Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 44 guests

antimissile antiLAC

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by MuonNeutrino   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 9:32 pm

MuonNeutrino
Commander

Posts: 167
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:40 pm

runsforcelery wrote:Don't know how anyone could say it any clearer, but you are completely, totally, and categorically wasting your time beating this dead horse. Just as you are with the notion that somehow putting a PD laser into a counter missile would produce anything remotely like a useful weapon system, or that deploying mines to stop missiles would be remotely worth the effort (or even physically possible), or that you can somehow use missile or drone impeller wedges to cover a ship against incoming fire.


Just because RFC was in the other thread when he shot this idea down doesn't make the flaming ball of wreckage any less dead, Skimper.
_______________________________________________________
MuonNeutrino
Astronomer, teacher, gamer, and procrastinator extraordinaire
Top
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by solbergb   » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:13 am

solbergb
Admiral

Posts: 2846
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:24 pm

Lord Skimper wrote:First off tons being displacement, the Shrike Ferret Katana are about 5000 tons.


Try more like 25000 tons, a bit less for early generation Shrike and Katanas, closer to 20k tons. The Havenite LACs are a bit smaller, at least the first generation were.

And I agree with other posters. Space is big. Mines as a replacement for LACs is not a winning strategy.
Top
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by Phalanx   » Wed Aug 13, 2014 7:29 pm

Phalanx
Commander

Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 6:26 pm

MuonNeutrino wrote:
runsforcelery wrote:Don't know how anyone could say it any clearer, but you are completely, totally, and categorically wasting your time beating this dead horse. Just as you are with the notion that somehow putting a PD laser into a counter missile would produce anything remotely like a useful weapon system, or that deploying mines to stop missiles would be remotely worth the effort (or even physically possible), or that you can somehow use missile or drone impeller wedges to cover a ship against incoming fire.


Just because RFC was in the other thread when he shot this idea down doesn't make the flaming ball of wreckage any less dead, Skimper.


Image
_



____________________________________________________
There are no Mesan Agents under your bed
Top
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by Laughingowl   » Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:34 pm

Laughingowl
Midshipman

Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:08 pm

Question on Anti-missile defenses next generation.

Give FTL and MDMs and Apollo, what about an Apollo style counter missle.

Either MDM based counter missiles, and/or swarm missiles, (large missile with multiple current style counter missiles.


If you could double/triple (or more) the range counter missiles could engage.

1) Give chance to thin the cloud a bit
2) (perhaps more importantly) force counter-counter measures to be used.
a) if missiles have to evade/go defensive long before final run they use up maneuver time, have greater chance of losing lock on initial target
b) Either counter missiles have greater then normal successes (as all defensive measures not active) or attacker uses up 'coutners' and so then the 'real' (traditional) defenses are more effective.
3) A lot of talk is made given the new missiles, speeds, etc how they fly through the counter missiles window so fast, limited salvo's are possible; however, they often have even longer (then before) total flight time) so Extending the 'window' of engagement would be a vast improvement.

Once launched, the overall trajectory of a multiple minute flight of missiles is pretty much fixed, so a 2 stage counter missile (whether true 2-stage, or launched remote platform, then launching current style Counter missiles, could easily intercept minutes out from the main ship, if fired, ballistic, then engage.

Basically continuing the 'LAC Antimissile' role, even farther, and reducing the LAC, to an Apollo missile (or recon drone)
Top
Re: Honorverse series, the future..?
Post by kzt   » Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:01 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

It's been suggested, in quite a bit of detail. David has never responded to any of the proposals.
Top
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by HungryKing   » Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:09 pm

HungryKing
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 369
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 9:43 pm

My impression, which is based partly on what characters have thought, and partly on some very old pearls, which more or less indicate bounds on what is possible, is that there are going to be competing systems, and they might well vary starkly by size bracket and navy.
Everyone is going to go massive on EW. The RMN, or rather Honor's experiments, is in the process of moving to dispersed doctrine based on squadron drones and personal drones for its capital units, coordinated but not interlocked, its smaller units probably with have some dual use drones, to set up a higher level defense if they are traveling together, but are assigned to duties that might disperse them. The SLN or its successors may still try the huddled turtling strategy, where each unit has personal drones that interlock with its squadron, to generate an area defense.

Everyone is going to use, for the moment, multiple LAC shells. The RMN and GSN, and by implication the BSDF, are the only ones, so far as we know, with the technology to build an active defenses drone, and are definitely feeling their way to using them in the inner shell.
MWW has indicated that the laserhead has the capability to eventually make shipboard PD clusters impractical, and the RMN has a plan for the dealing with that, part of the reason why they are using very overweight PDLCs on their new construction is probably to delay that date. I suspect they will use a variant of Keyhole and just move the PDLCs off board. Counter to this is the fact that MWW has indicated that there is a limit to how many large drones a ship can mount, and that no one is going to go to a giant heavily armored drone carrier, it is too much like an arsenal ship, which he has already shown to have serious problems, even if you build it from an SD or DN schemata, like an RMN CLAC, rather than a freighter.
Top
Re: antimissile antiLAC
Post by lyonheart   » Fri Aug 22, 2014 1:47 pm

lyonheart
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4853
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:27 pm

Hi HungryKing,

EW has been one of the RMN superior qualities for decades, as demonstrated by HH in OBS when Fearless's EW kept surprising the Sirius, so expecting considerable further improvement shouldn't be a surprise.

RFC has told us the RMN is in ongoing process of massively improving its missile defenses, which from what we've seen so far has barely scratched the surface of the potential, though no one has yet figured out what RFC's improvements are going to be.

Part of the problem is that the SLN doesn't begin to threaten the GA tech-wise, and won't even as its soon destroyed, so the pressure to cope with 'missile storms' has been removed at least until the SLN has been dealt with.

While the post-SL smaller polities may make EW one of their priorities for improvement, it will be years before they'll be close to needing the tech or tactics you cited since they're not needed against each other.

L


HungryKing wrote:My impression, which is based partly on what characters have thought, and partly on some very old pearls, which more or less indicate bounds on what is possible, is that there are going to be competing systems, and they might well vary starkly by size bracket and navy.
Everyone is going to go massive on EW. The RMN, or rather Honor's experiments, is in the process of moving to dispersed doctrine based on squadron drones and personal drones for its capital units, coordinated but not interlocked, its smaller units probably with have some dual use drones, to set up a higher level defense if they are traveling together, but are assigned to duties that might disperse them. The SLN or its successors may still try the huddled turtling strategy, where each unit has personal drones that interlock with its squadron, to generate an area defense.

Everyone is going to use, for the moment, multiple LAC shells. The RMN and GSN, and by implication the BSDF, are the only ones, so far as we know, with the technology to build an active defenses drone, and are definitely feeling their way to using them in the inner shell.
MWW has indicated that the laserhead has the capability to eventually make shipboard PD clusters impractical, and the RMN has a plan for the dealing with that, part of the reason why they are using very overweight PDLCs on their new construction is probably to delay that date. I suspect they will use a variant of Keyhole and just move the PDLCs off board. Counter to this is the fact that MWW has indicated that there is a limit to how many large drones a ship can mount, and that no one is going to go to a giant heavily armored drone carrier, it is too much like an arsenal ship, which he has already shown to have serious problems, even if you build it from an SD or DN schemata, like an RMN CLAC, rather than a freighter.
Any snippet or post from RFC is good if not great!
Top

Return to Honorverse