Maybe Blish contradicts himself? One ship switches on its Haertel overdrive just above Earth's atmosphere but without any adverse effects in The Star Dwellers whereas, in the sequel, Mission To The Heart Stars, another ship causes a tectonic shock by going into overdrive too close to a planet.
Does Anderson contradict himself? In Ensign Flandry, Hauksberg gives a logical reason for not switching on the Technic History version of a hyperdrive inside a planetary system. Matter is so dense that there is too much danger of quantum-jumping into a space already occupied by too large a body. (We have discussed this danger before in connection with Anderson's World Without Stars and Wells' The Time Machine. See here.) Flandry replies that he will depart at right angles to the ecliptic. But in "Hunters of the Sky Cave," Flandry's private yacht is fine-tuned enough to travel from Jovian to Terrestrial orbit in minutes by hyperdrive.
I will check into these various references more carefully tomorrow.
3 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Anderson may have slipped ever so slightly here, but he still rationalized this science fictional trope of FTL travel better than most SF writers have done. Jerry Pournelle's Alderson drive also struck me as better than most such speculations.
Ad astra! Sean
There’s a plot reason for forbidding FTL too close to a star — it complicates the plotting. For example, if ships can blink into and out of existence close to planets, then planetary defense becomes -extremely- difficullt.
Limiting ships to normal-space operation within solar systems makes everything much more like traditional naval ficttion.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
A good point. I would add that if we ever get a real FTL drive, it might discovered that it is dangerous to use such a drive too near planets.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment