| All rights reserved. |
Air & Space War
Space War
| The Only High Ground in Space is Boot Hill |
| The elephant in the room, (for Space Warfare), that no one wants to talk about. The elephant is a simple physical truth: if you can see it, you can destroy it. |
| For those of you who enjoy alternative histories: The Greeks Destroying a Roman Satellite |
Nuclear Proliferation and Missile Defense
The issues of Missile Defense and Nuclear Proliferation are two sides of the
same coin. Both seem to be a natural response when someone feels threatened.
When a country feels under threat, it will get nuclear weapons to defend itself.
History has not yet shown a successful invasion of a nuclear armed country. Recent
history has shown that a non-nuclear armed country can be invaded. (see Iraq)
When a country acquires nuclear weapons, the United States feels threatened. (see Iran)
When the United states feels threatened, it tries to design and acquire missile defense
capabilities to smother any nuclear attack, by a smaller country.
A country may acquire nuclear weapons without threatening the United States by
limiting it's means to deliver them. To defend itself, a country does not need to
be able to project nuclear weapons much beyond it's border.
A country wanting to go past defense, and into revenge, will get the technical means
to do so.
What goes around, comes around. Remember that when someone says, "We'll just
kick their ass and take their gas."
Even a lion may be killed by ten thousand pissed off hamsters!
The issues of Missile Defense and Nuclear Proliferation are two sides of the
same coin. Both seem to be a natural response when someone feels threatened.
When a country feels under threat, it will get nuclear weapons to defend itself.
History has not yet shown a successful invasion of a nuclear armed country. Recent
history has shown that a non-nuclear armed country can be invaded. (see Iraq)
When a country acquires nuclear weapons, the United States feels threatened. (see Iran)
When the United states feels threatened, it tries to design and acquire missile defense
capabilities to smother any nuclear attack, by a smaller country.
A country may acquire nuclear weapons without threatening the United States by
limiting it's means to deliver them. To defend itself, a country does not need to
be able to project nuclear weapons much beyond it's border.
A country wanting to go past defense, and into revenge, will get the technical means
to do so.
What goes around, comes around. Remember that when someone says, "We'll just
kick their ass and take their gas."
Even a lion may be killed by ten thousand pissed off hamsters!
Archimedes Using the Sun to Destroy the Roman Fleet
I suggest that the story is partially true, but incomplete. Archimedes was given
the credit and that may be true. The burning of the Roman fleet solely by the
action of reflections off of shields or some optical artifact does not stand up to close
inspection.
While looking for the above painting, I came across many discussions
about the technical feasibility of burning the fleet. But strangely this isn't the
critical point. On at least one web site, I found a more relevant question. If
Archimedes had actually deployed an optical burning apparatus, why didn't
the Romans copy it? If this was your website please contact me.
This would suggest a more complicated story. The Greeks had Greek Fire which
seems to have a strong historical basis. I would suggest that the reflections from
shields could have been used to blind the Roman crews to approaching Greek
ships. The Greeks could attack the blinded ships with catapults and Greek Fire.
Catapulting Greek Fire, the Greeks could have easily destroyed a Roman ship.
The following hypothetical scenario would need to be modified depending on the
time of day, for the position of the sun, and the actual deployment of the forces.
If the Romans had been too aggressive in their attack, they could have entered
the harbor without securing the entrance to the harbor, or more importantly the
land surrounding the harbor. Greek ships could have followed them in and kept
their distance, for a time. The main roman fleet probably ignored the outnumbered
trailing Greek vessels.
Syracuse harbor is quite small, and enclosed on about 270 degrees by land. People
on land might be a able to blind a ship's crew with large reflective objects. By
using their shields to blind the targeted ships crew, Greek ships could have gotten
much closer without receiving effective fire from the Roman ships. The Greek
Ships or even small land based catapults could have set the Roman ships on fire.
If the Greeks had first set fire to the Roman ships nearest the harbor entrance.
This could have trapped the main body of Roman vessels. Individual ships were
forced to break formation to go around the burning ships. In single file they would
have been easy pickings for standard Greek naval tactics or for small mobile land
catapults launching Greek fire.
Because of all the smoke from the burning ships, the mirrors would have quickly
become useless. But by this time the Roman naval formations had been broken, and
the Roman fleet was in disarray. This was the use of mirrors to blind the crews to
approaching Greek ships or land based catapults. The blinding mirrors would act to
cover a flanking attack.
The Romans could not go forward, because the land based Greek catapults were
larger and superior. There wasn't any significant technology for the Romans to
copy. It seems to be a special case application of technology, tactics, and exploitation
of Roman arrogance.
There doesn't seem to be any detailed breakdown of the battle available. (please
e-mail me if anyone finds one). This also could have been a case of someone
weaving the potential of an idea with real historical events and people. Archimedes
may have written about optics, but little has survived to the present time. The
people who might have weaved this story, had access to much more of Archimedes
writings on optics.
September 2009 Revised Sept 2011
I suggest that the story is partially true, but incomplete. Archimedes was given
the credit and that may be true. The burning of the Roman fleet solely by the
action of reflections off of shields or some optical artifact does not stand up to close
inspection.
While looking for the above painting, I came across many discussions
about the technical feasibility of burning the fleet. But strangely this isn't the
critical point. On at least one web site, I found a more relevant question. If
Archimedes had actually deployed an optical burning apparatus, why didn't
the Romans copy it? If this was your website please contact me.
This would suggest a more complicated story. The Greeks had Greek Fire which
seems to have a strong historical basis. I would suggest that the reflections from
shields could have been used to blind the Roman crews to approaching Greek
ships. The Greeks could attack the blinded ships with catapults and Greek Fire.
Catapulting Greek Fire, the Greeks could have easily destroyed a Roman ship.
The following hypothetical scenario would need to be modified depending on the
time of day, for the position of the sun, and the actual deployment of the forces.
If the Romans had been too aggressive in their attack, they could have entered
the harbor without securing the entrance to the harbor, or more importantly the
land surrounding the harbor. Greek ships could have followed them in and kept
their distance, for a time. The main roman fleet probably ignored the outnumbered
trailing Greek vessels.
Syracuse harbor is quite small, and enclosed on about 270 degrees by land. People
on land might be a able to blind a ship's crew with large reflective objects. By
using their shields to blind the targeted ships crew, Greek ships could have gotten
much closer without receiving effective fire from the Roman ships. The Greek
Ships or even small land based catapults could have set the Roman ships on fire.
If the Greeks had first set fire to the Roman ships nearest the harbor entrance.
This could have trapped the main body of Roman vessels. Individual ships were
forced to break formation to go around the burning ships. In single file they would
have been easy pickings for standard Greek naval tactics or for small mobile land
catapults launching Greek fire.
Because of all the smoke from the burning ships, the mirrors would have quickly
become useless. But by this time the Roman naval formations had been broken, and
the Roman fleet was in disarray. This was the use of mirrors to blind the crews to
approaching Greek ships or land based catapults. The blinding mirrors would act to
cover a flanking attack.
The Romans could not go forward, because the land based Greek catapults were
larger and superior. There wasn't any significant technology for the Romans to
copy. It seems to be a special case application of technology, tactics, and exploitation
of Roman arrogance.
There doesn't seem to be any detailed breakdown of the battle available. (please
e-mail me if anyone finds one). This also could have been a case of someone
weaving the potential of an idea with real historical events and people. Archimedes
may have written about optics, but little has survived to the present time. The
people who might have weaved this story, had access to much more of Archimedes
writings on optics.
September 2009 Revised Sept 2011
 |
 |
| Copyrighted By Some Mean, Mean, Jellybeans 2010 |