tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post5475237507902878531..comments2023-11-05T01:30:33.420-07:00Comments on Richard Tongue's Blog: In Defence Of Space Fighters...Richard Tonguehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13043914767873645160noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post-51229366081189143422020-11-08T06:55:31.507-08:002020-11-08T06:55:31.507-08:00I was so anxiuos to know what my husband was alway...I was so anxiuos to know what my husband was always doing late outside the house so i started contacting hackers and was scamed severly until i almost gave up then i contacted this one hacker and he delivered a good job showing evidences i needed from the apps on his phone like whatsapp,facebook,instagram and others and i went ahead to file my divorce papers with the evidences i got,He also went ahead to get me back some of my lost money i sent to those other fake hackers,every dollar i spent on these jobs was worth it.Contact him so he also help you.<br />mail: premiumhackservices@gmail.com<br />text or call +1 4016006790Elizabethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17641694205083699589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post-16366087412593558402015-12-26T12:04:38.796-08:002015-12-26T12:04:38.796-08:00Space fighters would expand the detection range of...Space fighters would expand the detection range of a task force just like they do now. Recon is important as well as taking out the eyes of the enemy fleet. The other thing that fighters provide is cheap firepower. Risking a carrier or even a destroyer is expensive attrition while one little fighter can cripple or destroy a big ship. A swarm of them might be able to take down big ships that may not have enough anti fighter guns to defend them. Keep in mind more turrets means more space, fuel, maintainance, etc. Fighters might be the cheaper alternative. Plus in combat with a foe that doesn't know your capabilities every thing might look dangerous to them. Plus they might be better suited for close air support rather than risky orbital bombardment from a ship. That's my thinking anyway.Wild Apehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12720252956007371359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post-34840628824137918082015-12-25T12:35:12.965-08:002015-12-25T12:35:12.965-08:00There is a certain something about space fighters ...There is a certain something about space fighters that I do find somewhat enthralling. Stories always work best when you place your characters at the moment of decision, and fighter combat is nothing but moments of decision, where one character - even one of a lower rank - does make a big difference. Having said that, something I built into the Triplanetary universe is that fighters are almost the equivalent of horse cavalry in the 20th century - something that has had it’s day.<br /><br />One of the key points that Glynn makes is that fighters are cheap, and quick to build. At the start of the Interplanetary War, I figure that the Mark I Interceptors were hastily converted orbital transfer shuttles, with missile ranks almost bolted on, as well as whatever electronic warfare systems as can be thrown in. This meant that the early victories were fighter-based, giving them a certain cachet, as well as long-term defenders - those who got their wings and have since gone onto flag rank.<br /><br />Looking into the future in a non-spoilery way, though, the Triplanetary Fleet is finally phasing out fighters. There is a drawdown in pilots - something which will come up in the next book, actually - except in aerospace squadrons, those intended to operate in atmosphere. (There fighters still have uses, mostly in terms of defending landing shuttles and close-range support. Orbital bombardment can lack...finesse.) The drone fighters I used in ‘Not In My Name’ were prototypes, with all that employed, and the manned fighter admirals managed to bury them for a while - but long term, the intention is for fast scoutships operating a half-dozen fighters, one pilot per fighter, at medium-range. While that is a while away, Mark II Drone Fighters will be coming in sooner than that. <br /><br />It all comes down to setting and technology. I honestly think that the space fighter should not be ruled out yet, and certainly it is quite possible - as is ably demonstrated in Space Carrier Avalon and its sequel - to create a universe that supports them as a concept. Ultimately, it’s all a matter of attitude, as well. I could make an argument that we should be using only drone fighters today, and certainly that the next generation of manned fighters is somewhat redundant, but Admirals, Generals and Air Marshals still want their high-speed jets...<br />Richard Tonguehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13043914767873645160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post-45275599576986165552015-12-25T11:14:51.209-08:002015-12-25T11:14:51.209-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Michael Blairhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13707913126319591535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5139245854261090165.post-30419281547151959832015-12-24T08:33:15.796-08:002015-12-24T08:33:15.796-08:00When I started Space Carrier Avalon, I intentional...When I started Space Carrier Avalon, I intentionally set out to create reasoning for starfighters in the setting.<br /><br />It boiled down to three factors in that setting, which tied together:<br />1) The whole concept of fuel efficiency tiers. There's nothing in the tech rules that stops a capital ship using the same acceleration as a starfighter - if they want to burn through what's supposed to be a six month supply of fuel in two hours. You can afford that level of power-to-weight ratio on something small you can't afford on a major capital ship.<br />(While not to the extent that its present in the Castle Federatuon books, I expect this will be a factor in the future)<br />2) Eggshells and hammers. Despite the massive size and scale of capital ships in the setting, they are extremely fragile versus the weapons available. When anything that is hit, dies, you want the ships taking most of the hits to be expendable.<br />(Again, I expect that this will be a factor, though again not to the extent it is in CF. If/when we build space warships, they will almost certainly have access to nukes, and it will be a long time before we can armor against a direct nuke hit)<br />3) Economics. A CF setting starship costs a significant chunk of a wealthy system's economic product to construct. Losing one HURTS, so again, they want the fight as far away as possible.<br /><br />Given the setting parameters, some form of expendable long-range parasite craft was inevitable. The size may not exactly be what we envisage as a 'fighter,' but the tactical role and crew size definitely make them starfighters.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08759294584312455395noreply@blogger.com