Satellite defence system for Earth

[Crazy Tom]

We don't know whether those were even real.

I did invent a better term, or made one available: LAC. Or frigate. Having it unmanned isn't the brightest idea, communications can be jammed, and AI isn't so advanced yet. Best equip it with a small crew at least.

But while we're at it, if you add some more space, this small system defense boat can turn into a small but powerful interstellar patrol ship. Cheaper than a 304.

Ultimately, your concern about people using the system to take over the world are along the same lines as the US taking over the world with a 304. Heck, we know it only takes a handful of people to operate it, so that makes it even easier.

[guppy338]

no ai can replace a pearson

[thekillman]

that's something only the ignorant say.

[comperius]

When reading several posts on this page I just got an idea.

What if we would take 304's, gave them only the stuff they urgently need for planetary defence (weapons, rechargeable shields, bigger bridge for like 5 or 7 people, F-302 hangers and space for living for maybe up to 40, instead of 200 people) and leave other systems to be build later, when we have I don't know more than 1 of this ships in our orbit?

Because building a fully functional 304 has no sense if it's going to be just for planetary defence and again it has no sense to design and than after 2 years build a new class of ship.

So the only thing what we would have to do in this scenario is to design a new bridge for more than 3 people and a rechargeable shields, which can be easily done by installing a secondary shields and making a some sort of mechanism that when shields are 15 seconds before failing, a secondary shield is automatically turned on and primary shields starts recharging and after secondary shields starts failing primary shield goes back on-line... and that repeats again and again. The only bad thing of this plan is that we could maybe need a better power source or install two times more power source than on normal 304's.

what do you think?

And otherwise I'm still for building a network of maybe 6 bigger, Ancient like defence satellites surrounding Earth instead of smaller ships, because than we would have to gave up firing power (so weapons) of the satellites for ships basic functions like hyper drives, mess hall, bridge, etc.

[Crazy Tom]

no ai can replace a pearson

See: Archailect, AI God, Turing grade, Singularity, etc.

And to add: Elizabeth Weir, Replicarter, Hubald, etc.

that's something only the ignorant say.

Wait for the natural stupidity line...

[stargater1990]

These satellites are for delaying purposes only. If there are no ships around Earth for some Deus Ex Machina of a reason, then the Satellites could delay the invaders until a ship or fleet of ship can return. Satellites, IMO, aren't meant to be a long-term defense.

When it's been shown that the bursts no longer work well against ha'tak classes?

here let me put this another way. we build a fleet of say 40 ships. theres no reason that you would ever need to to send every last ship we have away from earth or for that matter, more than half. i mean the point is to build basically 2 different fleets. 1 permenently attached to earth for planetary defence and the other thats assigned to whatever needs to be done be it escort, search and rescue, supply run etc.etc.

and if there was an attack against earth if we build a sensor grid capable of detecting ships a few hours before they get here, then we would recall all ships that could get here in time but more than likely there not going to be within a few hours travel of earth in witch case its going to take them a more than a few hours and even if they only get here an hour later, the satalites would have either destroyed the enemy ships or have been destroyed themselves in witch case they wouldnt really be delaying the ships but acting as a substitute to ships in the first place so really, why bother with them when you could just build real ships.

and it hasnt been shown that the burst dont work against hataks anymore, but what i mean by that whole thing was that in the show, when one of them works the other dosent so im hypothesizing that the two weapons work differently and that if one dosent work the other might so it would just be prudent to have both possibilities available in a combat situation if we were ever attacked by some new enemy that has shielding immune the the beam weapons,the bursts might work still and it would be best to have all available options.

[stargater1990]

it's better to create a (largely unmanned) defence system than a few more 304's.

304's are big, expensive, not to mention intergalactically capable, and have an expensive crew.

a sattelite (tom, you still cant invent a better term?) with just the very basics would be indeed a small ship, the only difference is it's unmanned and it's being controlled form a distance.

why does everyone think you can that easily defend against APBW's? Drones have been around for god knows how long and not ONE race so far has Drone-resistant shields (ancient drones, that is). with the possible exception of the asgard(by extent tauri).

why would APBW's be different. there are two explanations for the APBW's power:

1: possibly like other asgard weapons, it is designed to directly penetrate shields with some fancy applied technology.

2: sheer force heavily concentrated locally overwhelms the shield and thus passes through.

it's clearly the pinnacle of Asgard Technology. why would any farmer invent something better than that? or even something against that?

one way or another, were proboly going to be building a fleet of 304s for a number of different reasons. now just because we build 304s purely for planetary defence dosent mean that they have to be maned at all times. i mean all you would really need is for the ships to be in working order and maintained and kept in underground hangars untill needed so really it wouldnt be all that expensive.

andthe crews for the 304s are going to be working for the airforce or the other countries airforces and they would get paid whether their working onboard a 304 or working some other job so really the crew cost dosent matter.

and think about it this way, if each of the 5 nations represented in the episode "disclosure" had 8 ships that they either opperated at their own expense, or kept parked in underground hangars for emergency purposes we would have a fleet of 40 ships to work with for planetary defence and other missions and each individual country opperates their own ships and even then i really dont see all of these expenses that your talking about because besides food and medical supplies and weapons, there arent any extra costs associated with opperating a 304. i mean the naquada generators can run for at least a year without having to be refueled, if not longer, and the people will be paid whether there on the ship or not so im just not seeing all of the expenses you are.

[Rise Of The Phoenix]

Hi stargate1990, long time no chat, hope you're well.

I think with the whole cost thing thekillman meant the actual cost of the ships compared to a sat network.
304s probably cost at least a few billion to build each, even with off world resources being used, say it's 3 billion dollars per ship and you want to make 40 of them or 35 more to top up our current group of ships in quick time (building ships at a faster rate would probably put the costs up further and that's assuming it doesn't cost more than the 3 billion to start with, until you hit the building capacity of however many you can actually construct in secret) so we can have a defense force going well it's a massive cost and then there's the issue of making 302s and crewing everything with skilled people on top of that well I'd guess you could be looking at a few hundred billion dollars.

No one's saying stop making a fleet of ships, or that we don't start to make some smaller cheaper ships that can aid in the defense of Earth, but for permanent defense it would be both quicker and cheaper to make something like a satellite or as you know from a prior discussion we had the type of system I favor the ground based cannons.
TBH I think a network of shielded, perhaps cloak capable, ground based cannons would be the cheapest things overall, as they don't require anything but a power source, some computer tech, shield/cloaking emitters, sensors and they don't need engines, life support (unless they're manned in some way and the shield stops air from getting in to the control room if the weapons have them), along with some inertial dampers to protect any internal components or occupants from getting splatted when the satellite has to make any evasive maneuvers.
Still satellites would be cheaper than ships and you could probably provide a satellite system at a much faster rate than it would take to build a relatively small (compared to how many Ha'Taks, Hives or Wraith Cruisers there are out there) fleet of Tauri ships.


Dose anyone want to guess how much a satellite or cannon defense system would cost to make?

The 200 odd AG3s were I think $100 billion to get finished in 2 years and $200 billion to get finished in 1 year (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Of course we wouldn't be building quite that many satellites or cannons.
I think with a network of a dozen or so APBW sats we'd be pretty safe (without some member of the IOA putting in their own override codes) and I doubt that would cost anywhere near the same dollar figure as even 1 or 2 304s.
An equal number of APBW cannons would probably cost a bit less than the sats as they wouldn't need to have the same number of components or be placed in orbit.
Sats maybe $2 billion for 12 and perhaps half that for the same number of cannons.

[stargater1990]

Hi stargate1990, long time no chat, hope you're well.

I think with the whole cost thing thekillman meant the actual cost of the ships compared to a sat network.
304s probably cost at least a few billion to build each, even with off world resources being used, say it's 3 billion dollars per ship and you want to make 40 of them or 35 more to top up our current group of ships in quick time (building ships at a faster rate would probably put the costs up further and that's assuming it doesn't cost more than the 3 billion to start with, until you hit the building capacity of however many you can actually construct in secret) so we can have a defense force going well it's a massive cost and then there's the issue of making 302s and crewing everything with skilled people on top of that well I'd guess you could be looking at a few hundred billion dollars.

No one's saying stop making a fleet of ships, or that we don't start to make some smaller cheaper ships that can aid in the defense of Earth, but for permanent defense it would be both quicker and cheaper to make something like a satellite or as you know from a prior discussion we had the type of system I favor the ground based cannons.
TBH I think a network of shielded, perhaps cloak capable, ground based cannons would be the cheapest things overall, as they don't require anything but a power source, some computer tech, shield/cloaking emitters, sensors and they don't need engines, life support (unless they're manned in some way and the shield stops air from getting in to the control room if the weapons have them), along with some inertial dampers to protect any internal components or occupants from getting splatted when the satellite has to make any evasive maneuvers.
Still satellites would be cheaper than ships and you could probably provide a satellite system at a much faster rate than it would take to build a relatively small (compared to how many Ha'Taks, Hives or Wraith Cruisers there are out there) fleet of Tauri ships.


Dose anyone want to guess how much a satellite or cannon defense system would cost to make?

The 200 odd AG3s were I think $100 billion to get finished in 2 years and $200 billion to get finished in 1 year (please correct me if I'm wrong).
Of course we wouldn't be building quite that many satellites or cannons.
I think with a network of a dozen or so APBW sats we'd be pretty safe (without some member of the IOA putting in their own override codes) and I doubt that would cost anywhere near the same dollar figure as even 1 or 2 304s.
An equal number of APBW cannons would probably cost a bit less than the sats as they wouldn't need to have the same number of components or be placed in orbit.
Sats maybe $2 billion for 12 and perhaps half that for the same number of cannons.

im not talking about doing all of this overnight, obviously it would take maybe 5 to 10 years to build roughly 40 ships or perhaps more or maybe a little less since 304s are really powerful.

however, thus far we have yet to actually use asgard technology in the construction of 304s and i think that once we do, it would dramatically increase our ship output and cost to make a ship. i mean think of it this way, if the asgard could build a fleet of oniells in a matter of years and a single oniell is at least 10, if not more, times the size of a 304 then id say it would be very easy to make 40 ships in 5 to 10 years and at proboly a quarter of the cost that it would at our current rate.

and when you take into consideration roughly a year of R&D in order to build a prototype asgard construction yard, then maybe 6 months of construction and at a cost of maybe 2 to 3 billion, proboly no mare than it cost to build a 304, then 3 years from now we could have 15 304s ready for deployment at the most and thinking conservatively maybe 12. and from then on be pumping out roughly 8 to 10 a year.

why waste time building a satalite network when 304s would basically be satalites except 10 times better. and then have the infrastructure in place to begin construction of a big fleet of ships.

and in terms of cost, i would say that after the initial investment in building asgard infrasturcture on both earth to build the ships and on our offworld mining planets to increase the supply of raw materials to match production needs, i would say that the whole venture would cost a total of no more than 130 billion over the course of the next decade and that really a gross over estimation since thats making each 304 cost 3 billion when in fact once you have the asgard facility in place, a 304 will only cost as much as the labor to basically push the buttons because asgard equipment cant be very physically oriented given their limited physical capabilities.

and as for the crews, it will be up to the country that the ships go to to train their crews and cover the opperating costs but as ive said before, the cost to opperate the 304s isint very much since all your buying is food, medical supplies, and weapons.

basically i think our time would be better spent building the afore mentioned infrastructure and ships and that building satalites would be a waste of time because both of the ideas are really one or the other kind of things and that having both is really overkill and a waste of time and resources and that we either build a large fleet of ships to protect earth and oversee our intrests in the reast of this galaxy, or we build the satalite network and build maybe 10 ships to oversee our intrests and doing both is just a waste.


and building the 284 satalites needed to create a full defence grid would have cost 80 billion over the course of 2 years and 160 billion over the course of 1 year.(just thought id correct you as asked)

[thekillman]

a 304 has a 200+ expensive crew that bores itself out of it's skull from patrolling earth against....nothing. the sattelite system is linked to atlantis so it can detect ships from far away. the target is hailed and if confirmed to be hostile, all sats prepare for battle. all 304's nearby receive a databurst concerning the data on the craft, it's ETA, etc. so all captains are always informed. it should take a few hours to cross the MW with asgard hyperdrives. so, unless the mission is ubervital, the 304 can be recalled at a time in which it arrives a few minutes before the enemy craft and still can pwn it if needed.

[comperius]

does anyone have any info on firing range of APBW's?

[thekillman]

there is no such thing as range in space!

[Control_Chair]

What about acuuracy over distance? Target lock range?

[Buba uognarf]

there is no such thing as range in space!

Well its likely that the beam would disperse over long distances and due to the beams speed and the fact that a target will most likely be moving it will have an effective range. However the particles making up the beam will continue until they hit something or gravity pulls them into a planet or what have you.

[thekillman]

that's effective range.

well it depends. the oddy had shoot-hit beams, but the Deadalus and Apollo have shoot-fly-hit beams (in BAMSR) yet in EATG the beam nigh-instantly hits