On 21 Sep 2016 at 15:38, Ian Whitchurch wrote:

> Im a little unsure why a deep meson site is a better option than a
> very big SDB - the size of the caverns needed for the Deep Meson
> Site should show up on gravity and other sensors, as should much of
> the support equipment, and the sensor systems feeding them data are
> still vulnerable to orbital bombardment even if the site isnt. Im not
> even get to the need for radiators for the power requirement for
> them.

Well, a *long* time ago we discussed the sensor "problem".

I pointed out that for many purposes, having the higher TL equivalent
of webcams all over the place (useful for crime prevention type
surveillance) will give you quite accurate data for targeting
solutions by treating them as data sources for a sort of massive
synthetic aperture array.

just have decent co-ordinates for them, and redundant data links
(both are useful for the more normal purpose).

And give air rafts and the like, having them have a full "hemisphere+
of coverage makes sense. Even some short range radar or the like.

Also, most ships are strong neutrino sources (unless the power plant
is off), so you can use neutrino detectors which can be buried pretty
deeply as well.

So have a fair number of active sensors (and have some of them
masquerading as something else). Add in a bunch of neutrino
detectors, and then all the passive "visual" sensors in the world
(almost literally).

--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com