Sky 1 or interceptor?

Hey, guys!
I've got a technical question for all of you who've been discussing Skydiver
capabilities. At satellite distance, would an interceptor be sent in or
would Sky 1? Do any of the episodes deal with this or should we go by what
makes the most sense? (It's a minor point in my current story, and since
the discussion has been ongoing about Skydiver, I thought I'd get your
feedback.) I appreciate your comments.
Yours,
Denise

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Yes but "Exposed" implies that a Sky can operate at extreme altitudes. Plus
there are conventional fighter jets which have the capability of shooting
down satellites when equipped with special "antisatellite" missiles.

Michael


_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

[hidden email] wrote:

> Satellites, to my self-admitted limited knowledge, orbit in space.
> That's the territory of the Interceptors. Sky 1 I don't believe
> can operate out of our atmosphere.

You're right, Amelia. Sky One needs atmosphere to be able to
manouevre and for its jet engine to work, a satellite can't
cope with atmosphere - the friction would cause its orbit to
decay.

However I think it's best to think of the interceptors as being
used to intercept UFOs a long way further from Earth than
satellite altitude. Although they are used to clean up space
junk orbiting Earth in 'Conflict', something they wouldn't seem
to be well suited for.

"Michael Wolff" wrote:
> Yes but "Exposed" implies that a Sky can operate at extreme
> altitudes. Plus there are conventional fighter jets which have
> the capability of shooting down satellites when equipped with
> special "antisatellite" missiles.
>

That's true, but there's no evidence that Sky One carries such a
missile routinely, and it would be tough to arm it with one
underwater.

Multi-role missiles? Perhaps a different type in each of the tubes?

Michael


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Sky 1 has a air breathing engine and that limits it to Earth's atmosphere.
Outer space even close as a satellite would be Interceptor territory. But it
is a long distance from the moon. Maybe we need some sort of high orbiting
space station in a polar obit with a type of ship can bridge the gap between
space and and atmosphere for when the UFO's get by Moonbase and its too far to
call in Sky 1 yet.

James K.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], "Denise Felt" <neesierie@h...> wrote:
> Hey, guys!
> I've got a technical question for all of you who've been
discussing Skydiver
> capabilities. At satellite distance, would an interceptor be sent
in or
> would Sky 1? Do any of the episodes deal with this or should we
go by what
Denise,

"Satellite Distance" covers a wide range of altitudes. My dusty
memory tells me the minimum orbit of a satellite is something like
150 km (from the surface of the earth, but the satellite would come
back to earth on a hurry!), to about 36K km for geosynch birds (just
to throw some random data, maximum altitude for the space shuttle is
about 1500 km, almost nothing!). Of course, you can have higher
orbit satellites, or even on solar orbits, but I would say 36K km is
the ceiling for most satellites.

As somebody already commented, there are special missiles that can
be fired from fighter jets to knock down satellites (can they reach
geosynch satellites?).

Now, remember that on the other hand, the moon is about 250K miles
from the earth! We have no idea of the interceptors' range, but 250K
miles is a long way for an interceptor from the moon to try to shot
down a satellite within a few hundred or thousand miles from earth
orbit.

Of course, nobody knows the true capabilities of Sky and the
interceptors :-), but I think to sound "more realistic", you should
consider that Sky would be the one shooting UFOs in low earth orbit.

David Levine

"Michael Wolff" wrote:
> Multi-role missiles? Perhaps a different type in each of the tubes?
>

Well in the 'real world' anti-satellite missiles are much bigger
than typical air-air missiles, but in the UFO universe it's
possible I guess.

Since you reminded me about this. I was wondering why most people think Interceptors are short ranged, when Straker ordered them to make the trip to Earth, opperate in Earth orbit, then return to the moon.
Even if the Interceptors are capable of very high speeds, that is still one hell of a trip. Was Conflict just an aberation? Or do the Interceptors have the range, speed and resources to make it all the way to Earth and back in under a day?

David Levine <[hidden email]> wrote:
--- In [hidden email], "Denise Felt" wrote:
> Hey, guys!
(Edited for Brevity)
Now, remember that on the other hand, the moon is about 250K miles
from the earth! We have no idea of the interceptors' range, but 250K
miles is a long way for an interceptor from the moon to try to shot
down a satellite within a few hundred or thousand miles from earth
orbit.

