A Plausible Model for Space Combat in Science Fiction Writing
Copyright (c) 1993, Robert McKay
All rights reserved




       *A Plausible Model for Space Combat in Science Fiction Writing*
                                   an essay
                               by Robert McKay
                      Copyright (C) 1993 by Robert McKay


    By now, the *Star Wars* model of space combat is well-known even to those
few who have never seen any of the movies in that series.  The image of
fighters - either single or multi-seat types - zooming through the vacuum,
dodging and performing acrobatics as atmospheric fighters do, is indelibly
impressed on the collective consciousness of America.  This is true even of
those people who do not like science fiction.
    But this model is fatally flawed.  The ships of *Star Wars* and other
such productions are behaving as though they were in atmosphere, and such is
not the case.  Space is a vacuum - there is no atmosphere.  Thus, acrobatics
are not possible.  There can be no banks, no wide sweeping turns, no loops,
and no dog fights.  These things are part of aerial combat because they are
necessary and inherent maneuvers when flying aircraft.  They would not be -
could not be - part of space combat.
    It seems that from the movie-goer or TV viewer up to the production
staff, no one is aware of the characteristics of vacuum.  The best layman's
definition of vacuum is an absence of air.  There is no atmosphere in vacuum;
captured by the gravitational forces of planets, atmosphere - whether the
breathable mixture of Terra or the poisonous soups of Venus or Jupiter -re-
mains trapped around them.  It does not extend from planet to planet, much
less into interstellar space.
    This being the case, ailerons, flaps, wings, and other assorted control
surfaces are useless.  An aircraft rudder is designed to operate in atmo-
sphere; it swings to the left, and the pressure of the air through which the
plane is moving swings the nose to the left.  In space, without atmosphere, a
rudder is as useless as a tail on a tree.  It cannot serve any useful pur-
pose.  No matter how much it may be swung to the left, there is no atmosphere
to press against it and yaw the craft to port.
    If these control surfaces do not function in space, then the maneuvers
produced by these surfaces are likewise non-existent in space.  Remaining
with the illustrative rudder, we see that if it does not function in space,
there can be no yaw in the manner of an aircraft.  Unlike a B-52 coming in
for a landing, a spacecraft cannot use the rudder to go crabwise.  It's ac-
celeration is forward, and any acceleration applied from the side while for-
ward acceleration is in progress will, depending on whether the sideways ac-
celeration is at the nose, the tail, or amidships, point it in a new direc-
tion which the craft will then follow or shove it sideways bodily as it con-
tinues its forward flight.
    The currently popular space combat model is aerial combat.  We see space
fighters behaving as do F-15s, F-18s, or A-10s.  As I have discussed, this
model simply is not valid.  We need, therefore, to leave the air force in the
air, and find another model for space combat.
    The naval model is the best.  In our day, of course, the heroes are those
who climb into a cockpit and do single combat with other men in cockpits.
The high-tech radars, weapons systems, avionics, and other tools do not
change the fact that in aerial combat, it is still basically man against man,
one on one.  This is a romantic notion, but we must discard romance and deal
with reality in this matter.
    Without means of maneuvering fighters in the *Stars Wars* manner in vacu-
um, we must find a more credible way of picturing the thing.  We must discard
the romance of one-on-one fighter battles, and look to the ancient concept of
ships, with large crews and serious armament, tackling each other on a more
sedate, though not any less deadly, basis.  And this model is not devoid of
romance; until the advent of the air age, the main battle line was the place
where heroes were found.  The trenches of World War I may have been nasty,
muddy, filthy places, but at Jutland, German and British admirals could
charge each other in the wet and fog, hurling great destructive broadsides at
each other.  The fact that no one really won the Battle of Jutland does not
in the least detract from the romantic patina of it.  Even in World War II,
where whole battles of great strategic significance were fought without the
ships coming within 100 miles of each other, the Battle of San Bernardino
Strait saw battleships slugging it out, with the classic "crossing the T" ma-
neuver employed with devastating effect by the American fleet.
    It is not unromantic to envision fleets or single ships doing battle in
space.  It is merely less romantic to our modern frame of mind - and as I
have already iterated and reiterated, that frame of mind is simply unrealis-
tic.  If we are to base our views of space combat on what is romantic, we
could do worse than the naval model.
