This *does* bear a great deal of resemblance to the Death Star attack scene in the original Star Wars...

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 10/8/14, Tim <xxxxxx@little-possums.net> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [TML] Why do those big ships carry so many fighters?
 To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
 Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 8:49 PM

 It is much better to
 intercept further out.  At greater range it
 suffices to merely disable and deflect the
 missile, as opposed to
 requiring that it be
 completely vaporized.

 If
 the fighters miss some, the final line of defense at the
 ship has a
 very much easier time picking off
 the remainder.

 They are the array of point-defense weaponry!.
 Just mobile and further
 from the single
 basket full of valuable eggs.

 If you like, think of taking each few dtons of
 the point-defense
 systems on a capital ship
 hull, then putting thrusters and a small
 power plant on it.  The analogy isn't
 exact, but it's there.  The
 point-defense systems won't be huge spinal
 mounts or bay weapons,
 those will be almost
 certainly geared toward sustaining an ongoing
 barrage of super-powerful blasts.  Point
 defense requires more along
 the lines of
 high slew rates and rapid bursts of much lower energy
 required only for short periods, and
 infrequently.

 The main
 thing that point-defense weaponry is likely to require is
 surface area.  It's probably quite
 "shallow" in terms of the volume of
 support systems required within the ship per
 unit hull area occupied.
 So it seems to me
 that it makes sense to increase the available
 surface area by making it mobile with its own
 hull.

 - Tim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----