> Even if the Interceptors are capable of very high speeds, that is
> still one hell of a trip. Was Conflict just an aberation? Or do the
> Interceptors have the range, speed and resources to make it all the
> way to Earth and back in under a day?

In the episode CLOSE UP, when the Interceptors were trying to maneuver
the UFO back home, they were stating Interceptor
speeds in excess of the speed of light!

Not particularly believable, is it?

Marc

Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Even if the Interceptors are capable of very high speeds, that is
> still one hell of a trip. Was Conflict just an aberation? Or do the
> Interceptors have the range, speed and resources to make it all the
> way to Earth and back in under a day?

In the episode CLOSE UP, when the Interceptors were trying to maneuver
the UFO back home, they were stating Interceptor
speeds in excess of the speed of light!

Not particularly believable, is it?

Marc

Not really!!!!!!!!!!!

Even if we ignore the effects of time distortion that Eninstine postulated, it would still take 9 minutes to fly from here to Pluto. I wonder what that would break down to for the short hop between here and the moon.

I can't think of any shows that state how long the lunar flights actually take, and since I don't have most of them (Yet), I cna't check, but I know that the Interceptors are faster then a Lunar Shuttle, but... 30 MPH vs 30,000 MPH? I don't think so. Even as a devoted fan, that is a little much to ask.

Even if we "Allow" that the ships might have ION Engines, even they aren't designed to generate enough thrust to attain light speed, unless there is one just off the drawing board that I am unaware of. (Yes I enjoy Popular Science as well as Popular Mechanics too)

Someof the storys have suggested new technology form the diffrent "Friendly" aliens they have encountered, but FanFic doesn't count in this case.

Just like the quote; "Most of SHADOs vechiles are nuclear powered", I would have to see a heck of a lot of supporting documentation to belive that an Interceptor is capable of doing Lightspeed or anything approaching it.






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

James Gibbon <[hidden email]> wrote:"Michael Wolff" wrote:
> Yes but "Exposed" implies that a Sky can operate at extreme
> altitudes. Plus there are conventional fighter jets which have
> the capability of shooting down satellites when equipped with
> special "antisatellite" missiles.
>

That's true, but there's no evidence that Sky One carries such a
missile routinely, and it would be tough to arm it with one
underwater.


I seriously doubt any regular work is done on SkyDiver while submergered, even while stationary. How ever I guess some could make a case that the "Mystery Blisters" over the missile pods on Sky are actually access points for reloading the missiles and could be used to insert any number of special rockets or missiles.
I don't suppose anyone knows who actually designed the dam thing so that we could ask them, do they?


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robert Thomas wrote:

> I seriously doubt any regular work is done on SkyDiver while
> submergered, even while stationary. How ever I guess some could
> make a case that the "Mystery Blisters" over the missile pods on
> Sky are actually access points for reloading the missiles and
> could be used to insert any number of special rockets or missiles.
> I don't suppose anyone knows who actually designed the dam thing
> so that we could ask them, do they?

I feel very confident they would say "no, we just thought they
looked cool" ;-)

James Gibbon <[hidden email]> wrote:Robert Thomas wrote:

> I don't suppose anyone knows who actually designed the dam thing
> so that we could ask them, do they?

I feel very confident they would say "no, we just thought they
looked cool" ;-)

But I still wnat to know just who "They" are, so I can ask some rather pointed questions of them.







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Marc and Robert,

Marc Martin wrote:
> In the episode CLOSE UP, when the Interceptors were trying to
maneuver the UFO back home, they were stating Interceptor speeds in
excess of the speed of light!

I watched the above episode again and noted that Lt. Ford instructed
the pilot of the Interceptor to increase its speed to SOL 1.127.
SOL means "Speed Of Light"?

Robert Thomas wrote:
> Even if we "Allow" that the ships might have ION Engines, even they
aren't designed to generate enough thrust to attain light speed,
unless there is one just off the drawing board that I am unaware of.

In reality, the first practical ION engine was equipped on board a
Japanese inter-asteroid space probe MUSES-C named "Hayabusa" meaning
"Falcon" which was launched on May 9th 2003.
In fact, the thrust power of an ION engine is very weak compared with
both of liquid and solid rocket engines.
So, I do not think that the Interceptors fly by ION engines.