    It should not be imagined that if man finds himself in space combat all
will be - with the exception of the arena - precisely as naval battles have
been.  The three-dimensional nature of the battlefield will approximate aeri-
al combat - though it will also be reminiscent of submarine warfare.  The
speeds will be immensely greater - thousands of miles per second are standard
in space.  Weapons systems, detection methods, and armor - if armor there is
- will be radically different than those used on current warships.  Moreover,
regardless of the naval correspondence, it is most likely that any space mil-
itary will be derived from air forces; sailing ships can't leave the surface,
while aircraft can approach the edge of space (in fact, during the X-craft
tests in the 50s and 60s at Edwards Air Force Base in California, rocket pow-
ered aircraft actually left the atmosphere, entered the lower regions of
space, and glided back to a controlled landing; they were unfortunately, in
my view, overshadowed by the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs).
    What would a space battle be like?  Obviously any description is specula-
tion; science fiction is what such writing is termed.  However, some charac-
teristic are, I think, certain enough to be discussed.
    First, as I have already indicated, the vessels involved will be large,
with large crews.  The precise size(s) is not important.  However, it seems
logical to assume that one-man craft will be incapable of carrying the re-
quired fuel, weapons, and "avionics" (there's a term that will need to
evolve).  Whether the weapons are unguided or guided missiles or some sort of
energy weapons, they will themselves be large - probably larger, if missiles,
than current fighter aircraft.  Though at the speeds that are reached in
space even a small object can do significant damage, we must assume that the
opposing craft has made provision for such things in the form of armor and/or
some type of yet-to-be-invented shielding, and thus we must assume as a cor-
ollary that ships will mount larger weapons.  If for no other reason, weapons
of the physical sort will be large due to the requirements of fuel and war-
head; if they are guided, as seems to be a necessity, the target acquisition
and lock-on systems will increase the size of the weapon.  Second, the struc-
    ture of the vessel and crew will approximate the naval pattern.  There
will be a captain, with a staff of officers.  Whether there is a bridge, a
combat information center, or some control center that combines these two
areas, the captain will conn and fight his ship from this specialized loca-
tion, giving helm and firing orders much as today's naval captains do.  En-
listed men will man helm and other stations around the ship; the Star Trek
practice of having all bridge stations manned by officers is unrealistic and
will not come to pass.  While there will undoubtedly be differences, a modern
naval officer could be transported onto a space vessel and not find any seri-
ous differences in the basic principles of crewing, command, and function.
    Third, actual combat will be much like naval engagements.  Single ship
actions will doubtless see ships coming at each other from various angles -
ranging from an attack on the beam by an ambusher to a nose-to-nose approach
by vessels which have long since sighted each other, firing as their guns
bear, and loosing broadsides as occasion permits.  There is no weather gauge
in space, and powered "flight" renders this unnecessary in any case, but use
will no doubt be made, when possible, of solar glare, planetary or other bo-
dies, and electronic countermeasures in the attempt to gain an advantage.
Fleet engagements will no doubt see aggregations of ships approaching, with
the lighter and more maneuverable vessels forming a screen around the heavier
but more powerful vessels - just as a screen is today thrown around the heavy
vessels of a naval task force.
    Speculation at this point becomes sheer guesswork.  Ships will be able to
maneuver, and the basic maneuvers possible in space combat can be ascer-
tained.  But just what part this will play is hard to say.  Without the abil-
ity to twist and turn like aircraft - or even like ocean-going vessels - in
tight and sudden arcs, maneuver may be less important in space combat than it
is today.  On the other hand, there may be some system whereby relatively
quick maneuvers can be made, and weapons may arrive slowly enough on target
for these maneuvers to be a serious consideration.  What weapons will be
available is completely unknown.  For all the usage of lasers and phasers and
other speculative weapons, the fact is that we don't have anything today that
could do the trick and don't know what will finally be developed.  In fact,
in discussing space combat we are engaging in the greatest speculation of
all, for there is absolutely no guarantee that man will ever reach the point
where such is possible.
    Space combat in the *Star Wars* manner is simply not credible.  Space
combat after a naval model is much more plausible.  This much is certain.
But what the details will be - or even that they will be - is purely specula-
tive, and properly remains in the realm of science fiction.

