Cosmic Era (Gundam SEED) Space Navigation

[lwf58]

Hmm... so there'll be conflicting information on the target location between different ships. Even if only one ship would be regulated to being the 'detector', the moment it transmits those locations to the other ship, the locations would be different relative to the other ships.
A question, would distance decrease this margin of error (barring roll, yaw, and pitch for now)?

If you mean running close together, then yes. The farther apart the ships are, the more the difference grows. If two ships are cruising a few hundred feet apart, then the imprecise nature of the system allows for the reports to give approximately the same angles. If they are several miles apart, though, a target one ship sees in "blue-c" would, to a ship cruising on its port side, be in "blue-d" or perhaps even in "orange-c".

To the best of my knowledge, I don't think any Cosmic Era ships have thrust vectoring (The first thing that came to mind was the capability of the JSF, BTW). Small attitude jets, yes. And it'll probably work to do those maneuvers, in space, albeit it would be impractical. But then, the Archangel did that in Earth atmosphere/gravity. I don't know if this would be a factor in lunar "atmosphere"/gravity...

The mobile suits use it. Ships don't. Thrust vectoring is a trick to increase manueverability, and works for tonnage up to mecha weights. When your mass is in the spaceship class, brute power is what gets the job done.

Which is strange why an Agamemnon class has no weapons on its underside, though its a space vessel. No CIWS either. Strange.

That's because a spaceship doesn't need to have its weapons mounted to cover a direction. If the enemy is 'under' you, you just roll the ship to bring your weapons to bear. Since in space engagements, you're probably going to detect your enemy long before he gets in firing range, you have time to do that.
The lack of a CIWS, though, is a critical flaw in a universe that includes, space fighters, mobile armors, mobile suits, and missiles. What do they do? Keep a few crewmen on board just to pray when they go into combat? I can just see it, crewmen whose only job is to chant, "Please Lord, don't let them hit us!"

[camk4evr]

Detection measures in combat are essentially a mix of optical and IR systems. Like the Minovsky particles in UC N-Jammers scramble radar and radio waves and it's SOP to launch them going into battle.

They also probably use a 'laser radar' system as well since they do use a radar scope for tracking targets. Identification of targets is probably handled by having a computer compare the image of the approaching mechs/ships to images of friendly, and known enemy, ones in it's databanks.

[Fatherz]

If you mean running close together, then yes. The farther apart the ships are, the more the difference grows.

Though it wasn't the answer I was expecting, at least that covered one aspect of that method. What I meant to ask was the distance of the enemy from the ship/fleet/detector. But I guess that's a moot point, since it still haven't taken pitch, roll, & yaw into the equation. Hmm... perhaps as an initial, pre-battle long range detection method then? *sigh* Oh well, back to square one...

That's because a spaceship doesn't need to have its weapons mounted to cover a direction. If the enemy is 'under' you, you just roll the ship to bring your weapons to bear. Since in space engagements, you're probably going to detect your enemy long before he gets in firing range, you have time to do that.

Or you could just go to your enemy's underside, since you did say a barrel roll is a risky maneuver.
Ah, that suddenly gave me an idea. A lunar battle would, *theoretically*, consist of a ship staying at a low altitude using the lunar surface to prevent an enemy from getting to its vulnerable underside flank, and bring the most weapons to bear against the target.

The lack of a CIWS, though, is a critical flaw in a universe that includes, space fighters, mobile armors, mobile suits, and missiles.

I think the OMNI fleet decided to use a more diverse fleet, as opposed to ZAFTs all purpose ship.
Drake class ships mostly fire missiles and the occasional anti-beam depth charge to provide the rest of the fleet with cover from beam weapons (reminds me of a frigate or a destroyer, actually...). A Nelson class is perhaps the battleship equivalent probably taking the brunt of the fire, while the Agamemnon is a carrier (with main guns?).
If it were up to me though, I'd scrap the guns and put CIWS all over the ship, then have the Nelsons slug it out with the Laurasias.
Of course, this diverse fleet would be hard to manage, even if each ship has the means to defend on another. Reminds me of a rock, paper, scissors method in RTS games...

Identification of targets is probably handled by having a computer compare the image of the approaching mechs/ships to images of friendly, and known enemy, ones in it's databanks.

SEED-verse do have an IFF system, so no problems on that area. The problem is if the information is not stored in the databanks, of course.

[FOG3]

NASA spacecraft don't do barrel rolls. Their propulsion systems are intended to get the craft from point 'a' to point 'b', not for violent combat maneuvers. And we're not talking "staying in orbit" or "fine maneuvers". We are talking about the kind of movements that keep a ship alive when firepower is incoming.

And, your design is superior how? LockMart has another version of the Raptor on the drawing boards with no tail and 3-D thrust vectoring. A dodge combined with an implied insult and no backing whatsoever, is that behavior becoming of a mod?
To clear up some confusion, the F-35 Lightning II doesn't have vectored thrust, the business with the B model is for STOVL only, the F-22 Raptor however does have vecotred thrust. It adds a little weight but makes for more energy efficient maneuvers. Having a starship hover in atmosphere would be the height of stupidity, due to the insane amount of fuel you're wasting for the luxury.

Doing a barrel roll in a spaceship is insane to begin with. There's no need for it in normal operations. It's a defensive move that rapidly shifts the craft out of its former flight path without changing vector. If it isn't done at high-G, then incoming missiles, or beam or ballistic weapons fire from opposing warcraft, will be able to compensate and you might as well have not wasted the effort; the time would be better spent kissing your backside goodbye.

You're not dodging real high C weapons, period (although to be fair most sci-fi beam weapons are subsonic) and any missile worth anything is only going to be helped by you flailing around. Decoys and fine maneuvers > flopping around with a big IR signature for the seeker head of a missile that can pull 60G (AIM-9X can and there's no fluid to mess with missiles in space). Especially with nuclear warheads if they have laser prox fuses. EM sensors don't have any intermediate fluid messing with transmissions in space. You don't seem to appreciate you can run cold in space.

Zero-G has nothing to do with it. The forces are generated by the motions and thrust involved, not external gravitational pull. Sounds like you've forgotten that basic physics apply just as much in space as they do in atmosphere.

I have? Wow another dodge with implied insult, based on a strawman bordering on an outright lie. Is this kind of condescending attitude, used to deflect stuff he can’t handle, becoming of a mod? I overtly invoke Einstein and Galilean Relativity, acceleration is acceleration and you have to be getting pointlessly excessive with the roll to generate significant Gs. There's really no reason for it to be in the multiple G range.

That's because a spaceship doesn't need to have its weapons mounted to cover a direction. If the enemy is 'under' you, you just roll the ship to bring your weapons to bear. Since in space engagements, you're probably going to detect your enemy long before he gets in firing range, you have time to do that.

You’re going to bitch as if they can’t detect inbound until it’s upon them with the roll discussion, but immediately turn around and say they don’t need full weapons coverage, because things are going to be so leisurely they can just roll. Without a VLS equivalent, I don’t agree at all. You're counting on the enemy doing what you want and being stupid in the process, not a good idea. Wishful thinking << being prepared to meet them.

The lack of a CIWS, though, is a critical flaw in a universe that includes, space fighters, mobile armors, mobile suits, and missiles.

They do have CIWS eventually in that universe, although they don’t have SM-2/3 or SeaRAM equivalents that I'm aware of. Of course, in a universe where they’re willing to pay more for the luxury of having to pay even more in logistics just so they can have mechs what can you say? It's already a given they're not brightest bunch of bulbs.

all those equipment in the ship, especially in the hangar, being jostled around would inflict some injuries or casualties.

If they don’t secure their hangar properly to prevent that, then yes they are not setup for hard maneuvers.

Even if only one ship would be regulated to being the 'detector', the moment it transmits those locations to the other ship, the locations would be different relative to the other ships.

It might not exist in universe, but this can be dealt with easily. Given it’s close to Earth you basically just have to flip the GPS satellites around so they’re transmitting spacewards and have enough to reliably get a signal from at least four for 3-D coordinates. Absolute position relative to Earth is thus established. Build a database correlating with constellations, which can't be jammed, and you're in business.
Honestly though it’s not like the AWACs equivalent couldn’t give them heading info to vector in on the enemy. Adjust x,y, &z and vector at v velocity at t time. If it can see both a computer can figure out the intercept between them and send the instructions. Adding extra code to take into account a reasonable time lag wouldn’t be difficult. Don't be such a defeatist.

