Space combat?

The thing is people like to take up that idea, and post away over and over again.

If anything, stealth in space is only good if it works on advanced sensors that cover quite a bit of space like the whole solar system...

likewise

In space you don't need windows to spot enemies. Your eyes will never spot one at the distances we are considering useful.

But stealth sure makes space combat so much more fun
I remember Almael killed the idea though, just don't remember how...gotta re-read the topic

It's good to see KOTS working again, it's been forever since i last visited

Yeah.Looks like Almael wants to keep it running as much as possible.I think when
the Alternative Worlds Forum started Zinv expected it to replace KOTS in a way,but looks like for now we still have both going.Which might not be too bad an idea.

I appreciate being popular but I would prefer it being by girls, though.

*grabs AlexT's hand**shakes*
Long time no see! I was missing your arts feed, there. ^_-

Common even if I kill certain misconceptions, I always encourage people to keep expressing their opinions. It's my believe in such freedom and I'm not going to deny it to anyone. I already proved that by my service.

Of course I, too, play games with all the misceptions, too.
btw. I was thinking of test-playing eve-online...so I may have to come to cross you in the future.

If you haven't noticed Kots does have a number of good hits and top scores on certain google search requests and not just for Seikai.
I think that's due to AN being closed. Otherwise AN's many ore great topics would get the better part of the cake. Here we got a number of good threads...

So I think I will just do similar threads to keep some consistency to our offerings. (more hobby specific)

Alternative Worlds has it's own charm which I will support with its own thread in its direction. (more anime specific, watching thread, reviews)
Then we got the Tenchi Forum, easy thing here.

Any other thoughts?

Nice to see you too Almael!

Almael wrote:Of course I, too, play games with all the misceptions, too.
btw. I was thinking of test-playing eve-online...so I may have to come to cross you in the future.

You should try it - EVE is one of the most "scientific" space games out there, you'll have a lot of misceptions to hunt Although game is not easy (or forgiving) one and time consuming, there are few other that are as deep and complex.
I wasn't playing for a long time now though - wasn't at home long enough, spent last couple of years traveling, but i heard it was getting better and better

A for KOTS forum - i guess those who seen the anime and then seek internet resources associated with it will likely search for the most "dedicated" site. Many people came to AN this way

Btw, how did we end up as Cadets?

Will, sometime later. I see. Otherwise I may consider joining your group if it's not all russian talk.
Good to hear you have not been "restricted".

Not only that, our starship thread for example is quite popular as well as this one and others.

Well, it seems when JGzinv uploaded the backup the ranks got lost. I fixed it for now. It may need a bit better calculated ranking. As of now it's kind of higher than before. Well, I can't build a better table just yet. However, I added lower crew ranks so newcomers easily climb up.

edit:
http://www.webstatsdomain.com/domains/kinofthestars.heavenforum.org/

Kinofthestars.heavenforum.org is ranked 108,253 in the world (among the 30 million domains). This site is relatively popular among users in the France. It gets 34.5% from France. This site is estimated worth $3,902USD. This site has a low Pagerank(1/10). It has 477 backlinks. It's good for seo website. Kinofthestars.heavenforum.org has 13% seo score. Kinofthestars.heavenforum.org is safe.

0.o

Well it has been awhile since most of us posted here,so it will be a rather educated guess as to the correct rankings.

All right since it's been a while since the following have been known widely and since I already linked them...

Here I give you
the original english translation by the firm of the russian work that made stealth possible:
Ufimtsev, P. Ya.. "Method of Edge Waves in the Physical Theory of Diffraction".

The research analysis on CIWS
Christian Wachsberger, Michael Lucas and Alexander Krstic. "Limitations of Guns as a Defence against Manoeuvring Air Weapons". DSTO Systems Sciences Laboratory.

How to design your bunker:
part1: Bulkhead design against blast
part2: Blastloading on structures
part3: building design

What does ETI stand for?

An easy acronym Extra Terrestrial Intelligence or so. An old naming scheme...
Just don't really see the reason for the TS designation. After all it's not saying anything anyone can't think of after a bit of thinking. or maybe because it was saying the truth about the UN being just a table to come and talk. That was actually the idea for the UN to begin with. Take politics 101 and you will learn all about nations & citizenship....

I don't think that was ever taught in Civics though.Do they even teach Civics any more?
Any way as we know now a lot of the UN is useless.

Dunno, don't remember seeing Civics 101, I took philosophy 101. Only took the interesting hard ones.

----------------------
Back to some stealth discussion.
Since the beans have been spilled for some time.

S*t*e*a*l*t*h * h*a*w*k

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Almael wrote:Dunno, don't remember seeing Civics 101, I took philosophy 101. Only took the interesting hard ones.

----------------------
Back to some stealth discussion.
Since the beans have been spilled for some time.

S*t*e*a*l*t*h * h*a*w*k

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Well hard and interesting are often the same thing.It's often more fun to have a challenge then to try to learn something that's easy.

That's right.
The movie mock up happens to be similar to released blueprints from the 80's. Of course the movie copper is smaller than a real black hawk, it's probably an Agusta AW139(italian) brand (eg Airwolf). There's a brand new boeing looking the same, too, but doubt that.

Since april, the germans flying the european Typhoon have been more than on par in dogfights with the F-22. Of course the Air Force is playing it down but it's not really that surprising. The F-22 had lost to F-16, and F-18 in the past. The F-18 lost to the X-31. The F-18 is very maneuverable but least powered (very bad). The X-31 being mostly german and similar to the Typhoon. The Typhoon is high powered but not as much as the F-22 in absolute numbers. It's sleeker and a lot more unstable, hence, it's basically more maneuverable than the F-22. The F-22 is a stable (glider), hence, needed vector trust.

My guess is because of this common aeronautic insights the russians and chineses have put canards on their stealth birds to boost maneuverability. Imho the russian integrated wing design is best.
Add russian vector trust and it's perhaps the most serious dog fighter.

Stealth is only good if you can use distance to your advantage and stay outside detection range. In our time, there's lots of birds flying which reduces the sure identification and forces visual id.
So stealth isn't that advantageous unless it's total war where you don't care about hitting some "innocence". That's why the japanese buying the F-35 was kind of unreasonable but it helps their main relationship.

My only problem with stealth stuff was always it's upreditability - there's no real way of knowing how close could it get without being spoted by radars so it's more of a bonus but not "tactical" feature...
No wonder there's no stealth transport helicopters, not even for covert ops use

As for identification - modern equipemnt is quite capable of identifying millitary stuff from civilian pretty well. A fresh idea would be to teach planes/helicopters to mimic civilian ones, though i doubt any official millitary doctrine would approve it (officially at least)

Well, it's possible to tell to a certain degree. For a normal aircraft you can tell that its detection range is half the distance from where you received the radar signal at max range. Modern software can calculate the energy from there. (just like in the games) Normal radar change the frequency if they tack. If they mark you they change the band and energy. You know you are being shot at.

Well, in good weather the F-14 camera can see a civil craft at about 110 km. But it's easy to mistake things especially when pilots are stressed in war time. Actually, here's how you infiltrate enemy air space.

From what i heard - it's more unpredictable than that. My father (he had experience with radars, it maybe be a bit outdated now though) used to tell that unless you have all the info on enemy radars, their positions, landscape, weather etc. - there's no sure way of knowing how close you can get.

The best use for stealth stuff in a modern world would be somekind of stealth transport (troop carrier) helicopter for at least 6-12 men.
Predators are good enough for everything else and they're sneaky

Interesting article, long though - guess i'll have to read it on iphone in train

Your father is right, and it does not apply to stealth aircrafts.
It does apply to normal aircraft or ones that don't have much stealth.
That's when they need to use landscape, valleys to make a stealthy approach.
And they need to know where the radars are etc.
Rain on one hand clouds radar but also makes the aircraft skin more reflective (ice, too).

In the modern world of stealth aircrafts the tactic is to fly high, hence, increase the distance to the radar as well as flying above the radar cone.
The advantage is that it can pass through the radar cone at max distance while flying above it at closer distance.
The F-22 flys at max service level which is 60-65000 feet (24400 m) or more. Many fighters are designed for 65000 feet as standard but aircrafts fly at 36000 to save fuel or 40000 at best.
Another advantage is to be able to fly a bit faster in the thin air and use gravity as an acceleration assist.

Another reason why they don't fly low is because the air is thick closer to the ground. The aircraft vibrate and may break up. It is stressful to the pilots. Fuel consumption is high because you need to burn all that air.
Up high you need to heat up a lot to get thrust from the thin air. About 36000 feet is ideal.
That's why there aren't many aircrafts build for low level flights: Panavia Tornado, B-1 bomber.
Because of stealth the F-22 has little fuel and cannot hold station as long as all other premier fighters.
The Su27 & co. (new stealth?) on the other hand have so much internal fuel it's futile to hope it to run out of fuel.

And the f-22 cannot be called up by anyone. It has limited communication only the higher ups can call it.
Something like some troopers in Transformers calling the F-22 is impossible.
Or should I say it's unrecallable unstoppable once let loose.
Btw. look out for the new "Total Recall" movie.

Design for Air Combat by Ray Whitford from 1987
Out of print and outdated. I wouldn't buy anything before 95, but the basics are still valid.

Good ideas are never really outdated.They just need to be updated and modified to keep up with the times.

One important issue needs some scientific scrutiny:

Being blown out into vacuum by sudden decompression of the room

I'm not going into what happens to the body, since you can read that everywhere and there are lots of medical docs about this.

I'm going to talk about the physics of the blow-out or explosive decompression.

There are some people arguing if it's being blown out or being sucked out. The reason for this is that gas tends to equalize pressure, therefore is being drawn to the vacuum. Hence, it is being sucked by the vacuum. But what about the human body? Well, the pressure in the room is x human, and 0 human in vacuum. However, humans do not automatically move toward the vacuum, hence, a human is not being sucked. Simple proof is to have a human in a vacuumed room and open the door to vacuum. Nothing would change.
So I'll side with humans are being blown out.

The problem is to determine how fast air escapes into vacuum. Well, if you know a bit of physics the logical bet is on the mach 1 speed because that's the highest speed at which a gas gives way.
However, movement always comes at a price of energy. And for a gas energy is provided by temperature and pressure. This leads us to gas molecule velocity, the inert velocity at a certain state.
http://www.chemteam.info/GasLaw/gas-velocity.html

v = √(3RT/M) , with R = 8.31447 J mol^(-1) K^(-1); M = the molar mass of the substance, expressed in kilograms; T in Kelvin; v in m/s

You should have heard about this in highschool and done some calcs in college/university.

Lets take an average cargo bay on a starship with a an area of 20x20 m. Air density is 1.2041 kg per m^3, 20 C degrees and 1 bar pressure.
A human silhouette is supposed to be 1000 in^2 = 0.64516 m^2 (I dunno if this is correct since skin area is 2 m^2).
Air molecule mass is 28.97 kg

Lets say a human stand right in the middle, 10 m away from the inner wall. Then the room's outer wall, force field or door is suddenly gone.
The air mass between the human and the inner wall is
0.64516 m^2 * 1.2041 kg/m^3 * 10 m =7.76837156 kg
Due to air's composition lets just say the gas velocity is about 650 m/s instead of the close to 700m/s.

Is that enough to blow a human? Well, taht depends on the Impulse.

I = F t = m v, with F force, t time, m mass, v final velocity.

With this we can calculate how fast a human is being blown.
An average human weights 180 lb = 81.72 kg.
This gives us I = air mass * air speed = human mass * blown speed.
We get
blown speed = (air mass * air speed) / human mass
=(7.76837156 kg * 650 m/s) / 81.72 kg
=61.789543734703866862457170827215 m/s

So a human gets blown away at about 62 m/s (223.2 kmph) if he stands 10 m away from the inner wall. That nearly as fast as a normal parachute jumper's maximum speed.

Since things are linear in this case (under the same conditions) you can just say a human gets blown away at 6.2 m/s for every m distance from the inner wall. As long as the distance is less than the gas velocity, though. That means max blown speed possible depends on the gas velocity, and at least a room of a size for it to need a second to cross.


Edit: Forgot to mention this does not account for human aerodynamics.
If I remember right a sphere is c=0.47 so taking this into account the forces applied are halfed, hence, the blown speed too.

I take it you mean the normal human male weighs 180.

Overall it doesn't matter if you describe it has sucked or blown,you're still dead.

Yes, it's the average human male. It applies for most of the world. Nowaday, we got slightly heavier, tough. There were some nice tables on the net but can't seem to be able to find it again.
Not this one but also nice:
http://www.halls.md/chart/height-weight.htm
Women dominate calculations in their volume, but this applies for spatial related safety and economics... There's a nice case I was thinking of writing about...

Of course we could look a bit further into what happens:
For example how much force is being applied to the body and if a it's possible to grab on something.

Since I don't have good aerodynamic data for the human body I have to estimate the drag coefficient to be 0.5 to 0.7.
The blast the body experiences last less than a second (0.1s).
At 0.45 seconds into it you will hit the floor (artificial gravity).
Based on the impulse the force ranges from 3 to 6 metric tons over the whole frontal body area. The acceleration ranges from 32 to 44 g (that's within the survival range for short forces).
So what happens is you're likely knocked off and blackout instantly.
With luck you won't wake up...but I kind of doubt it will be a good death.

If there's a hole and your body gets in the way, it will be crushed by the peak pressure. And likely your body will be squeezed & cut through the hole just like a certain aircraft accident case (in which the hull breached further in size)...

So it's like falling from a high height.