Spaceships hull armor…solid?

[Polydamas]

Very many visions of space warfare involve ball bearings, birdshot, or other spherical projectiles (remember "To be slightly more military-minded you can make something like a claymore mine only loaded with the smallest birdshot"?), and the only way to test whether other shapes would work better is to sit down and calculate, calculate, calculate.

(Obviously NASA and the ESA do not envision being hit by perfect spheres either, but it simplifies the calculations and irregular space junk is likely to be less effective than those spheres; I suspect there is a paper out there on the possibility 'what if a bolt or screw hits small-end-on?')

Edit: for those following along at home, the claim which I show is not justified is "people interested in space combat are not going to use spherical impactors". A lot of people speculating about how combat in space might work do assume spherical projectiles, and to show that any other shape would perform better against Whipple shields (without simultaneously performing better against homogeneous slab armour) you need to sit down and calculate, calculate, calculate.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Very many visions of space warfare involve ball bearings, birdshot, or other spherical projectiles (remember "To be slightly more military-minded you can make something like a claymore mine only loaded with the smallest birdshot"?), and the only way to test whether other shapes would work better is to sit down and calculate, calculate, calculate.

That was not to penetrate Whipple plating. That was to scrub the outer layer of it away. For military applications there's no need to liimit yourself to doing it all in one shot.