10-10-2012, 06:40 PM | #16 |
Member
Posts: 20
Karma: 567553
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Device: Nook 1st Edition
|
Everyone makes good points here, especially the navy vs air force thing. The air force, being airborne and requiring fuel to stay there, is not a long-term-deployment service. The navy, however, is. You don't need to use fuel to stay at sea (you're likely to never get back to land if you run out, actually), nor do you need to use fuel to stay in space (excepting unstable orbits).
The space force splitting off and becoming more navy-like over time is something I would expect to happen. This would not really happen, though, until we had viable bases in space already, to start from and head to. The air force would certainly start this, as fighters etc need to launch/land from *somewhere*, and doing so from Earth's surface would be *very* impractical. So. Initially, the air force. As our spaceborne infrastructure develops more and more, more like the navy. |
10-10-2012, 06:45 PM | #17 | |
Well trained by Cats
Posts: 29,782
Karma: 54830978
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Central Coast of California
Device: Kobo Libra2,Kobo Aura2v1, K4NT(Fixed: New Bat.), Galaxy Tab A
|
Quote:
The Navy makes water, lights (and cools) the ship, cooks food for the crew. All use power (fuel) A ship without power is uncontrolable (no headway for the rudders to work on). |
|
10-10-2012, 06:58 PM | #18 |
Philosopher
Posts: 2,034
Karma: 18736532
Join Date: Jan 2012
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch
|
A ship needs power to function, but it doesn't require power to stay at sea. An airplane needs power to avoid crashing.
|
10-10-2012, 07:33 PM | #19 |
Member
Posts: 20
Karma: 567553
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Device: Nook 1st Edition
|
|
10-10-2012, 07:43 PM | #20 |
Member
Posts: 20
Karma: 567553
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Device: Nook 1st Edition
|
I used the phrasing I did on purpose. A ship at sea without fuel is dead in the water, unable to maneuver, but still at sea. A ship in space would need fuel to start moving, to stop moving, and to change course, (as well as support life) but not to *continue* moving, or stay in space (except for unstable orbits, as mentioned above). (Except for FTL travel. *Something* has to bend physics to your will, dammit.)
The point: a ship without fuel will not immediately find itself beached or sinking, though it will need rescuing. It can still be its own lifeboat. Even a diesel-electric submarine *might* still be able to force enough pressurized air into its tanks to surface. An airplane without fuel will very quickly test the "any landing you can walk away from is a good landing" hypothesis. |
10-10-2012, 09:20 PM | #21 | |
Philosopher
Posts: 2,034
Karma: 18736532
Join Date: Jan 2012
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch
|
Quote:
|
|
10-10-2012, 11:20 PM | #22 | |
Grand Master of Flowers
Posts: 2,201
Karma: 8389072
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Naptown
Device: Kindle PW, Kindle 3 (aka Keyboard), iPhone, iPad 3 (not for reading)
|
This is an interesting thought experiment.
If you haven't yet, it might be informative to read this "Aircraft Carriers in Space" article from Foreign Policy - it's short and pretty interesting: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...pace?page=full Here's an excerpt: Quote:
And although the Air Force is generally thought of as the branch with the planes, the Army, Navy, and Marines all have their own planes and pilots within their own branches. (Although this is perhaps not a given; in some countries, the Navy operates the aircraft carriers, but the airforce flies the planes on it.) So it's quite possible that while the Orbital Corps is the main space-based force, the Army, Navy, and Marines may have their own ships for their own purposes. (And of course the Marines are interwoven with the Navy of course - the "corpsmen" who serve as medics for the Marines are actually Navy enlisted men (even in places like Afghanistan)). |
|
10-10-2012, 11:54 PM | #23 | |
Old Fart In Training
Posts: 534
Karma: 2742476
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gladewater, Texas
Device: K3+3g/KFHD 7"/Nexus 7/Nexus 7.2
|
Quote:
Now other navies in the world may do things a bit differently. |
|
10-11-2012, 01:07 AM | #24 | |
Apprentice Curmudgeon.
Posts: 427
Karma: 3286968
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Runaway Bay, QLD, , Australia
Device: Kindle DX Graphite, Touch, Paperwhite, Sony, and Nook.
|
Quote:
|
|
10-11-2012, 06:36 AM | #25 | |
Well trained by Cats
Posts: 29,782
Karma: 54830978
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Central Coast of California
Device: Kobo Libra2,Kobo Aura2v1, K4NT(Fixed: New Bat.), Galaxy Tab A
|
Quote:
Navy and Marine squadrons on board (Both of their planes are equipped with 'Tail Hooks'). I watched the Marines fly (really just riding behind the controls at that moment ) some of the first ACLS (Automatic Carrier Landing System) test flights. Talk about a Brutal hand on the stick It did a great landing, just not kind to human passangers |
|
10-11-2012, 08:19 AM | #26 | |
Old Fart In Training
Posts: 534
Karma: 2742476
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gladewater, Texas
Device: K3+3g/KFHD 7"/Nexus 7/Nexus 7.2
|
Quote:
What I am not sure of is if the USAF still fly's the same exact aircraft the navy uses. If so they will have a tail hook also. But I do not think so. When I was in, the predominant aircraft that the USAF was flying was the F-4 phantom and it did have a tail hook because I think that aircraft was the same flown by all branches of the US military services, at the time, So in theory the USAF could fly on and off carriers, tho probably only once. They maybe able to take off OK, but the landing probably would their last one Because they did not have the training to do the standard Navy carrier controlled "Crash" they like to call a landing. |
|
10-11-2012, 08:21 AM | #27 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,099
Karma: 11315768
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Device: Kindle, Kobo Touch, Nook SimpleTouch
|
It seems clear that the navy and air force will disagree over who should run the new space force, and that's why there will be a new branch of the military. (Possibly starting as some sort of combined operation.)
|
10-11-2012, 08:30 AM | #28 | |
Old Fart In Training
Posts: 534
Karma: 2742476
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gladewater, Texas
Device: K3+3g/KFHD 7"/Nexus 7/Nexus 7.2
|
Quote:
You can bet your "Booties" that the Navy will want a piece of the action! And Get it. |
|
10-11-2012, 08:38 AM | #29 |
The Dank Side of the Moon
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
|
|
10-11-2012, 08:41 AM | #30 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Military Sci-fi | jbcohen | Reading Recommendations | 48 | 09-22-2017 04:19 AM |
Scientists invent human avatars | xg4bx | Lounge | 1 | 07-19-2012 02:26 PM |
Scientists Invent Particles That Will Let You Live Without Breathing | xg4bx | Lounge | 17 | 07-06-2012 04:06 AM |
PRS-T1 Military Only --- | AJ Starr | Sony Reader | 7 | 10-31-2011 10:09 AM |
Military site | Bob Russell | Lounge | 0 | 11-08-2005 10:14 AM |