Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Surface Warfare in the 23d & 24th Century...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mucus: [QB] Personally, I think that surface warfare on larger planets is moot. Earth right now has maybe 6 billion people (someone correct me here)and we are already having complaints of insufficent resources to feed everybody. A 24th century Earth would probably import the majority of its food, such a world would probably surrender if cut off from resupply, rather then let a huge amount of its population die of starvation. As I recall Betazed seemed to either surrender or fell extremely quickly during the Dominion war. Another point is that even currently, the US military is developing a technology that can destroy a flying air-to-air style missile with a laser mounted on a 747 style plane. In Star Trek, ships are fighting with phasers and other weapons at speeds probably at least half the speed of light(estimate). They can also hit targets with photon torpedos at FTL speeds. You realise that "small" miss at FTL speeds would mean a miss of hundreds if not thousands of kilometres. I think its a safe bet that a ship in orbit could easily destroy a 20km/h tank without even singing the grass underneath it. So in the list: 1. Infantry: Obviously, we've seen infantry with "standard" uniforms, not very probable, but maybe phaser-style weapons are so powerful any armour would be useless unless they are on a Borg personal shield level? 2. Artillery: Easy target for starships, or even shuttles. Wouldn't it be easier just to "beam" a shell on top of the enemy instead of beaming down a gun to do the same thing? 3. Armour: Big f*ing target. Not likely 4. Anti-tank weapons: No Tanks....why anti-tank weapons? 5. Intellegence: Always useful, no argument 6. Air forces: Only useful for knocking down shuttles and other space to ground transports. Airfields are obvious targets so airplanes would have to be VTOL capable or something similar. Major point: ICBMs and battlefield nuclear weapons would be a large threat. They are capable of wiping out expensive armies in one blow if they don't have something that can knock them down mid-flight. All in all, I think that warfare from space to the ground would be a moot point in most cases. Space superiority grants air superiority, air superiority grants victory in the oceans, a ground defending force could only hope to fight a holding action until reinforcements arrive in space. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3