war in heaven ,by ,fletcher ,pratt ,who is going to use death-rays when solid-shot and space-mines will bring far cheaper victory8 ,an article about space-warfare4 ,virtually all science fiction authors and most of those who read the stuff have speculated at one time or another upon space-warfare4 ,how will it be waged8 ,what will the ships be like1 the weapons1 the tactics8 ,fletcher ,pratt1 even more renowned as a military and naval historian and student than as a science fiction author here take a peek into an all-too probable future and comes up with some well-thought-out answers that are guaranteed to surprise all would-be spacemen4 ,transcriber's ,note3 ,this etext was produced from ,fantastic ,universe ,june-,july #aiec4 ,extensive research did not uncover any evidence that the ,u4,s4 copyright on this publication was renewed4 ,the mighty ship released a flashing sheet of energy but the ,uranian space-vessel's beams were met by a counter-energy screen that caused its blinding heat to ricochet in flashing showers from a barrier invisible against the star-studded black wall of space4444 ,oh1 yeah8 ,it reads well--or has a few thousand fictional times--but it doesn't make sense in a too-real future4 ,look chum1 a searing bolt of flame has to have something that will support combustion or it will go out4 ,and what do you mean sheet of energy8 ,how do you generate it8 ,how do you expect to keep radiation in a tight beam across a couple of thousand miles of space when you can't even prevent a beam of light from spreading after a couple of thousand feet8 ,the tractor and repulsor beams1 screens of force and death-rays of high-power interplanetary stories simply aren't going to work4 ,at least not according to any science we know now4 ,about the only kind of ray that might be dangerous would be ultra-violet4 ,but the ,sun itself produces ultra-violet faster and in greater quantity than any generator man could build and unless the crews of space-ships are very thoroughly protected against it there won't be any space-ships4 ,maybe the ,,bems from ,arcturus will come around with something more serious but it is a better-than-even-money bet that they can't do any more about the laws governing radiation than we can4 ,and if they can't space war will have to be fought with far more mundane weapons4 ,well1 what kind of weapons8 ,that depends upon the kind of ships4 ,you don't expect an earthly battleship to carry torpedoes because she will never get close enough to the enemy to fire them--or a destroyer to mount #af-;inch guns because she can't carry them4 ,so the problem of space-war begins with that of designing a space-warship4 ,and that brings up some interesting questions4 ,the first of them is the shape of the ship4 ,the torpedo-shape with brief wings1 the type usually pictured1 is very attractive4 ,it is the only shape that could take off from earth and go out through the atmosphere4 ,it keeps the machinery well away from the living spaces4 ,for landing on the moon or an asteroid it is quite all right because it can be turned over and set down on its tail jets4 ,but when space-warfare really gets going the torpedo-shape will take a back space before a vessel built in space 7probably at a satellite station7 to operate and fight in space4 ,and the shape of that ship will be a sphere4 ,it is the strongest1 the most economical for the use of the contained cubic capacity1 but these are not the main reasons for building space-warships round4 ,the reasons are those of military efficiency1 which take precedence over all others when it comes to designing fighting equipment4 ,in the first place a sphere can be given more than one rocket exhaust4 ,with more than one the spherical ship would have a maneuvering ability making immeasurably superior to the long1 graceful torpedo4 ,the latter would have to sweep around in curves of hundreds or thousands of miles1 or change its course on gyros1 which would take nearly as long4 ,but the sphere1 with a simple opposite-direction blast from its rockets1 could halt1 change course and be off4 ,probably only two exhausts are necessary1 but those we have to have4 ,i am aware that the engineering problems of building a space-ship that way are very severe but so are the engineering problems of building an atomic submarine or a carrier to carry jet planes4 ,however1 when there is urgent military necessity for something1 neither expense nor the difficulty of the problem is ever really allowed to stand in the way4 ,in the second place a sphere can be built with no blind angles of approach4 ,the fighter airplane of today1 with an enemy on his tail1 is in trouble--and so will be a space-ship with an enemy on its exhaust4 ,of course1 turrets can be mounted above or below the exhaust on a torpedo-shaped ship but they will never give quite the same protection as not having any blind angles at all4 ,in the third place the sphere is the most convenient shape for landing on the ,moon or asteroids and they are going to be important as bases4 ,and in the fourth place the armor of the sphere can carry the main structural stresses1 making the interior structure light4 ,using a spherical shape means size1 of course1 but so do several other necessary factors and it is impossible to avoid them all4 ,this means that the warships of space will not be divided into classes of battleships1 cruisers and destroyers like warships of the ocean4 ,with an exception to be noted later all will be battleships4 ,there is no reason for making them anything else4 ,oceanic destroyers gain speed by sacrificing armor but there is no comparable gain in a space-ship4 ,once the jets are started and the original inertia overcome the heavy ship will travel as fast as the light one because the limiting factor is how much acceleration the crew can stand physically--and it's the same for both4 ,on earth the design of a ship is a compromise between the demands of armament1 protection1 speed and cruising radius1 with the last the least important4 ,for the space-ship speed will make its demands but they will not have to be satisfied at the expense of the other characteristics4 ,however1 cruising radius is something else4 ,the ruling consideration in the radius of action of an earth-ship is the ability to carry fuel4 ,stores for the crew were seldom a problem during the war1 even though the food did sometimes run down to ,spam and those incredible dehydrated potatoes4 ,ammunition became a problem in only a few cases4 ,but in the space-navy all this will be changed4 ,fuel does not look like a particularly serious problem4 ,a given space-ship will be burning lots while she is using it but most of the time she'll be coasting on gained acceleration and will need fuel only for short bursts of maneuver during action4 ,the true limiting factor in the radius of action of a space-warship is the stores for the crew--not food or water but most specifically air4 ,the problem with water is not supplying it but getting rid of it4 ,for every five pounds of food you eat two pounds of water is the minimum result1 exuded in various ways4 ,and water is ridiculously easy to purify by distillation4 ,food itself can be carried in various concentrated forms but it is impossible to carry reserve air except in oxygen bottles under compression and it is very difficult to get rid of surplus unwanted carbon dioxide4 ,for stations in space air-purifiers have been suggested1 consisting of algae operating in a churned water-tank4 ,this would be all right for a station which has a steady motion in a determined orbit4 ,but the space-battleship in action will be subject to violent gyrations which would do no good to the air-purifying system even if considerations of weight and space made it practical to install such a system in the first place4 ,then there is the added danger that a single hit in so vital an installation would put the ship out of action for keeps while a few oxygen bottles blown up would not matter4 ,so the space-battleship will probably have to depend on bottled air1 like a pre-snorkel submarine1 and the quantity she can carry will determine her radius of action4 ,this does not mean that she cannot make quite long voyages1 since a ship of the dimensions we are contemplating could store quite a lot of air4 ,but it does help to determine the strategy of space-warfare4 ,it will be fundamentally a struggle for bases where more oxygen can be obtained4 ,not through going down into the atmosphere of ,earth or the thin atmosphere of ,mars or the questionable one of ,venus4 ,it means bases on the ,moon and the asteroids4 ,the ,moon and asteroids are made of rocks1 on the surface at least1 and practically all rocks are loaded with oxygen--#dg in the crust of the ,earth for example4 ,with the kind of power that will be available by time we get space-ships1 it will be a comparatively simple matter to separate these rock materials from their oxygen electrolytically4 ,carbon dioxide is partly oxygen1 of course1 but so stubbornly bonded that no ordinary electrolytic process will break it and it has the unpleasant quality of being a gas under electrolytic conditions4 ,since the oxygen-producing machinery will be too heavy and bulky to carry aboard the space-ship the job will have to be done at air-refueling stations and these advanced bases will be the key of space-campaigns4 ,naturally1 they will be powerfully fortified against attack from the enemy's space-fleet4 ,equally naturally they will be logical points of attack in the hope of limiting the enemy's operations by cutting his bases from under him4 ,thus the overall strategy of a space-campaign will somewhat resemble that of the ,pacific ,war1 with each party trying to destroy or neutralize the enemy's bases while extending his own4 ,if both have bases on the ,moon or ,mars there may even be ground campaigns in support of those in the skies4 ,and getting control of one of those erratic asteroids that come within the orbit of ,mars will count for ten4 ,what about armament8 ,in stories of space-warfare that get away from those improbable rays there is usually some kind of hyper-super-duper torpedo1 rocket-propelled4 ,but this only demonstrates that the authors of the stories are thinking in ,earth-terms instead of space-terms4 ,it is perfectly plausible to include some torpedoes1 probably with atomic warheads1 in the armament of a space-ship--something that would knock out an enemy base or destroy a space-battleship at a single blow4 ,but the torpedo will always be what military men call a weapon of opportunity4 ,they can't be used at all angles--it would be fatally easy for one of them to make a near-miss on the enemy craft and atom-bomb your own ,moon base or some part of the ,earth you didn't want atom-bombed4 ,earth's gravitational attraction would pull such a torpedo in from quite a distance out4 ,there is also the point