Just a question to gamers/astophiles (I think thats the term ! And I
don't mean the green stuff!!)
When in Sci-fi (or FT) you jump into a system , it always appears that
you are beyond the outermost planet. Hence the 'defenders' have time to muster
a defence and come out to meet you (Cut the last jump close as the KV did in a
MT senario and you shorten the muster). What I want to know is why is it
always on the solar plane? I would have thought that jumping in over the poles
of star would mean you could be 'in system'. The solar wind (Correct me
please) is concentrated along the plane so polar jumps would be safer (same
with debris)? What gravitationally would the difference be? (fast spiral as
opposed to a drag orbit?)
On a gravity space-time distortion map I would have assumed no
distinction between planear and polar
Jon(T.C.) How the hell are we assuming H-space works anyway RE FT II ?
Sprayforming Developments Ltd. [production tools]
made in
[prototype times]
'The future is now'
Off the plane of the ecliptic there ain't a whole lot of cover. The last thing
i would want in attacking a star system is to be completely naked ready for
those LR missiles to come cruising in from every darn weapon platform in the
system.....
> Sprayform wrote:
I had always thought that it works a little like B5 H-space, in that if
you open a hole into H-space, any ships with you can enter also. If it
isn't like that, but more like Traveller's system, where every ship
jumps into H-space by itself, and has a +or- 10% time and distance to
where and when it breaksout, so attacking fleets come in spread out over a lot
of space. This has significant effects on the strategy of system invasions. It
makes things like Battle Riders and Carriers MUCH more important, because they
are a large force transitting into a system simultaneously, in one spot. If on
the other hand, the ships FTL drive can be slaved to each other, this is a
tremondous advantage to the attacker, who can jump into the system at any
point, while the defender must garrison all the important points of the
system.
Mainly, i was thinking an attacker would be wise to jump in WAY out
of the system and attempt to Boost/Glide and use natural assets like
planets or asteroid fields to mask his approach and course changes. Using a
planet's gravity well to assist with course changes etc. Only when near a
potential target would you light off the drives and radiate a signature. Most
drives in RL radiate a lot of energy be it chemical or radiation (I mean how
stealthy can you be in an ORION for instance) by USING a system's terrain for
a planned incursion, an attacker could maximize his potential for tactical
surprise....
> sprayform.dev@netwales.co.uk writes:
@:) What I want to know is why is it always on the solar plane? I @:) would
have thought that jumping in over the poles of star would @:) mean you could
be 'in system'.
Steve Pugh had a bunch of good answers to this. Remember also that if you want
to perform multiple gravitational assists, you'll need to stay in the plane of
the eccliptic since that's where the planets are, by and large. Whether that's
a factor varies from one SF setting to the next.
> That Sprayform chap wrote:
As 99% of a systems mass in usually concentrated in the primary, there will
only be tiny differences in the gravity fields caused by the planets. So yes,
jumping in on or off the plane will put you about as far out from the star.
But you don't wnat to get to the star, you want to get to a planet somewhere.
Assume you can appear anywhere on a sphere of radius R. Now you want to get to
a planet with orbital radius r. The shortest distance you
can travel is R-r. Which requires you to appear on the same radial as
the planet. It's simple vector addition! ;-)
Anyway, that's one reason why you might want to jump in on the plane.
The plane is more cluttered with dust, micro-asteroids and so on.
Also there are those planets and planetoids. They may slow you down a bit, but
only in SciFi movies are asteroid belts dense enough to be a naviagtion
hazard. NASA hasn't lost a single probe in the asteroid belt as far as I'm
aware. (Okay so the number of probes going beyond it is in single figures, but
you get the point.) If you can buy that this clutter will slow you down, you
must also buy that the clutter will help to prevent your detection.
> From a non-military point of view, rescue in an emergency will
> How the hell are we assuming H-space works anyway RE FT II ?
I don't think FT has a hyper-space like Star Wars or Babylon 5. I
think jumps are instantaneous, but limited in range and you need to spend time
recharging between them. Yep, checked More Thrust and that seems to be the
case. There's some PSB on page 34 of MT.
Cheers,
> Christopher Pratt writes:
@:) yeah...but would'nt it be easier if coming in from the zenith or @:)
[nadir] points of a star to cruse up or down to a planet, reletative @:) to
the star of course
If you don't know where in its orbit the planet will be it might be
sensible to come in this way - so you are never further from the
planet than its orbital radius (well, in the x direction anyway). On the other
hand, if you want to stop when you get there and you don't have unlimited
fuel, the ecliptic plane is the place to be.
> To: ftgzg-l@bolton.ac.uk
> Just a question to gamers/astophiles (I think thats the term ! And I
I don't think this will answer your question but I had come up with an idea
for system assaults for a campaign game. Basically it works on the idea that
the nearer you jump to a heavenly body (Claudia Schiffer whoever) the more the
gravity well will affect you. If you jump in too close then the ship blows up.
If you happen to have good navigators then you can probably make it futher
into the system with some damage. If you take the safe way out then you give
the defenders time to muster an effective defense. This idea borrows somewhat
from the Renegade Legion strategic game Prefect. In the space component of the
game the map is broken into 7 bands around the system primary numbere 1 to 7
from the primary. To jump into band 1 you needed extraordinary navigators and
enormous amounts of luck. The further out you jump into the easier it is.
T.C. writes
[...]
> What I want to know is why is it always on the solar plane? I would
Solar wind is a pretty uniform thing. See, it's just a-radiating away
from the star, and the star radiates in all directions, no one direction
moreso than another (well, pulsars aside; we're talking your 'generic' star
here).
You can think of the light you see from the star/sun part of the solar
wind. Doesn't diminish when looking at it from the polar regions vs the
equatorial regions.
> (same with debris)?
Debris is another matter, as most mass associated with a solar system
will be concentrated in/near the plane of the ecliptic. However, the
amount of mass that is in the plane is *so* minute, it really doesn't pose
much of a worry or problem.
For example, take a dime (or any other suitable coin with a person's face on
it). Check out the size of the eyeball on the coin. Let's say that the eyeball
is...the size of Jupiter! Scaled down, of course. Now, place said
coin in such a position so it is facing you - from 100 miles away. On
the other side of the coin, oh, say, 50 miles away, is a basketball (soccer
ball, what have you). Now...try not to hit the eyeball of the coin as you make
your way towards the basketball...
Okay, so it's a tad on the extreme side; I was just trying to make a point.
That point being that while the debris is concentrated into the plane of the
ecliptic, it is in reality not going to pose all that much of a problem. Try
to avoid hitting the *dime*, then, if you don't like the eyeball
analogy. ;-)
(so much for not coming in nekkid, eh, Mike? :-D )
In Hollywood it's a whole 'nuther ballgame.
So, use this for what you will (he says as everyone starts pulling out
'Dramatic License!' certificates for their games/scenarios ;-)
Mk
> For example, take a dime (or any other suitable coin with a person's
BTW, since I failed to make it clear, and I don't want anyone to be 'left in
the dark' (so to speak), the basketball represents the sun
(or any other suitable generic star; non-generic stars are to be
represented with American-shaped footballs).
:-)
Mk
If you read the background sections of FT & MT, it does explain the FTL
sequence. Effectively, the further you jump, the more inaccurate the landing.
Who wants to jump 5 light years only to find the entire fleet
re-emerges in the same spot. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!
(w) Brendan.Robertson @ employment.gov.au 'Neath Southern Skies
> Mike Wikan wrote:
One aspect of Star system attack I haven't seen mentioned yet is the use of
electronic countermeasures to feint and confuse the defenders. In Full Thrust
terms, it would be the tactic of sending in escorts and decoys, etc. with
Weasel systems to divert and confuse the enemy.
There has not been much mentioned in the rules on the grand tactical scale for
a system attack. Depending on the game universe, the FTL limit to the home
world or other High Value Location in a star system could have some distance
separating them to engage and divert an attacker. If there were multiple HVLs
in a star system worthy of an attack, a more rigorous and flexible defense
would be needed.
If whatever FTL technology you use allows entry into a solar systems at *any*
point, then there is no effective way to defend a solar system; it's just too
damn big to position any kind of ships to protect against all the
potential angles. Delta-V, thrust, etc., all prevent an adequate
coverage of the area (unless you have unlimited defensive resources).
An entry (jump) point metaphor allows strategic defense while at the same time
logically encouraging *realistic* battles.
Chris Klug Black Bear Design Strategy and Computer Games
(732) 866-1881
[quoted original message omitted]
In a message dated 97-09-10 14:44:02 EDT, you write:
<< > @:) What I want to know is why is it always on the solar plane? I
> @:) would have thought that jumping in over the poles of star would
yeah...but would'nt it be easier if coming in from the zenith or nadar points
of a star to cruse up or down to a planet, reletative to the star
of course
chris "still short on wit" pratt vlane10@flash.net
> [quoted text omitted]
Oooops!! Please let me defend against you, please. If you come against a
planet from that direction, all three orbital forts have simultaineous shots
at you!! If there is a moon with forts on or around it, it gets worse!!! On
the plane of the eliptic the moon will block till you get one or two of those.
Then you get to face the orbital defense fort one or two at a time. Also nukes
near L5 factories limit defenders fire patterns. The choice is between attack
from the zenith [frontal attack across the open into fixed defences] or
attacking in detail [one or two forts at a time] with covering terrain.
Geee I wonder why they come in on the planetary plane?
I don't mean to be rude but I couldn't help it.
----------
> From: Chris Klug <cklug@earthlink.net>
it's
> just too damn big to position any kind of ships to protect against all
You could also think of FTl travel the way Timothy Zahn portrays it in his
Conqueror series of books. A ship meshes in and out of hyperspace (i think)
but creates a tachyon wake that can be detected by planets or
other ships. The larger the ship/fleet the bigger the wake, so the
defender would have time to ready a defense. A neat little deversion he used
in the last book was a proposed attack on earth by an alien fleet using the
tachyon "cover" of a fleet of merchant ships flown by supposedly pacified
aliens.
Chris
> |
> Chris Klug writes:
@:) If whatever FTL technology you use allows entry into a solar @:) systems
at *any* point, then there is no effective way to defend a @:) solar system;
it's just too damn big to position any kind of ships
@:) to protect against all the potential angles. Delta-V, thrust,
@:) etc., all prevent an adequate coverage of the area (unless you @:) have
unlimited defensive resources).
Or high enough technology. I think a solar system is in some ways analogous to
an ocean, which can, to some extent, be defended. That's because, while oceans
are big, there are only a limited number of places that people want to go to
in them, and you can defend those and the logical approaches to them. Given
today's technology, I think it would take so long for an attacker to proceed
from the outer reaches of the system to the inner planets that the planet
under attack might as well build a defense force on the spot. Fleets would be
required
to defend small colonies and stations that are not self-sufficient.
@:) An entry (jump) point metaphor allows strategic defense while at @:) the
same time logically encouraging *realistic* battles.
While I think jump points work well enough, "realistic" is definitely a
subjective term when your talking about completely fictional material. Myself,
I prefer to keep the grand strategic assault, so I don't usually like
wormholes or jump points. Actually I think I prefer Star Trek's warp travel
which doesn't prevent ships from being detected or intercepted, it just makes
them fast.
> At 10:23 PM 9/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
it's
> just too damn big to position any kind of ships to protect against all
That's why in my own, home-brewed universe I have people jumping into
the corona (sp?) of stars. You fly into the star towards the jump point, and
come out the opposite jump point heading away from the star. Of course, heaven
help you if you miss...
> Mainly, i was thinking an attacker would be wise to jump in WAY out
I hate to put another damper on it (really), but in RL, this sort of
'attack' would take a reeeeeeaally long time to execute - on the order
of years or decades! Look how fast comets kick through our solar system.
They ain't puttin' along, either, and they can be affected/deflected
by gravitational influences (see also Shoemaker-Levy back in '94).
But unless you're making really close passes to your gravity well for
a boost/assist, the results will be pretty slow.
:-/
Mk
> On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Allan Goodall wrote:
> At 10:23 PM 9/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
it's
> >just too damn big to position any kind of ships to protect against
The CORONA of a star? Better have wonderous sheild-tech, even on
commercial vessels...sort of like in 'Mote in God's Eye' where the jump point
was inside some sort of dwarf star. They had to have fantastic sheilds and
radiators there...
I like the basic FT/MT idea, with open-ended jumping, but fleet cohesion
a problem and gravity wells fatal, both causing fleets to jump to the
outskirts of a system and form up on their way in to the strategic
objective - planet, moon, base, etc.
The poster (sorry forgot your name) who compared defending systems to
defending oceans seems right -- there's no way and no point to defending
some isolated bit of vacumn or water, only the strategic/important bits
need to have a fleet, wet or space, near them - Pearl Harbour, say, or
the appropriate colony planet, etc.
One idea I like is the idea of an exit from 'hyperspace' causing some sort
of shockwave/ripple that can be detected, giving the defenders of a
system
some warning and therefor time to form up. But if normal-space drives
aren't detectable at the ranges hyperspace-exit traces are, where your
attackers go after they enter your system is still a problem - so some
grand-tactical stealth movement/spoofing/etc is possible.
Just my $0.02.
> EPICS: Self-Guided Wilderness Tours wrote:
> >I hate to put another damper on it (really), but in RL, this sort of
As far as using Solar System terrain, how about jumping in system closer to
the star than your target and then approaching 'out of the sun', this ought to
give you some measure of visual and electronic masking. I'm
assuming FT ships have the sustained Delta-V capability to achieve this
sort of approach.
I also think the critical factor that determines the success or failure of
many of the recently listed tactics is detection range. In the FT universe at
what range would starships (taking precautions to be as stealthy as possible)
be detectable by spaceborne or planetary based early warning systems (optical
and electronic)?
For example: if we knew where to point it, would the Hubble ST be able to
resolve spacecraft or their emissions at any great range?
> Chris Klug wrote:
it's
> just too damn big to position any kind of ships to protect against all
> As far as using Solar System terrain, how about jumping in system
Ya know...that's a thought...
You *prolly* won't want to come literally 'straight out of the sun', though,
if you're approaching a planet with any kind of astronomical
research going on. Trust me on this. ;-) Come in off at a slight
angle.
> be detectable by spaceborne or planetary based early warning systems
The Hubble? Nah. If you get a chance, pull up some of the recent Mars images
we've taken. The resolution is good, great in fact, but to resolve individual
ships....unless they're fragging large...prolly won't happen (this assumes the
ships have masked themselves against
being highly reflective to light ;-). We can get a resolution down
to miles, but that's it with what we have available (if you check out the
images of Pluto's surface, we only have a resolution ~300 miles or so).
Mk