![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chris_gerribA while back I linked to an interesting article about aircraft carriers in space. The tl:dr version of the article is "aircraft carriers in space don't make any sense." This article was linked to over at Simberg's Flying Circus, and in comments, there were several discussions about whether or not beam weapons (AKA "lasers") were better than missiles for space warfare.
I would argue that the well-appointed warship of the foreseeable future would have both weapon systems. But first, it's important to understand the military effectiveness of a laser in space, which I'll do today. A note - all equations and facts are from either the damage from laser online calculator or the great time-sink Atomic Rockets of the Space Patrol.
In order to understand the effectiveness of a laser, one really has to crank the math, which requires making assumptions about power output and hull design. So, since I needed to anyway for the sequel to Pirates of Mars, I made the assumptions. They are:
Laser wavelength = visible blue light. (I assumed these were lasers repurposed from civilian asteroid mining, in which case a wavelength that's not good for an atmosphere would be a cheap safety measure)
Radius of emitter mirror = 2 meters
Power rating = 1.5 megawatts at 50% efficiency
This laser would cut through 8.35 millimeter of aluminum per second at a range of 1,000 kilometers. It would cut through structural steel at that same range at a rate of 2.13 mm / second. (For comparison, the hull thickness of a 747 is between 1 to 2 mm.) The hole would be 30 cm in diameter.
To put that in more understandable terms, it would be like sitting in Chicago and cutting 12-inch holes in Boeing 747s flying around over Minneapolis. Talk about reaching out and touching somebody! the hole we're creating is also only slightly less then the diameter of a Harpoon anti-ship missile.
Since my hypothetical space ships run around using plasma-electric drives (formerly known as "ion engines") powered by mini-nuclear reactors, power for weapons is readily available. I did some calculations on heat dissipation, and came up with a block of ice the size of a household refrigerator allowing 30 seconds of continuous fire. In short, such a weapon doesn't appear too terribly futuristic.
For the next installment of "Laser Death Rays of Death," I intend to talk about the practical problems of lasers, and eventually I'll get to why I think missiles won't be going away.
I would argue that the well-appointed warship of the foreseeable future would have both weapon systems. But first, it's important to understand the military effectiveness of a laser in space, which I'll do today. A note - all equations and facts are from either the damage from laser online calculator or the great time-sink Atomic Rockets of the Space Patrol.
In order to understand the effectiveness of a laser, one really has to crank the math, which requires making assumptions about power output and hull design. So, since I needed to anyway for the sequel to Pirates of Mars, I made the assumptions. They are:
Laser wavelength = visible blue light. (I assumed these were lasers repurposed from civilian asteroid mining, in which case a wavelength that's not good for an atmosphere would be a cheap safety measure)
Radius of emitter mirror = 2 meters
Power rating = 1.5 megawatts at 50% efficiency
This laser would cut through 8.35 millimeter of aluminum per second at a range of 1,000 kilometers. It would cut through structural steel at that same range at a rate of 2.13 mm / second. (For comparison, the hull thickness of a 747 is between 1 to 2 mm.) The hole would be 30 cm in diameter.
To put that in more understandable terms, it would be like sitting in Chicago and cutting 12-inch holes in Boeing 747s flying around over Minneapolis. Talk about reaching out and touching somebody! the hole we're creating is also only slightly less then the diameter of a Harpoon anti-ship missile.
Since my hypothetical space ships run around using plasma-electric drives (formerly known as "ion engines") powered by mini-nuclear reactors, power for weapons is readily available. I did some calculations on heat dissipation, and came up with a block of ice the size of a household refrigerator allowing 30 seconds of continuous fire. In short, such a weapon doesn't appear too terribly futuristic.
For the next installment of "Laser Death Rays of Death," I intend to talk about the practical problems of lasers, and eventually I'll get to why I think missiles won't be going away.
