Wolfhound error?

Theemile wrote:

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:
Forex, I have no idea why there wouldn't be a "Flight II" Star Knight without the 3d fusion plant; nor would it have surprised me if one of the reasons Janacek didn't build a whole lot of new light ships doesn't turn out to be a never-implemented refit program giving the older ships "off-bore" capability, but with a modified version of the older missiles. So, a Havoc running anti-piracy patrol runs into a former Sillie light cruiser, and launches a 12 missile salvo (2 broadsides, 1 chase). Modifying the missiles while keeping the form factor doesn't do anything for your range--but Sillie (or Verge) pirates couldn't match the pre-war ranges, let alone what they were by Buttercup.

<snip>

Rob

One of the reasons the "3rd reactor" was such a big deal at the time was that the leaked specs listed the SK as having the same offensive power as the Prince Consort - 8 broadside tubes, where in reality it had 12 separated on 2 decks, all the while the ship grew ~50,000 tons. Officially, this a chalked up to the increased defenses AND the 3rd reactor - where in reality it also included 4 more tubes per broadside and more missiles.

So the Reactor isn't really a big thing - it just adds more battle damage resistance (allowing an iffy reactor to be shut down earlier in the fight.). The RMN just allowed it (and probably actively assisted) to be blown out of proportion to hide that fact hat the Star Knight had a 50% increase in throw weight.

It was Harrington thinking of the wasted space that readers saw, not the public reaction. Although whether she would have used the space for additional missiles, or replace more of the lasers with grasers, she never said. And, at the time, she was the CO of one of them, iirc.

Rob

HungryKing wrote:Um the third reactor was a big deal moving foward, it is partly responsible for the delay on the Saganami class. It probably was also a good idea for the following designs.

You have to remember that the Alverez class was a de facto preview build of the Saganami class, one without full integration of the grayson compensator (that took a new hull frame), and with an all graser energy armanent, as I recall the graysons couldn't fully intermix the weapons as the reactors got in the way.
But then moving foward, the Sag-A and adrian, were very supperior to the Mars, and it meant the Saganami-B really was a BC someone had shrunk down. Admittedly they went a bit too far in the 'add offensive tonnage' department, but they could, thanks to the third reactor.

HungryKing,

Sorry, I agree more with Theemile on that reactor.

I don't think the delay had anything to do with the reactor, that would be a pretty simple fix, really. The delay was because the mission requirements and specs kept shifting and didn't stop changing until around 1908, when the ship was supposed to be introduced in 1905. At that time, they were supposed to automated the Culverin, and likely the Valiant too, making the original, never built Saganami prototype a stable-mate of those vessels. I think it likely failure of the automation project is closely related to the delay.

Also, I expect BuShips didn't start construction until after they got data back from the Alvarez class, but I suspect it was fixing the automation software that delayed it more than that.

I don't have the SITS books, as I noted above, but I would be surprised if the Star Knight class has more than 20 missiles per tube; that would be 600 missiles, probably a hundred more than you could stow into a Prince Consort (with 10 fewer launchers). But the Saganami had 34 launchers, and likely 30 missiles per tube--that was why it needs to be so much bigger than Alvarez in spite of the automation. A big big jump in combat throw weight and endurance. So, the Prince Consort --500 missiles, Star Knight --600, Saganami --1020. Although, without actual references, I am just guessing.

Rob