I don’t think we’re talking light-minute effective ranges for Iron Empires anti-ship weaponry. The Culture in the Ian Banks novels only manages that because everything they’ve got moves at staggering FTL speeds, including possibly their coffeemakers.
If nothing else, it’s worth noting that your quoted light-second range for a laser assumes that the target can’t get out of the way in two seconds (one for your visual or radar return to get from the target to you, another for your laser to get from you to the target). A hammer patrol boat or attack sled is probably on some kind of random evasive scheme that means that it’s not where it looked like it was gonna be when you sighted to shoot. (end digression)
Atmospheric effects mean that lasers aren’t very effective from orbit, and neither are fusion batteries most likely, so the stuff that you really have to worry about, as an Anvil soldier, is really missiles (that’s what we see used for ground bombardment in Faith Conquers, isn’t it?).
This reinforces the Maginot Line side, I think, as you can conceivably deploy some sort of antimissile system or ECM that would reduce your exposure in a fixed position.
I’m not sure Culture or Harrington are good analogies… both are definitely High Index societies. Also, when firing lasers, you need to be seriously conserned with beamspread. Besides, primary armament for capital ships in IE is q-beams, which are effectively meson guns, not lasers.
to finish Mike’s thought…
And Q-beams can’t fire into a particle field (ie: forget about firing into an atmosphere, they can’t even fire at ships in orbit).
I assume lasers could be made to function in an orbital bombarment role, but it wouldn’t be instant death at light speed (the attack would be close, but the aquisition wouldn’t be).
-Chris
And presumably target acquisition is considerably easier for surface-to-space weapons than it is for space-to-surface. The Hammer gunners are having to look down into the atmosphere and pick their targets out from tremendous clutter: clouds, precipitation, layers of hot and cold air, trees, hills, rocks, camouflage, maybe tunnels and bunkers underground – think how much trouble modern-day overhead reconaissance (satellite, UAV, etc.) had finding the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong, even in large formations, or the insurgents in Iraq. By contrast, the anti-Hammer gunners just have to look up through the atmosphere and find their target in the void of space, where as a rule there are very few multi-ton solid objects that emit radiation. Even if the Hammer is relying solely on passive sensors and coasting without using its engine or thrusters, it still emits some radiation, because it has to have at least part of its hull warm enough to support human life inside (the crew!), and that will stand out against the background of space like a campfire at night.
Now, once you lock onto your target, the equation switches: the ground-based forces are screwed once they’re seen, because they can’t move far or fast (or at all, if they’re fortresses), while Hammer can always break a lock-on by hitting the main drives to boost out of orbit and out of range – it’s not as if the planet can follow them!
Similar dilemma faced by Serbian AA crews when being bombarded by coalition forces. Do we light up in the hope that we might nail one of the incoming aircraft, with the knowledge that if we do, we eat a HARM (radiation seeking missile), or do we stay passive, let them fly by, and life to shoot (or not shoot) at different aircraft. I could see some lucky hammer pilot, possibly a Lord Pilot-Hussar in a Hammer Hussar, being ordered to make high speed strafing runs at the planet in the hope of provoking defensive fire, so the fleet can paste the defensive sites.
Slightly different here. Since the hammers are radiating (they can’t help but radiate) targeting could be done passively, and passed off to remote, unmanned weapon stations, like orbital or submarine unmanned weapon platforms that are supposed to be killed.
Of course, offering up unmanned targets isn’t exactly sporting, is it.