Pretty much my thinking is that a space navy can do just about anything a water based navy can do but better. I mean they aren't even limited by the water like a traditional navy is.
Would a Space Navy render a Water Navy useless?
Pretty much my thinking is that a space navy can do just about anything a water based navy can do but better. I mean they aren't even limited by the water like a traditional navy is.
yes because the water in space is the same as the water in the water
SHUT IT DOWN HE KNOWS TOO MUCH
Doesn't it only vaporize or freeze?
Can't remember which at the moment, tired and probably stupid.
And not talking in a stable environment like inside the ISS, cool videos though.
water in space freezes into ice crystals and simultaneously sublimates. But it definitely freezes more than it sublimates.
You're moronic
should have mentioned that I'm assuming this "space navy" has the capabilities of flying around in the atmosphere. Figured it would be obvious but then I remembered I'm on /k/
Thats a big assumption. While it would be doable, it wouldn't be like the movies. Getting up and down from space are incredibly difficult and dangerous procedures. If you had to do while the enemy was trying its best to stop you it would be even harder.
You're moronic
>btw I'm assuming it's 10x harder than it actually needs to be and pushing the tech level from TR6 or 7 to TR 3 or 4
You're assuming space magic, then. Sure, there's not much need for floaty things when you have star destroyers that can float millions of tons in space or in the air.
In a Newtonian-based universe, wet-navy has an advantage in terms of sheer mass. Compare a 100,000-ton aircraft carrier to Starship's potential lift in fully-reusable mode of ~150 tons. While our ability to efficiently use that mass has improved over time (microchips), it's still a big difference.
Also, unless you're throwing nukes around, subs can still use water for concealment *and* hard cover; water even effectively blocks energy weapons, so a sub with a mast-mounted IR telescope and a laser cannon would have a major advantage over a spacecraft.
>Also, unless you're throwing nukes around
Nukes are still not an effective threat against submarines because you can't nuke literally the entire ocean, and if you can, just blow the fricking planet apart and stop worrying about a water-based navy
>Nukes are still not an effective threat against submarines
the US Navy disagrees
>because you can't nuke literally the entire ocean
so you locate the submarine to within a few nautical miles and carpet nuke that bit with 250kt depth charges
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUM-44_SUBROC
>Sir, we can’t get an exact fix on the SSBN. We’ve narrowed it down to a general area, but-
>Captain
>Yes, admiral?
>Nuke the sea
Man, the Cold War was fricking metal. It’s a criminal shame that they don’t build these ludicrous Dr Strangelove-tier nukes anymore, I’d kill to see a Davy Crockett go off in real life.
Also, I am only just now learning that Goodyear had an aerospace division. I guess that explains their fascination with blimps.
Apparently you're in the Infinite Warfare universe so I'll say no. Even if you had 2 gorillion surface boats with spaceship-killing railguns they'll all get disabled and jacked when a Martian POW sudokus himself on a ruined balcony during the magic hour. Invest in your special forces instead.
>should have mentioned that I'm assuming this "space navy" has the capabilities of flying around in the atmosphere. Fi
And underwater? moronation OP it is real and it is (you)
Fricktard, its call an airforce. Grow up.
If only there was some sort of middle ground between the water and space? Some type of medium we could harness to move between places that required some kind of...machine or vehicle... that could take advantage of our understanding of air pressure and thermodynamics? God...what could it be?
Yeah sure the air force already exist but unless some shit has changed from when i lasted looked they don't have flying battleships or cruisers able to shrug off AA or deploy fast movers from their hangers.
>in this fictional future the space force is going to have all this cool shit
>but somehow the air force isn't
good luck hitting with what are essentially all ballistic missiles
The air force didn't render the army useless. We still needed boots on the ground to secure land, and sometimes air supremacy wasn't guaranteed.
I think space will be much the same way. Being in space gives you a serious advantage over someone on the ground, but getting there is hard and expensive. Add to that the fact that enemy may also be there and you have a compelling reason to keep your options open. Then you have the things like submarines which can sneak around undetected, meanwhile stealth in space is impossible. Then you have trade protection and coastsl defense, both of which are also better done by navies.
>stealth in space is impossible
It is, you're constantly emitting radiation to keep yourself from overheating and you're sitting in an empty void.
I'm sure you could have short-term stealth capability
If it were a small unmanned satellite running on incredibly low power in orbit above a planet then yes, it would be stealthy. But any amount of human crew or sizeable engines are going to make it glow.
Couldn't you have a craft go temporarily unpowered, or minimally. Like a glider.
Not if its got people inside. People generate heat and need a lot of things to survive, which also generates heat. That heat must be radiated away, lest the occupants cook to death.
Heat sinks and heat pumps. Have large but retractable radiators and 20 tons of salt to melt before you need to use them.
>you're sitting in an empty void.
It's actually the opposite, there isn't one square millimeter of sky that isn't littered with stars and galaxies, if you're seeing nothing that means your view is being occluded by something.
You do know that those stars are extremely far apart, right? Most of space is, as the name would suggest, space.
The stars are far apart, but there are an incomprehensible amount of them. There is not a single empty patch of sky. Unless your super stealthy satellite/spaceship is transparent it can be detected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Ultra-Deep_Field
>The HUDF image was taken in a section of the sky with a low density of bright stars in the near-field, allowing much better viewing of dimmer, more distant objects.
>...the rectangular image is 2.4 arcminutes to an edge, or 3.4 arcminutes diagonally. This is about one-tenth of the angular diameter of a full moon viewed from Earth (less than 34 arcminutes)
>smaller than a 1 mm2 piece of paper held 1 m away, and equal to roughly one twenty-six-millionth of the total area of the sky.
>Unless your super stealthy satellite/spaceship is transparent it can be detected.
Thats what I was saying
>ABYSS
The other images I find beautiful, this one fills me with dread
Why?
It gives me an impression of dozens of eye sockets in the incomprehensibly immense skull of some eldrich being. The fact they names it ABYSS doesn't help.
Not really, I can't think of anything else like that. Space has always just freaked me out, I tried Space Engine when it released and that was horror gaming for me
It looks more like a piece of moldy bread to me.
Besides, why does something so incredibly far away scare you so badly? If it were some giant entity, there's no way it gives a damn about you.
You got that trypophobia? Fear or aversion to clusters of small holes or bumps?
a spaceship is going to be a subpixel in any image and exposure times are minutes to hours for an image to be anything but a random number of photons.
Space is noisy and only very long exposure times can average out the noise. Exoplanets, dust and all kinds of gravity wiggles cause constant noise.
If your spacecraft is as "loud" as the noise around it, it is invisible.
>subpixel
NTA but that's a question of distance and sensor sensibility.
Even if we assume a spaceship capable of showing a perfectly cool face in our direction (cruising cold from a place not seen by sensor), it will need to fool future sensors far superior to what we can afford to launch right now.
Think a superior mass produced James Webb Space Telescope looking in every direction non-stop.
You need a lot of "what if" before you can sneak up on a civilization with a good presence in space. Unless it's a relativistic missile bus meant to destroy the civilization in one shot.
I miss humanity frick yeah threads
I don't, all the writing was boring power fantasies about how earth is a death world and we're super crafty and strong compared to everyone else, also we have culture unlike the blank hordes of alien grays that eat nutrient cubes and sleep in pods etc etc etc
There is zero reason to entertain another sentient species, and any sufficient space-faring civilization would sling a big fricking rock at our colonies and never think about humanity again
Pluto is a pixel to subpixel on James Webb.
James Webb Optical resolution: ~0.1 arc-seconds
Apparent diameter from Earth
Maximum (seconds of arc) 0.11
Minimum (seconds of arc) 0.06
Pluto is also 1188km in radius, 2376km in diameter.
Mean values at opposition from Earth
Distance from Earth (106 km) 5756.78
Apparent diameter (seconds of arc) 0.08
Apparent visual magnitude 15.1
Bond albedo 0.72
Geometric albedo 0.52
Black-body temperature (K) 37.5
I'm telling you this information so you can think about how this would differ from a theoretical spacecraft this is only a hundred meters long and ten meters wide, running cold and far. The point isn't that it is invisible, the point is that telescopes aren't omniscient and require long exposure times.
