From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 04:06:49 UTC+2, Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw a écrit :   
      
   > You are trading detection over a given time in exchange for a longer time    
   > to be spotted.  It's going to be a wash.   
      
   I think you really don't understand how probabilities work. IFF both the scan   
   rates and fire rates are fixed, then, yes, eventually, you are going to be   
   detected (unless your fire rate is the same as the scan rate, but out of phase   
   with the scan... in    
   which case you are never going to be detected by your burns). However, even   
   here, the amount of time before detection can be considerable, and it may take   
   an extensive amount of time before detection can be verified. If either of the   
   cycles are varied,    
   you are running a roullette table favouring the ship.   
      
   >    
      
   > I take it you have never seen a photo of a VASIMR drive in operation    
   > then.  Even the little 5N testbed has a visible plume several metres long.   
      
   Actually, I HAVE seen both the stills and videos of VASIMR. However, it is   
   true that my laptop monitor does not handle low light levels very well. When I   
   reviewed the videos on another monitor, you are correct that the plume become   
   more apparent.   
   That said, I think you might be having some problem understanding the actual   
   scale of the images. ALL of those images were produced either by mounting a   
   camera directly onto one of the viewing ports, or by setting up a camera   
   within the chanmber itself.    
   This chamber has a diameter of 4m. The entire test field is only 5m in length   
   (so, no, there is no actual visual support for your assertion that the visible   
   plume is "several meters" long). Most of the photos and videos are taken with   
   an FOV of slightly    
   over 4m^ (2m x 2m), AT MOST... although there was at least one video shot from   
   behind that apparently covers the full 5m length of the plume test region, as   
   well as a meter or so of the mounting region.   
   So, yes, you can see the plume from a distance of 2m or so away from its   
   highest concentration zone, using a light sensitive camera (assuming the   
   monitor is capable of showing low light images), with a plume distance of   
   perhaps 5m or more.   
   I have, however, found some information that provides a best case range of   
   detectability. I will try to lay that out once I have a little more time.   
      
      
   >    
   > WISE was also looking for extremely hard to spot things, many of which    
   > would have no bearing on interplanetary combat.  It was also in the    
   > business of detecting and observing interstellar and intergalactic    
   > objects.   
      
   WISE/NEOWISE was in the business of detecting and cataloguing things that were   
   very difficult to detect. It had excellent capabilities (much better when   
   cryogenically cooled). However, its abilities were limited by the laws of   
   physics, as well as other    
   factors. For instance, it is not possible for an IR platform to detect   
   emissions from objects colder than the platform itself, because the platform   
   will flood the detectors with the same wavelength emissions that the detectors   
   are looking for (which is    
   why two of the IR bands were rendered inoperable once the cryostasis ran out).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)