[lwf58]

Though it wasn't the answer I was expecting, at least that covered one aspect of that method. What I meant to ask was the distance of the enemy from the ship/fleet/detector. But I guess that's a moot point, since it still haven't taken pitch, roll, & yaw into the equation. Hmm... perhaps as an initial, pre-battle long range detection method then? *sigh* Oh well, back to square one...

The farther away the target is, the more the system applies across several ships in the same general area. But equally, the farther away the target is, the more area the boxes cover, making the report less precise. I'd say that the system was most likely intended for use at combat ranges. It'd be a good way to get your ship's gunners pointing their weapons in the right general direction to find the target themselves.

Or you could just go to your enemy's underside, since you did say a barrel roll is a risky maneuver.

I was afraid you might get mixed up with this because I wasn't clear enough on what I meant. A roll and a barrel roll are two very different things. Rolling a ship just means rotating along the forward axis of the ship, changing the direction "up" is. You stay on the same flight path. A barrel roll is a maneuver mostly used in atmosphere, where the rotation point is a distance above the ship. You are moving sideways as well as forward, and the ship makes a spiral move that eventually puts it back on the same flight path and vertical orientation. It shifts you out of your flight path temporarily, so that something that might otherwise have run up your tail or nose hopefully misses.
That's why I said a barrel roll is more complex and dangerous for a spaceship. In addition to the normal forward thrust, you're adding thrust to the side and from the belly of the ship to make that spiral. At combat speeds, the way you need to do the maneuver to dodge incoming fire, it would cause stresses of several G in intensity and a mild artificial coriolis effect. Usually, when a ship dodges, they just shift to the side or up or down, and take a new flight path.

If it were up to me though, I'd scrap the guns and put CIWS all over the ship, then have the Nelsons slug it out with the Laurasias.

Makes sense to an extent; at least I can see the idea behind it. But you're right about it being a poor design.
Back in the early days of aircraft carriers, a lot of them were converted from cruisers and light cruisers, and they kept the main guns from some of those ships on the resulting carrier. Then they found out the hard way that aircraft carriers aren't good ships to send into ship-to-ship combat and ditched the big guns in favor of more anti-aircraft emplacements.
The same thing happened with some battleships. The last great action of the battleship was Jutland in World War One. There were no massed battleship actions in World War Two. Instead, the battleships ended up as glorified carrier escorts or supporting amphibious assaults as mobile artillery emplacements. They were also just as vulnerable to air attack as the carriers. So battleships that started WWII with lots of big guns often got refitted with fewer big guns and more anti-aircraft batteries. The Yamato is a great example of that.
The Yamato started the war with twelve 127-mm guns (6x2), twenty-four 25-mm guns (8x3 enclosed mounts) and four 13.2-mm machine guns (2x2). When it was sent to the bottom, it had 152 25-mm AA guns (50 triple mounts, 2 single mounts). During its war career, two secondary turrets were removed and the deck structures were extensively remodeled to fit the new AA guns.
Kind of strange with that war history, that a Japanese person writing about a naval war (even if it is in space) would make that mistake.

[Sunshine Temple]

FOG3 may I direct you to two rules on the forum.
F) There is a difference between flames and critical commentary. Reviewers remember not to flame, and writers remember that you are asking for C&C and not all of it will be positive.
I) Standards of civility, common sense, and coherence are expected. This is connected to rule F but applies to all posting. Moderate profanity is acceptable, if the context of the dialog calls for it. Excessive or inappropriate use of profanity may be grounds for a warning or tempban. This will be judged by Fukufics staff on a case-by-case basis. Examples at end of rule list.
Larry has been calm and rational in this discusion while you have started to give ad-hominim comments. If you cannot be civil and argue without personal insults this may not be the right forum for you

[lwf58]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Sunny. I certainly can't see anything personally insulting in what I wrote.
Er... What did you mean by "ad-hominim"? I can't find it the dictionary!

[Sunshine Temple]

.
Er... What did you mean by "ad-hominim"? I can't find it the dictionary!

Latin roughly means personal attack. It's where you use personal insults instead of debating the other person's points
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominim