History Analysis / SpaceFighter

12th Sep '16 11:41:12 AM sith15
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

!!A14. Time Lag

As noted in B9, space combat may take place at extreme ranges measuring in light seconds or even minutes. At such ranges, even lasers have to lead and predict the movements of their targets, making lasers more akin to naval artillery shells, and the overall battle much like an old fashioned battleship duel. A large craft like a battleship or even a cruiser would have its ability to maneuver and change course limited by its mass and volume. However, small craft could use its size to its advantage to make it significantly harder to lead. Thus, space fighters could get much closer to the enemy than its larger companions while maintaining the same relative ability to evade incoming fire, while having an advantage in their own accuracy due to the decreased range.


31st Jul '16 12:20:29 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake or maneuver in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.

to:

Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners InertialDampening aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will be stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake or maneuver in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.
31st Jul '16 12:12:54 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake or maneuver in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.



Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.

to:

Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.
6th Jun '16 2:50:15 PM ScorpiusOB1
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

Another issue related to B8 is acceleration. InertialDampeners aside, a small space fighter may be able to reach a higher acceleration than, say, a capital ship but the former having small fuel reserves will stuck at a certain velocity (you'd better save fuel to brake in both cases), while the larger ship even if it had a far worse acceleration could maintain it for a longer time as it has far more fuel, eventually overtaking the fighter.
20th Jan '16 4:00:30 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


As for the cloud thing, you don't need fighters to overcome. You can send recon drones or infantry spotters. If defences are so strong that even those can't get through, you should still be working on orbital superiority rather than bombing.

Anything you need to capture intact, or is placed somewhere you can't bombard from air or orbit ''a la'' Literature/TheGunsOfNavarone, you should be sending in the {{Space Marine}}s anyway.

to:

As for the cloud thing, you don't need fighters to overcome. You can send recon drones or infantry spotters. If defences are so strong that even those can't get through, you should still be working on orbital superiority and destroying orbit-to-surface defences rather than bombing.

whatever else you need more precise aiming for.

Anything you need to capture intact, or is placed somewhere you can't bombard from air or orbit ''a la'' Literature/TheGunsOfNavarone, you should be sending in the {{Space Marine}}s anyway.
anyway. Precision guided munitions can only be so precise after all, so if it's something that precious, you should be using boots on the ground, not fire support.
4th Jan '16 2:58:22 PM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


By simple physics, a small fighter just can't carry as much fuel and ammo as a larger warship. And unlike naval gun fire support, where targets can be far enough inland that a fighter can reach but a ship's guns cannot, almost everything planetside can be hit with the right orbit. Maybe for some reason you can't or don't want to dedicate an all-up battleship to fire support, but some kind of corvette or gunboat equivalent would still be able to remain on station longer than a fighter squadron.

to:

By simple physics, a small fighter just can't carry as much fuel and ammo as a larger warship. And unlike naval gun fire support, where targets can be far enough inland that a fighter can reach but a ship's guns cannot, almost everything planetside can be hit with the right orbit. Maybe for some reason you can't or don't want to dedicate an all-up battleship to fire support, but some kind of corvette or gunboat equivalent would still be able to remain on station longer than a fighter squadron.
squadron, which would have to more frequently return to the safely-distant carrier for refuelling and rearming.

As for the cloud thing, you don't need fighters to overcome. You can send recon drones or infantry spotters. If defences are so strong that even those can't get through, you should still be working on orbital superiority rather than bombing.



Yes, you can refuel a fighter. But what about its ammo? Unless it's purely armed with energy weapons and unguided, non self-propelled cannon, the MobileFactory converting {{Asteroid Mine|rs}}d resources into munitions will also need to produce complicated electronics for drives and sensors. And from there it's a stone's throw to producing missiles.

to:

Yes, you can refuel a fighter. But what about its ammo? Unless it's purely armed with energy weapons and unguided, non self-propelled cannon, the MobileFactory converting {{Asteroid Mine|rs}}d resources into munitions will also need to produce complicated electronics for drives drives/engines and sensors. And from there it's a stone's throw to producing missiles.
31st Dec '15 2:30:21 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


By simple physics, a small fighter just can't carry as much fuel and ammo as a larger warship. And unlike naval gun fire support, where targets can be far enough inland that a fighter can reach but a ship's guns cannot, almost everything planetside can be hit with the right orbit. Maybe for some reason you don't want to dedicate an all-up battleship to fire support, but some kind of corvette or gunboat equivalent would still be able to remain on station longer than a fighter squadron.

to:

By simple physics, a small fighter just can't carry as much fuel and ammo as a larger warship. And unlike naval gun fire support, where targets can be far enough inland that a fighter can reach but a ship's guns cannot, almost everything planetside can be hit with the right orbit. Maybe for some reason you can't or don't want to dedicate an all-up battleship to fire support, but some kind of corvette or gunboat equivalent would still be able to remain on station longer than a fighter squadron.



!!B12. A13 is not actually an argument for or against fighters, merely against missiles

to:

!!B12. A13 is not actually an argument for or against fighters, merely against missilesmissiles. And not a very strong one either.
Yes, you can refuel a fighter. But what about its ammo? Unless it's purely armed with energy weapons and unguided, non self-propelled cannon, the MobileFactory converting {{Asteroid Mine|rs}}d resources into munitions will also need to produce complicated electronics for drives and sensors. And from there it's a stone's throw to producing missiles.

Back on topic, if said MobileFactory can produce fuel and ammo for fighters, it would merely be a matter of scaling up to produce supplies for larger warships too. Unless, of course, there are arbitrary restrictions on this.
31st Dec '15 2:00:58 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message
31st Dec '15 1:59:14 AM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:


!!B11. Exactly because there are planets and celestials.
All the so-called weaknesses mentioned in A7 and A12 apply equally to fighters. If a missile can't do the acrobatics needed for close quarter combat in an AsteroidThicket, neither will it be possible with a larger, less agile fighter unless there is blatant PlotArmor. And complaining about the speed of a larger warship while playing up an even faster fighter is silly.

By simple physics, a small fighter just can't carry as much fuel and ammo as a larger warship. And unlike naval gun fire support, where targets can be far enough inland that a fighter can reach but a ship's guns cannot, almost everything planetside can be hit with the right orbit. Maybe for some reason you don't want to dedicate an all-up battleship to fire support, but some kind of corvette or gunboat equivalent would still be able to remain on station longer than a fighter squadron.

Anything you need to capture intact, or is placed somewhere you can't bombard from air or orbit ''a la'' Literature/TheGunsOfNavarone, you should be sending in the {{Space Marine}}s anyway.

!!B12. A13 is not actually an argument for or against fighters, merely against missiles
28th Dec '15 3:01:59 PM GentlemensDame883
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Approaching A9 from the other side, depending on how the technology pans out, the different roles a spacecraft's crew has to handle may get more complex, such that the traditional fighter's pilot-weapon systems officer two-man crew may no longer be adequate and larger crews are needed. In such a situation, crew complements could balloon to the point where they more closely resemble fast attack craft or patrol boats'. As such, although they might still technically count as "fighters" by virtue of being short-legged and reliant on carriers for operating away from friendly ports, their doctrine would necessarily differ from traditional fighters'. Once again, see the Honorverse's light attack craft for an existing example.

to:

Approaching A9 from the other side, depending on how the technology pans out, the different roles a spacecraft's crew has to handle may get more complex, such that the traditional fighter's pilot-weapon systems officer two-man crew may no longer be adequate and larger crews are needed. For example, sensors could get more advanced and complex without data-analysis AI or software keeping up, resulting in the need to spin off a dedicated sensor officer to keep track of what's going on in the fight. In such a situation, crew complements could balloon to the point where they more closely resemble fast attack craft or patrol boats'. As such, although they might still technically count as "fighters" by virtue of being short-legged and reliant on carriers for operating away from friendly ports, their doctrine would necessarily differ from traditional fighters'. Once again, see the Honorverse's light attack craft for an existing example.
This list shows the last 10 events of 94. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Analysis.SpaceFighter