From: chakatfirepaw@gmail.com   
      
   On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 03:08:55 -0700, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:   
      
   > Le mercredi 5 octobre 2016 19:51:29 UTC+2, Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw a   
   > écrit :   
   >   
   >> > Furthermore, although you are quite correct about armour peircing   
   >> > shells not being a requirement, I had a slightly different intent in   
   >> > mind for the use of the explosive shell, which I should have made   
   >> > more explicite.   
   >> > Detonating the shell just before contact sends a splatter of   
   >> > shrapnel, which is quite effective at scouring detectors, rendering   
   >> > them unusable.   
   >> > This also takes care of those gap issues we were discussing.   
   >>   
   >> To have something like that you need larger shells.  That means either   
   >> more mass, a narrower area of attack or larger gaps between your shells   
   >> than you would have had between the shot.   
   >   
   > You really don't. You don't need anything more than a principle mass of   
   > hard grains mixed with an explosive binder. You also need a small   
   > detonator... a computer nanochip will do, with just a little bit of   
   > hypergolic reactants. You can do a lot with nano-tech, especially after   
   > a couple decades or so of further research.   
      
   Remember that the shot was made up of 1g projectiles, making those   
   bursting shells means you're now firing fine dust and gas.   
      
   >> Which is something you can't afford to do.  Consider, in a 1AU orbit a   
   >> normal burn that shifts things by a single arc second means a   
   >> difference of ~750km in three months.   
   >>   
   >> Now consider something that is doing that once a month and you have a   
   >> time in flight of 3-4 months.   
   >   
   > Perhaps. However, again, random actions have a tendancy to negate one   
   > another, meaning there will be an average path with a stanard of   
   > deviation. If that standard of deviation is considered too large, then   
   > yes, military planners will opt for another approach: such as drones,   
   > mines, stealth seeker missiles, stealth guided missiles, laser attacks,   
   > etc.   
      
   Asked and answered.   
      
   >> Getting it isn't so hard, it's getting it up to 10,000m/s or so.   
   >   
   > Yes it is. But asteroid miners will more than likely have to overcome   
   > this challenge anyway in order to get their ore to the various customers   
   > and their processing plants.   
      
   First, the processing plant is going to be at the asteroid.  There is no   
   sense in shipping large amounts of useless rock and mostly useless iron.   
      
   Second, they're going to need much smaller velocities than that.  It's   
   not like they are going to want to have their paycheque off on it's way   
   to Zeta Cygni.   
      
   > Energy production will be scaled up at   
   > least as much as material production.   
   > Unfortunately, so will demand.   
      
   Overall production/use and local production/use are different things.   
      
   >> > Also depends upon the energy available. If we are dealing with   
   >> > colonies that can afford building their own space navies, the   
   >> > availablity of both will likely be extremely high.   
   >>   
   >> You don't quite grok the energy needed.   
   >   
   > Actually, I understand this quite well.   
   > Sorry, it appears my earlier estimate for world yearly energy   
   > consumption was a bit off. The world was already in the 20 EJ range   
   > since before 1820. By WWI, it was at 50 EJ/yr. Currently, it is   
   > approximately 550 EJ/yr, and growing more steeply than it ever has been   
   > before, with the exception of the early 1970s.We have barely started   
   > tapping solar energy.   
      
   You seem to be a few years behind, the growth in world energy use has   
   been slowing and most of what growth there is is in developing regions.   
      
   > Sorry. I will have to get back to this later. Might be a few days or so.   
      
   Here's some advice for you:  Wait until you are done with your reply   
   before posting.  As it stands, these dribs and drabs keep going over   
   already addressed points.   
      
   --   
   Chakat Firepaw - Inventor and Scientist (mad)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)