that on ,earth the torpedo is a comparatively short-range weapon1 fired from concealment or under conditions where the torpedo-carrier approaches so rapidly it cannot be stopped--by a submarine under-water1 by surface ships at night or from behind smoke-screens1 by torpedo-planes that attack at ten times the speed of the target-ship4 ,none of these conditions can be realized in space-warfare4 ,even if the space-ship were painted black and operating in a planetary shadow 7as in some stories7 radar would pick it up at a distance at least equaling that from the ,earth to the ,moon4 ,and even black coloring would make the space-ship visible as it occluded the practically continuous blanket of stars visible in open space4 ,you can't make a smoke-screen in space--you can make it1 but it wouldn't hang and wouldn't be any use against radar if it did4 ,comparative speeds that would permit the torpedo-plane type of attack are simply unattainable4 ,finally naval experience shows that fire is always opened at the greatest possible range where there is any chance of doing damage--and that range is usually maintained in the hope of avoiding hits4 ,only when one party has been so badly pounded that defeat seems inevitable is there an effort to close the range for torpedo or gunfire4 ,in space-war1 given high visibility and the fact that there will be neither gravity nor air resistance to slow up shells1 fire will be opened at extremely long ranges--hundreds of miles4 ,at this distance1 a rocket-torpedo1 clearly indicating its presence by its trail of fire1 will be quite easy to intercept--by shooting smaller rockets or shells with proximity fuses at it4 ,the time it will take the torpedo to cover the distance is the major factor4 ,and running in to launch a torpedo from close range will be very difficult because of the low speed differential between the two parties and again because of the distance4 ,so it is probable that most space-actions will be fought out with guns4 ,i said guns4 ,but a very different type of gun from those most of us are familiar with1 because this is another point where ,earth-thinking must give way to space-thinking4 ,when the breech-block of a gun aboard one of our cruisers is swung open to receive a new shell there is a brief moment when the gun forms an open connecting tube from the inside of the turret to the outside air4 99 99 99 99 99 ,this will never do aboard a space-ship--there is no air outside and the air from all over the vessel would rush in a tornado to escape into outer space4 ,there will have to be some device for loading the gun in a vacuum or1 since this might give trouble in case of a breakdown or a misfire1 more likely an automatic tompion to close the mouth of the gun until there is another charge in the breech4 ,this would have the advantage that the rush of air into the gun1 evacuated by the previous firing1 would automatically clean it of residual explosion products4 ,but this is not all4 ,since there is no air to set up resistances to take a projectile out of its proper path1 there is no particular reason for rifling the gun4 ,in fact it would be rather better not to4 ,and while shells were mentioned1 in connection with beating off rocket-torpedoes and would be very useful for that purpose1 there is no reason whatever for employing them against another space-ship or the dome of an enemy base4 ,the reason for using a shell against an ,earthbound ship is that after it gets through the side it explodes there and messes things up for a considerable radius4 ,but a space-ship is vulnerable in a way that no ,earth-ship ever is4 ,if it loses its air it's the finish for everybody aboard4 ,a high-velocity solid-shot1 penetrating the side of a space-ship1 could tear holes in several compartments and connect them all with the outside1 causing disastrously rapid exhaustion of the air4 ,it would be much more damaging than any shell1 which would only ruin one or two compartments4 ,for that matter it was discovered during the last war that a solid projectile which penetrated a tank and ricocheted around inside was quite as effective as a shell-burst4 ,a solid-shot would have more penetrating power because of its greater mass and unwillingness to break up against armor4 ,and there is also the law of military economics that requires you do everything with the least expensive weapon that will accomplish the purpose4 ,a cast-steel bullet with a soft iron head to grease its way through armor will be both cheaper and more effective than any type of shell4 ,as an alternate type of ammunition for use against ships with exceptionally heavy armor1 there might be some projectile using the shaped-charge principle4 ,there's nothing wrong with carrying several different types of projectile for the same guns--both ship and field artillery do it right now4 ,the type and purpose of the projectiles also determine the size of the guns4 ,the reason for using large-caliber guns on ,earth are two--to get a bigger bursting charge at the receiving end and to obtain greater range by a larger driving charge in the breech4 ,but in space a projectile would have infinite range1 unless it fell into the gravitational attraction of some body1 and the big bursting charge is not required4 ,so the gun need be only just big enough to make the driving charge give it a very high muzzle-velocity4 ,considering the question of ammunition stowage and supply1 probably the best caliber would be between #c4e and #f inches1 #ij and #aee millimeters4 ,liquid propellants give higher muzzle velocities than solid and would have the advantage of making a better seal around the projectile in the breech4 ,they could be pumped in from metered tubes4 ,after the air-tight doors have been closed the men who serve these guns will go into action in space-suits1 breathing the air around them but having the suits fitted with automatic valves that will close down the moment the compartment begins to lose air4 ,damage-control parties will have special apparatus for patching holes--probably quick-drying viscous plastics with a silicone base1 because of their imperviousness to temperature changes4 ,what about fire controls8 ,the calculations for them will be arduous because of the distances and speeds involved4 ,but ,dr4 ,john ,d4 ,clark has pointed out that two space-ships engaged in a fight1 no matter what courses they are traveling with relation to the ,sun or the planets1 are in a single plane with relation to each other and so are all the projectiles fired by both of them4 ,this plane may tilt violently as they maneuver but at the moment of firing the line from gun to target1 or predicted position of target1 is a perfectly flat and straight line4 ,this is a much easier ballistic problem than in any ,earthly firing1 where gravity1 air resistance and for long ranges even the curvature and rotation of the ,earth must be considered4 ,the guns will certainly have automatic radar controls and a high rate of fire4 ,the only trouble is that the calculations fed into the controls will have to be made at lightning speeds1 in micro-seconds--which means electronic computers4 ,and this brings up another difference between space-warfare and the kind we know1 though it may extend to war on ,earth4 ,it is possible to make an electronic computer non-functional by overloading it with data or to drive it electronically insane by feeding it undesirable data4 ,space-warfare is therefore bound to include all sorts of decoy devices--small metal balloons have been suggested--that will register on the enemy's radar as space-ships and set his guns swinging wildly or firing at phantoms4 ,the only type of ship to which all that has been said does not apply is the space-minelayer4 ,these can be quite small as compared with the battleships1 need carry no armor and can use the torpedo-shape for operating from an earth base4 ,some years ago ,malcolm ,jameson suggested small iron spheres as mines1 strewn along the enemy's path where he would run into them--but the matter is not quite that simple4 ,if the space-minelayer merely dumped the spheres overboard as an ,earthly minelayer does they would become part of a new small gravitational system around the minelayer1 and would follow her around like ,mary's little lamb4 ,the mines of space-warfare will have to be provided with some kind of power that will take them into a predetermined orbit around ,earth1 the ,moon or an asteroid after the minelayer has dropped them4 ,only enough to set up the orbit1 mind--after that they could take care of themselves4 ,also it is doubtful whether a mere ball of solid iron would smash up the works of an armored space-ship unless she met it at high speed on an absolute collision course4 ,the more normal event would be for the mine to be picked up by the small but perceptible gravitational attraction of the space-ship and travel with it as a satellite4 ,so the mines of space will probably have to be fairly large and contain heavy explosive charges1 probably with proximity fuses4 ,still the advantages of mining are so great that they will undoubtedly play a large part in space-warfare4 ,asteroid or ,moon bases can be defended by minefields1 which would keep an enemy at a distance until he had painstakingly located the pesky objects and shot them up1 during which time the ship would be an ideal target for guns on the ground4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and one striking feature about this space minefield must always be remembered1 a feature that makes it different from anything encountered on the ocean4 ,the fields will be constantly moving4 ,fixed in an orbit #be1jjj miles above the ,earth a space-mine would always remain over the same ,earthly spot and there is a similar critical distance for the ,moon1 ,mars1 and the asteroids4 ,but few of the mines will be at exactly that distance4 ,unless they are they will be tiny satellites1 revolving around their primaries at greater or less speeds1 constantly on the go4 ,a space-ship won't have to hit them4 ,they will hunt it up4 ,there is also the fact that mining in war is not merely a defensive tactic4 ,in ,world ,war ,i the ,german subs were pretty thoroughly mined in by the barrages across the ,north ,sea and ,english ,channel4 ,in ,world ,war ,,ii what was left of the ,japanese fleet was immobilized in its harbors by mines4 ,space-mines would serve a similar purpose of closing a planetoid or an area to all access4 ,they could serve a tactical purpose as well by limiting avenues of approach4 ,not that they couldn't be eliminated--rocket-torpedo fire would be something quite different and more effective than the same kind of fire against a space-battleship capable of striking back4 ,but this would take time and time is the one thing no one can afford to waste in a kind of war where everything will move at speeds exceeding those of the planets4