999 seconds finding its target, aiming at it and then detonating.
>
>
>ok think i got what was bothering me. bomb pumped xray lasers depend
>on those laser tubes to generate their beams of doom. from what i've
>read those things need to be perfectly aligned to work right and by
>perfectly i mean within very very tiny tolerances. seems to me that
>building something like that to withstand high speed maneuvering is
>going to be somewhere between incredibly difficult and just plain
>impossible. i don't think they can really do any terminal maneuvering
>without rendering themselves largely ineffective as weapon over this.

Yeah, that's probably the answer. I would think the warheads have to
go ballistic while they deploy.
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Loren Pechtel

External


Since: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 428



(Msg. 60) Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:58 pm
Post subject: Re: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 14:48:30 -0800 (PST), Ben H
wrote:

>The problem comes with figuring out just what the hell that means.
>Sure I can say "Betelgeuse is over there, and thirty degrees east of
>it there's Arcturus" but thats not significantly useful, without
>already having a strong indication of where you're at.
>You need to have a good idea of how far you are from these stars
>before their positions in the "sky" are of great use. Differences in
>magnitude will give you a good idea, but you're really going to want
>something like a Cepheid variable, where you _know_ its absolute
>magnitude. So what you're going to end up looking for aren't the
>hundred brightest stars, but rather the 50 closest Cepheids. Which
>_will_ take time, since you've got to find them
>
>Parallax could be used, but its incredibly time consuming.
>The Hipparcos sattelite only measured the parallax of 118,000 stars in
>a four year period.

Actually, it shouldn't be hard if all you are interested in is what
star system you are in.

Forget about the brightest stars, what you want is blue stars, not red
ones. Get vectors to the stars, use the spectrascope to identify
them. 3 stars should give you enough data for a solution.

It doesn't make much sense, though, in most cases--turn your
spectrascope on the nearby star--you'll get your system from *ONE*
data point then!

Trying to get a location more accurate than a star system from stellar
measurements would be quite hard, though.
 >> Stay informed about: Ideas for honorverse space navy improvements? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Maps of the Honorverse - Hi, I am new to this group. I have been searching the web looking for maps of the "Honorverse". I have found several but not in the detail I am interested in. They are all "schematic" but I am more interested in x/y coordinate syst...

Honorverse Cosplay? - So, I've gotten it in my head to do a Honor Harrington cosplay of some sort for sci-fi cons in Texas. I'm kind of a short guy, so I figured I might cosplay as a Grayson officer. Any suggestions on how to do this? I was thinking getting a surplus Air...

Getting the whole honorverse in one bundle - Hi, Could you suggest the best Internet place to get the whole HH series (all 17 books so far) in one bundle (in US)? What's the best deal on such a wholesale (both hardcover and paperback series)? thanks

Honorverse: Dramatis Personae - Hi everybody, is there a list in the web with all the people acting in the different stories? Such that it is possible to find out when e.g. Alice Truman possessed what rank? TIA Michael Dahms

Honorverse: Body Count? - If you consider the Manticore-Haven war as starting in "On Basilisk Station," has anyone ever worked out total casualty figures for the Manties, the Peeps, and the Graysons respectively? Compared and contrasted to any total population data we m...
   Book Forums (Home) -> David Weber All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 4 of 5

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Warning: fopen(/home/adsense_reject.txt) [function.fopen]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1142

Warning: fwrite(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1143

Warning: fclose(): supplied argument is not a valid stream resource in /home/autoforu/public_html/Giga/GigaFunctions.php on line 1144



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]