Re: meteors vs. missles

>The Problem with meteors is that they are very visible, and easily disrupted by
>sufficient TL weapons, whereas a missle could easily have stealth capabilities
>and be hardened.
>
>Jim Baranski
>DEC Tewksbury MA

Sorry, but a small asteriod/large meteor is *not* very visible. The only way
to detect it is with active sensors as it won't have any emissions worth
mentioning. You might say it is naturally stealthy. After all, it is just
a falling rock. Nothing special about it except the fact that its orbit
intersects that target's orbit at the time the target is there.

And just what TL weapon can *destroy* a chunk of nickel-iron a mile or
two in diameter? Breaking it up into pieces makes the problem *worse*
not better. You have to completely destroy it or deflect its course.
If you "break" it, the pieces will deliver just as much impact energy,
and more of it will wind up in the atmosphere (and thus mess up your
climate).

If we go for near-lightspeed projectiles, you won't be able to detect
them in time to stop them. After all, at .9c, something a billion miles
away will arrive less than 7 seconds after any possible detector message!
A billion miles is roughly the diameter of Jupiter's orbit. And at .9c
a projectile a few *meters* in diameter would be a world killer.

I can't see any practical defense. Luckily .9c is not easily attainable
even at high tech levels. But this type of overgrown kinetic-kill weapon
is a possible means of gravely unbalancing the balance of power.