On 7 Apr 2014 at 21:30, DED wrote:
> First off, there's the transponder. You'd have to intentionally turn
> it off (like the missing jet), which I don't believe free traders are
> going to do unless something was up.
>
> Secondly, you're using TL-12 (or better) sensors versus what we've
> got today.
Actually, for EM spectrum you can't actually *get* much better than
sensors we have right now. When you can detect individual photons at
most wavelengths from near IR on up, there's not really any room for
improvement. They'd be cheaper and more rugged, maybe, but not any
more sensitive.
> Thirdly, how long before the IR signature of the starship blends in
> with background crap.
No so much "how long" as "how far away is it?"
Though if the ship is powered down (and no survivors, then it's a
matter of how fast it cools to really hard to detect temperatures.
> The only thing that obscures your sensors are other "things", unless
> the star's EM output is that bad (but we compensate for that now).
> We're finding planets around other stars, right now. Amateur
> astronomers are finding asteroids in our own solar system. On a
> really clear night where the light pollution isn't so bad, I'll bet
> you can spot a satellite with just your eyes--and that's through an
> atmosphere.
>
> A big, shiny refined metal spacecraft out in the emptiness of space
> is going to be easier to find with TL-12 gear than that plane.
It doesn't have to *stay* shiny.
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com
> First off, there's the transponder. You'd have to intentionally turn
> it off (like the missing jet), which I don't believe free traders are
> going to do unless something was up.
>
> Secondly, you're using TL-12 (or better) sensors versus what we've
> got today.
Actually, for EM spectrum you can't actually *get* much better than
sensors we have right now. When you can detect individual photons at
most wavelengths from near IR on up, there's not really any room for
improvement. They'd be cheaper and more rugged, maybe, but not any
more sensitive.
> Thirdly, how long before the IR signature of the starship blends in
> with background crap.
No so much "how long" as "how far away is it?"
Though if the ship is powered down (and no survivors, then it's a
matter of how fast it cools to really hard to detect temperatures.
> The only thing that obscures your sensors are other "things", unless
> the star's EM output is that bad (but we compensate for that now).
> We're finding planets around other stars, right now. Amateur
> astronomers are finding asteroids in our own solar system. On a
> really clear night where the light pollution isn't so bad, I'll bet
> you can spot a satellite with just your eyes--and that's through an
> atmosphere.
>
> A big, shiny refined metal spacecraft out in the emptiness of space
> is going to be easier to find with TL-12 gear than that plane.
It doesn't have to *stay* shiny.
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com