>Sensitivity is defined to be the brightness of a point source detected at 10 σ in 10,000 s. Longer or shorter exposures are expected to scale approximately as the square root of the exposure time. Targets at the North Ecliptic Pole are assumed. The sensitivities in this table are subject to change. Prototype exposure time calculators are available at the Space Telescope Science Institute website.
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/forScientists/faqScientists.html
The point remain, by the time we start considering space warship the JWST will be likened to Newton first telescope compared to JWST. JWST is not optimized for object that small or bright object but doing so wouldn't require science we don't already have.
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/forScientists/faqSolarsystem.html#whatlookat
You'd need a pretty damn specific context like a ship coming at relativistic speed, cooled at 3°K for it to remain unseen until "too late" which is the only metric we could use.
So sure, today we could miss an alien spaceship entering the solar system with active cooler pointed toward Earth.
But stealth would remain impossible in any practical context were we would put any effort into detecting spaceship. Save of course technology so above ours it's like a caveman looking at the sky compared to JWST.
>The point remain, by the time we start considering space warship the JWST will be likened to Newton first telescope compared to JWST
No? JWST is state of the art, and so is Starship. You can fit a SPY-6 panel and Mk 41 self defense length VLS cells into Starship. Space Sparrows are a matter of funding, the tech is here.
JWST detects singular photons. It detects every photon that hits the reflectors on the dish. Is effectively a ~6.57m diameter dish. Sensitivity is 10sigma over 2.7 hours exposure for a 99.998% chance of detection. The view area is also widest at 9 Arcmin^2 (~3x3arcmin) at most.
JWST is already near the theoretical limit of a telescope of its size. Future telescopes might be slightly better, but not immensely so. The answer is thousands of large 100m reflector orbital telescopes phased into a larger array and it still has to deal with the cold truth of diffraction limits and how many photons actually reach a detector. Cold objects eject very few photons.
Space telescopes is not a simple "I see everything all the time".
Have fun looking for infinitely small occultations with background light sources because any other radiation doesn't mean anything when it's spread isotropically from a stupid amount of distance away from you
None of that shit fricking matters considering that any space navy attacking a seagoing navy is going to be in orbit. Guess what? Shit in a continuous orbit around the earth moves ridiculously fast to maintain it, much faster than the background of space, and is on an extremely predictable trajectory. ASAT missiles would suffice and any seagoing navy that exists in a world with a space navy would absolutely have them as an option.
Finding a ship from space would be an absolute c**t, especially if they don't give off any thermal signatures in this scenario, and especially impossible if it's a submarine.
Ship's perspective:
>search thermal signatures/visual imagery for anything rapidly moving across the sky that isn't in the cataloged list of known satellites+known orbital objects
>easily identify and fire on the target that will have significant problems changing trajectory without de-orbiting itself
Space ship's perspective:
>search thousands of square miles for a most-likely camoflaged ship using water as a natural heat sink or running on battery power to not produce heat, bonus difficulty if it's submerged and they're looking for a rod coated in radar absorbent material that's sitting about the same height above the water as a person
>screen out non-military targets because you don't have the time nor firepower to blow a hole in everything currently floating on the ocean
>fire upon that single military target while incurring the wrath of every other military target on that side of the globe
>eat shit and die when third-party targeting allows assets on the far side of the earth to send shit streaking over the horizon right at your ass
>pic
God, look like someone looked for every gimmick he heard would work and slapped everything together.
Not saying that stuff like ChoDE is much better, every number for nuclear propulsion, coilgun & lasers are overoptimistic and in practice we would likely have an AI deduce the most efficient design to minmax.
I thought it looked cool, any sci-fi spaceship generally beats a dead horse of "plausible but cool-sounding weaponry that we don't currently have"
If you can locate a submarine within a few nautical miles from space sure. You know how submarines are detected 99.99% of times?
Acoustic sensors. You're not doing that shit from space while also not getting dicked down by anyone seeing you launch your stupid fricking orbital sonobuoys. SUBROCs were based as hell and would absolutely buttfrick a submarine, but like I said, you can't just blanket attack every inch of water from Kyushu to California. A counterfire would probably work, but the submarine in this scenario is some mythical high-tech bastard that exists in a world with space militaries, so who knows how fast it could fire and frick off.
>I thought it looked cool, any sci-fi spaceship generally beats a dead horse of "plausible but cool-sounding weaponry that we don't currently have"
I'll show you!
My 1970 Orion destroyer with battleship guns will be real! It will fire salvos of nukes and launch space fighters!
Space war will not be limited to mass-produced E-WAR unmanned laser-relay satellites blinding each others to avoid making "spache debrise" (another lie from the deep alien)
I really wish space warfare would be cool but the future of warfare in general is unmanned systems shutting each other down without causing unnecessary casualties. Future wars will be fought without a single drop of human blood spilled, like a massive game of fricking chess. Then the droid uprising will exterminate us all
>Would even an asteroid directed at the earth stop them if they hide deep enough?
It'd fricking obliterate the planet but I doubt that's the goal if you're engaging targets planetside. Defending navy wins in every reasonable scenario.
>stealth in space is impossible
Let's get that out of the way
https://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacewardetect.php#id--Strategic_Combat_Sensors--There_Ain't_No_Stealth_In_Space
As long as the vehicle have a temperature higher than 3°K or reflect the sun's light. It can be detected by rather standard IR sensor.
Every variant of "going dark" come with the problem you were visible before and cannot change trajectory without becoming visible.
And that's for PASSIVE detection.
The most you can hope is either to be disguised as a very heavy cargo crate that was cleared through a corrupt process or put all your hope on an "hydrogen steamer" that -if it work- require a billion sacrifice, be unmanned and can only operate for a period of time.
Even if it were cooling itself and "sending heat in a direction with no sensor", it's position can be calculated from the time when it was launched.
>sizeable engine
It's not the size as much as any form of heat. You'd have to propel yourself using cold hydrogen.
On top of that you have the requirement of having a stealth coating to escape active radar.
You can't hide on the ocean you moron. Any navy is gonna get blown the *frick* out from atmosphere.
Black person.
Top tier navies can shoot back at LEO stationed military assets with SM-3
>You can't hide on the ground moron. Any soldiers are gonna get bombed to pieces from 30,000 ft in the air
Also
>You can't hide on the ocean
You can though
>ON the ocean
Subs are still part of the navy
>submarine aircraft carriers to combat threats from space
Actually, I'm starting to think the navy will btfo space targets if they all become submarines. What are space Black folk gonna do? Would even an asteroid directed at the earth stop them if they hide deep enough?
You can't answer that without discussing logistic.
If the space-side need to wait 10 month to receive food supply/ammo and the asteroids drop take several year to pull of, the navy-side have the time to snipe every attacker in orbit, produce then launch enough missiles/laser in orbit to destroy the attacking fleet.
But if the space space-side is so numerous they receive new ship every day, then they could identify and overwhelm every port, every factory, every mines, every surface habitat on the planet.
...well that or deploy a solar shade that ice the planet until the navy accept to surrender at the condition of killing themselves in way that amuse the invaders.
>But if the space space-side is so numerous they receive new ship every day, then they could identify and overwhelm every port, every factory, every mines, every surface habitat on the planet.
>...well that or deploy a solar shade that ice the planet until the navy accept to surrender at the condition of killing themselves in way that amuse the invaders.
If the space side grossly outnumbers the waterborne side then yes, obviously they'd win, but this is a classic attackers vs defenders scenario where the attackers have been identified since they passed in closer than the fricking moon, and the defenders can be anywhere on 70% of the planet's surface(or subsurface).
A 1v1 firefight is a plausible waterborne victory. A 1v10 in favor of waterborne is a fricking massacre. Shit, if this scenario wasn't the first instance of some shit like this happening, I'd imagine most planetside anti-space assets would just have missiles containing 100,000 ball bearings to pop into orbit and beat the shit out of whatever's up there.
I'll insist that we have no basis to define what count as "1vs1" so to me the question is roughly wether the logistic is better on the space side. They could be outnumbered at the start, as long as the space side can keep coming indefinitely while the Sea-side lose all their ports&so on.
That ...or WIN through solar shade, it's seriously a weapon that can only be beaten if you have a space force yourself.
I've got a funny idea myself I unfortunately can't write to save my life.
The basic idea:
A (literal) poker game is going on, each player is some kind of parody: A.pex for the ultimate warrior race, an ultra advanced scheming race, a mind-control parasite race, a grey goo everyone else on the table is afraid of.
They all banter each others but overall are ok together, it's all thank to the friendly blue people race who manage the bar and who cannot be anything but friendly, they all owe them so much.
...then come the boastful human who immediately take advantage of the blue barista
Every of the aliens put their card down, each with a one liner suggesting what they'll do to the human.
Get an LLM to get you started and help you along! ChatGPT, or go check out
if your story is not milquetoast enough for OpenAI.
submarine carriers have the problem that they can't launch or recover aircraft while submerged, which negates most of the purpose of being a carrier. Fighter Aircraft only have a ~2-4hr flight time. Plus the carrier needs time to seal, dive, remain submerged, surface, clear water and open hatches before any aircraft can launch or land.
So if your carrier takes 10 minutes to surface and be ready to launch, 10 minutes to dive and has to launch and recover aircraft for 15 minutes every hour that's 120 - 35min = 90 min submerged. And we all know that clockwork is unreasonable so it has to spend more time surfaced, plus aircraft need air and time to warm up before launching. Need time to taxi onto the catapult or off the recovery area and you want a bit of safety so you're not crashing and not able to dive anymore because your dive hatches are warped from burning jet fuel and an exploded aircraft and its ordinance.
Subcarrier also loses its ability to launch and land in rough seas vs a taller supercarrier.
And what do you gain? A little more stealthy while submerged and enemy weapons need to be designed to hit the submerged target like depth charges. It is just as vulnerable while surfaced and probably can't dive if it receives anything more than cosmetic damage.
Kys airforce Black person
What space navy, satellites and shuttles?
Starship with a 5" gun and a Mk 41 VLS system. She's a big girl.
Look, the problem with military scifi speculation is that it's heavily influenced by our contemporary bias technology can achieve anything:
>Stuff x will become so powerful in x time it will render obsolete y
You know you are reading a spacebattles gay with zero STEM education when you see this sort of sentence, just because you can make a viable mathematical model or there is a technological tendency towards certain development it doesn't mean it will become a reality.
Why do you think we still have no portable fusion reactors? Let alone commercially viable ones? The theory has been out there for decades, but practical viability is a completely different beast.
>SciFi is based on things that don't exist
Say it ain't so
Which remains a problem for debates about the genre, because sooner or later someone is going to go down the line of Clarke's Third Law, making the discussion a dead end, if it was up to me I would enforce a rule where appeals to technological development are strictly forbidden within an specific scenario to be talked about, many settings actually support this which is the reason why 40k and Battletech have lasted for decades while the Xeelee Sequence and Gurren Lagann, for all their popularity couldn't grow beyond certain reach.
Not everything has to be a mega popular forever franchise. Things can just end after they make their point.
>The series spans billions of years of fictional history, centering on humanity's future expansion into the universe, its intergalactic war with an enigmatic and supremely powerful Kardashev Type IV alien civilization called the Xeelee (eldritch symbiotes composed of spacetime defects, Bose-Einstein condensates, and baryonic matter), and the Xeelee's own cosmos-spanning war with dark matter entities called Photino Birds. The series features many other species and civilizations that play a prominent role, including the Squeem (a species of group-mind aquatics), the Qax (beings whose biology is based on the complex interactions of convection cells), and the Silver Ghosts (colonies of symbiotic organisms encased in reflective skins). Several stories in the Sequence also deal with humans and posthumans living in extreme conditions, such as at the heart of a neutron star, in a separate universe with considerably stronger gravity, and within eusocial hive societies.
Well that's all very interesting, I might look through a story synopsis
>After overcoming a series of brutal occupations by extraterrestrial civilizations, humanity expands into the galaxy with an extremely xenophobic and militaristic outlook, with aims to exterminate other species they encounter.
I will now read your novels.
As long as your country borders a body of water, a water Navy is necessary for that country's defense. Otherwise, you leave your whole country vulnerable to sea invasions.
>As long as your country borders a body of water, a water Navy is necessary for that country's defense
Neum is great.
imagine living in the star wars or star trek universe where people are exploring the galaxy in space ships, meanwhile you are just some frickin loser who still works on a boat.
It could be pretty cool depending on where the boat is. If I'm some zany themed pirate on a Star Trek hat planet it would be pretty cool. Or if my boat is on one of the more crazy star wars workds with cool landscapes and strange animals that would be neat too.
probably not. Assuming we become a multiplanet empire colonizing other worlds, water navies may lose some of their roles but theyre still going to be the dominant way to control domestic military affairs. They wont win against a space navy but they can fight rebellions and control piracy for alot cheaper and for better effect.
>space navy can do anything a water navy can
yes but it also requires a much more complicated logistical system and is orders of magnitude more expensive to operate. Water has the nice trait of being relatively cheap to travel in. Space not so much. Theoretically it should be cheap after escaping orbit, but escaping orbit is always going to be a b***h.
The amount of energy to go up and down a gravity well is immense. If for only this reason water navies would still exist solely for a cost efficiency reason.
>Would a Space Navy render a Water Navy useless?
No, you're still going to need to defend shipping lanes and coastlines.
Unless you're talking about some kind of hypothetical far future where humanity is united and all conflict is happening on some alien planet, in which case any assault would probably be from space with land and sea forces only existing to occupy territory once it's been taken so those land and sea forces would just be special division within the space force.
Can it move large amounts of cargo around inexpensively?
boats and rail are the two most efficient methods of transporting goods and equipment. You will always want some presence to protect shipping.
I always get the shakes before a drop. I’ve had the injections, of course, and hypnotic preparation, and it stands to reason that I can’t really be afraid. The ship’s psychiatrist has checked my brain waves and asked me silly questions while I was asleep and he tells me that it isn’t fear, it isn’t anything important—it’s just like the trembling of an eager race horse in the starting gate.
I couldn’t say about that; I’ve never been a race horse. But the fact is: I’m scared silly, every time.
Yes, plenty of roles for boats even in a astropoltical era, a unified planet would want a bigger coastguard with supercarriers for disaster recovery in coastal areas, and a planet that feared invasion would have analogs to both boomer and attack subs as Death's hand or stay behind problems for their opponents, possibly partly or fully autonomous. Underwater sites my also offer harder to detect and more survivable sites for planetary defense weapons that one ashore. The defensive and stay behind navel systems are obviously pointless in a dark forest environment, but that its probably not going to describe every extra-planetary threat that will ever exist, and even in that environment a robust coastguard is required, with the anti-shipping and land attack capacities to put down anyone trying to build an unlicensed radio transmitter.
No and it's one of many moronic sci-fi tropes. An airforce doesn't render an army obsolete and nukes didn't render conventional forces obsolete. People who say oh you can just bombard a target from orbit are basically making the same argument that you don't need Infantry because you could just nuke a city instead.
A navy will still be needed to patrol waters. Spacecraft operate in space, not in atmosphere and star wars style ships that seamlessly move between space and earth atmosphere are very unrealistic.
Friction has both ups and downs. On water, you can slow things down easily due to friction of the water/air. In space, you need to follow the physics, without external help. So its 1000x more energy intensive to change course/stop/etc in space.
You'd presumably need a 'water navy' for particular purposes in the daily running of the planet, but it would be smaller in scale or size of vessels than a modern navy and certainly not designed to fight space ships.
Massive gunboats bigger than battleships would be able to bring incredibly powerful anti-space weapons to bear equivalent to those of most emplaced defensive batteries on land, but, unlike the land-based batteries, these sea-based batteries are free to move around.
>inb4 caspian defense fleet protecting n.mid-east, e.euro & w.russ
Submarines are still pretty hard to detect & kill from space.
>inb4 ackshouwalley... us.govt has [redacted] able to easily spot any sub anywhere in the world on a clear night
It may make more sense to land MASSIVE starships in the deep ocean instead of on land; coastal & island spaceports become a thing.
PGM>HMG>Rifle>Pistol>Sword>Knife>Rock>Nothing, and yet we still use whichever weapon we have, best or not, due to... LOGISTICS.
at a certain point in multi-planetary expansion, i imagine there arises a perverse incentive for the inhabitants of the different celestial bodies / space rawks to decouple in response to rising tensions as a side effect of destructive probing of the threat space.
if you can't see, for instance, naval combatants by normal means, but you can see and possibly damage them by means that also damage the environment under observation, that leads you to weird places strategically.
by that time spaceships will be capable of being waterships too