In the episode CLOSE UP, the B142 space prove travels to the Alien's
planet following the returning Ufo.
The same planet was supposed to be located at Alpha Centauri which is
4.3 light-years away from Earth, wasn't it?
Straker said that the first picture from B142 would arrive in four
months or so, that is, B142 would reach the Alien's planet in the
same period of time.
Therefore, B142, the man-made space prove, also flies faster than
light!

My own speculation is that the B142 was trapped within the force
field generated by the Ufo something like the warp field in "Star
Trek", and transferred along with the Ufo FTL, as they said that the
B142 was "linked up" with the Ufo.
After four months, B142 reached the Alien's planet, and transmitted
the images of the same planet to Earth by Utronic beam?

BTW, SHADO might have an extraordinary advanced technology, that is,
"Utronic Drive", which make the Interceptors possible to fly faster
than light even in an instand, I suppose.
The warhead of the Interceptor's missile is a nuke, isn't it?
I have been always perplexed with the exposure to radiation of
Interceptors' pilots caused by the explosion of its atomic missiles.
If the Interceptors were equipped with the "Utronic Drive", they
would have been able to do the "Picard Maneuver"???


Kaoru

Kaoru wrote:

>If the Interceptors were equipped with the "Utronic Drive", they
>would have been able to do the "Picard Maneuver"???


What? You mean talk for five minutes, then surrender?

Michael

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

>You mean talk for five minutes then surrender.

No Micheal, you quote the Prime Directive the enemy till they surrender!

James K.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robert Thomas wrote:
Derek Meddings designed Skydiver. You might try going on Crossing Over
with John Edward to ask him any questions.
AT

Now remember Picard is not really French, so he wouldn't really act like that.
BYB: Aren't we a triffle (Truffle?) OFF-SUBJECT here?

Michael Wolff <[hidden email]> wrote:
Kaoru wrote:

>If the Interceptors were equipped with the "Utronic Drive", they
>would have been able to do the "Picard Maneuver"???


What? You mean talk for five minutes, then surrender?

Michael

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

So everything in UFO can fly at really mind-boggling speeds when it suits the writers purpose, but they go back to "Normal" speeds when they want a UFO get to get away from the Interceptors.
Just like there are all of those convient "Blind Spots" in the radar coverage for the UFOes to slip through time after time.
By the way.. Thanks for the info on the ION Engin. I guess I will have to look that up since I missed it before.

tchbnk <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Marc and Robert,

Marc Martin wrote:
> In the episode CLOSE UP, when the Interceptors were trying to
maneuver the UFO back home, they were stating Interceptor speeds in
excess of the speed of light!

I watched the above episode again and noted that Lt. Ford instructed
the pilot of the Interceptor to increase its speed to SOL 1.127.
SOL means "Speed Of Light"?

Robert Thomas wrote:
> Even if we "Allow" that the ships might have ION Engines, even they
aren't designed to generate enough thrust to attain light speed,
unless there is one just off the drawing board that I am unaware of.

In reality, the first practical ION engine was equipped on board a
Japanese inter-asteroid space probe MUSES-C named "Hayabusa" meaning
"Falcon" which was launched on May 9th 2003.
In fact, the thrust power of an ION engine is very weak compared with
both of liquid and solid rocket engines.
So, I do not think that the Interceptors fly by ION engines.

In the episode CLOSE UP, the B142 space prove travels to the Alien's
planet following the returning Ufo.
The same planet was supposed to be located at Alpha Centauri which is
4.3 light-years away from Earth, wasn't it?
Straker said that the first picture from B142 would arrive in four
months or so, that is, B142 would reach the Alien's planet in the
same period of time.
Therefore, B142, the man-made space prove, also flies faster than
light!

My own speculation is that the B142 was trapped within the force
field generated by the Ufo something like the warp field in "Star
Trek", and transferred along with the Ufo FTL, as they said that the
B142 was "linked up" with the Ufo.
After four months, B142 reached the Alien's planet, and transmitted
the images of the same planet to Earth by Utronic beam?

BTW, SHADO might have an extraordinary advanced technology, that is,
"Utronic Drive", which make the Interceptors possible to fly faster
than light even in an instand, I suppose.
The warhead of the Interceptor's missile is a nuke, isn't it?
I have been always perplexed with the exposure to radiation of
Interceptors' pilots caused by the explosion of its atomic missiles.
If the Interceptors were equipped with the "Utronic Drive", they
would have been able to do the "Picard Maneuver"???


Kaoru




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]