Hyperspace Combat and the Solarian Leauge Navy

Garth 2 wrote:doesn't seem like a short or long term solution. Not only is difficult to locate and attack ships in hyper space both sides vessels are optimised for n-space engagements and the SEM ships probably have the following advantages:
* larger gun decks (i.e. more guns)
* all Grasers load out
* more powerful Grasers (i.e. energy through put)
* more accurate Grasers (better sensors etc.)
* longer range Grasers (there must have been some improvements in this field)
* actively involved in a shooting war for the past several years and very well trained in convey tactics

Though an SEM ship would get hurt in a h-space, energy range engagement its very probable that the attackers would not be going home at all.

SLN ships are aimed towards energy engagements and have more guns.
Your other points are likely valid.

The question then of course becomes just how much more guns the average SLN ship has, and wether it has any chance of making up for the disadvantages.

Well, that's one way to look at it, and it's probably the ideal situation.

But ambushes do occur and it happens to Peeps, Manties and pretty much everyone at one point or another. It happens precisely because a human being is only capable of dealing with and processing so much at any one time.

It's not a corporate mindset, it's a human mindset.

To counter this, militaries develop doctrine and they train. And what do they develop doctrine concerning, what do they train for. They train for those things which are considered valid threats and expected situations that forces might encounter. You are going to give some attention to less than likely circumstances but which are within the realm of reasonable possibility but your main focus is, and has to be concentrated on those situations with are most likely to be encountered.

As far as any evidence we have suggests, hyperspace intercepts are not part of any doctrine employed by the RMN or anyone else. I can never recall any hint that drones are ever employed for reconnaissance in hyperspace or that screens of light units are ever sent well out in from of fleets while in h-space, nor has anyone to my knowledge addressed even this possibility in any of their tactical thinking or planning or given it an ounce of concern in their planning.

Now theoretically if you were planning on preventing an ambush ANYWHERE, and that h-space was one of these possibilities, one would think that someone would mention it somewhere someplace in some context.

They never do.

This is not proof positive of course, but it seems to be indicative of an attitude that such a thing isn't a realistic possibility in h-space and that it is not considered to be even a possibility worthy of any planning nor any mention.

This, while not again proof positive, is an indication of a mindset with does not give much if any attention to this matter and is, in fact, one which is more likely to judge the threat remote enough not to take extraordinary precautions to defend against it.

I'd also like to point out that the Manties, much like everyone else, do not react well to new things particularly well. For the most part, the Honorverse is not replete with stories about how the RMN encountered a new tactic or approach and did particularly well with it when it is first encountered. They, like most other humans, take their first initial licks and then figure out how to respond to it so that it doesn't work the same way twice. Clairvoyance does not seem to be a course successfully taught at Sagamani Island.

If something hasn't been tried in the last few centuries at least, there's a decent chance a SLN commander can catch the GA forces napping if they can pull the intercept off.

Now, I could be wrong. Manty doctrine may specify that fleets in hyperspace should only travel behind a wall of drones thick enough to walk from one to the other across the frontage of the fleet.

But I'm betting that the GA doctrine on this issue does not contemplate an entire fleet attempting this maneuver and whatever doctrine is currently in place, it's likely to be quite a bit less intensive than similar doctrines related to n-space where everyone knows all the fighting is pretty much always done.

kzt wrote:

n7axw wrote:It seems to me that an effective counter to this would be to carry a couple dozen LACs at the entry point of where you were planning to enter in the hyper band where they were going to operate and spread out in a shell formation looking for goblins. Once its established that the coast is clear, enter hyper and plot a course designed to be unpredictable.

You are going to do this how?

Remember that if you enter hyper within a few light minutes of where a ship is hiding in hyper you will be a few LS away, which is in energy range. If you enter hyper within 24 light minutes you are in SDM range. I don't carry how many LACS you have, if I can engage your carrier in the first second to a minute+ after transit they are all going to die when the carrier reactor goes, as you can't exactly fire up their wedges until they get major separation. And you can't exactly use a fusion rocket on a LAC...

However it's likely that you can avoid this once you reach the point where you feel compelled to try it by going polar or way out.

What's worse is that the hyper transition is easily seen by any other ship in the general area. So you cross the wall and send off a huge signal. Then you putter around searching the alpha band for bad guys. So a few obvious questions:
How do you get your results back to real-space? I'd assume you are not planning on leaving the carrier there as it's a sitting duck.
Given that you have just told any lurking ships exactly where you intend to have a convoy leave, how do you plan to handle the issue that they are going to gather on Beta and wait for you?
Detection range against stealthy ships in hyper is a few light minutes at most, and a shell 10 light minutes in radius means you have shell with an area of 1256 light minutes. If we assume each team is 3+ light minutes away from the other at the edge, you need about 65 search teams, and the run to 10LM takes about 3 hours. (less if you don't plan to come back, but I suspect the LACs would like to go home, so I'll assume they stop at 10LM) There is then another 3 hours to get back to the launch point. So it's not like there won't be lots of time to organized a response. Oh, and given that each LAC team is 6 LM away from the nearest help at the edge, how many LACS are you planning in each team?

I'd really suggest using recon drones instead. Or send the LACs through and RAPIDLY follow with the convoy. The problem for the LACS comes with leaving hyper, as a bunch of LACS and a carrier all inside mutual wedge distance are not in an ideal position to fight if someone drops onto them from Beta, and the whole un-dock, maneuver and then re-dock to go back to RS is going to take some time.

Fist, kzt, there is no such thing as completely risk free no matter how hard you try. My notion of it would be that it would be better to risk the colac -- a freighter modified to handle the lacs-- than to risk an entire convoy. As for getting the news back into normal space, that is what couriors are for.

I am not sure about using the recon drones. How do they function in hyper? You probably face the same problem getting them across the hyper wall as you do lacs. The advantage would be that you could deploy them quicker than lacs. The draw back is that unless we are talking about mistletoe style drones, they have no way of bloodying the bad guy's nose.

Your point about dropping in on colac from a higher band is well taken. However, consider the level of complexity involved in accomplishing that. IIRC, you can't actually see your target from another band which would mean you would have to know the location of your target in advance and be in position to perform the maneuver on a pretty exact schedule. If you randomize the route and the entry point into hyper, it seems to me to be almost impossible.

What would be your sensor range in hyper? The point of using the lacs would be to develop a safe zone for the convoy to enter hyper and allow it to get underway, preferably on a randomly selected vector. The point of vulnerability would be the time it would take to get the lacs launched. But unless the BC or whatever is sitting almost right on top of where the carrier enters hyper, that shouldn't be too bad. What would energy range in hyper be? 800,000 klicks or less? Sensor range would be somewhat more. But the probabilities are that the BC is going to have to power up to get close enough to use its grasers. And once everybody is powered up, the advantage goes to the lacs due to the fact they are very small, stealthy targets. And add in to that the fact that the lacs have better sensors since we are up against solly equipment, if the BC is lying doggo, it gets spotted first.

Don't know about any of this for sure, but that is how it seems from here. So I will stand by my previous post for now.

Don

n7axw wrote:I am not sure about using the recon drones. How do they function in hyper? You probably face the same problem getting them across the hyper wall as you do lacs. The advantage would be that you could deploy them quicker than lacs. The draw back is that unless we are talking about mistletoe style drones, they have no way of bloodying the bad guy's nose.

Unless you send forth LACs in the hundreds they just going to die if they encounter anyone who will stand and fight. A shell deployment means each recon group is out of support range of every other group. How many LACs do you think you need to take on a BC squadron that knows you are coming?

Tenshinai wrote:

Alizon wrote:What this means is, at least initially, an approaching GA force will probably not have a deep screen of light vessels probing a good distance ahead of them following a screen of drones and they will probably be taking a least time course from across the rift to their target system and will not in h-space be fully utilizing their stealth and ECM systems.

Bold assumptions. I very much doubt their probability. Most of the GA commanders that WOULD proceed in such a way are already dead, and the others have learned that there are no truly "impossible" in war.

Alizon wrote:When the PRN was facing the RMN during operation Buttercup, they faced a similar situation to the one which now faces the SLN. Yet there is no mention from either the Peep side or the RMN side where the issue of h-space fleet combat was ever mentioned much less discussed. As far as I can tell, no RMN admiral took any particular precautions to defend against it nor any Peep Admiral any attempt to employ it.

That we know of. And importantly, how many quality peep admirals at the time were even completely in charge of their commands?

Alizon wrote:Why is that. Well one reason would be that it's because neither the RMN nor the Peeps regarded it as an option and so failed to either employ it or defend against it.

Probably because it is generally not a realistic option.

We didn't get descriptions of how fleets moved and screened themselves through hyper. But we do know that, despite viewing convoy escorts primarily as being present to sanitize and protect the n-space area the convoy would drop into at each, the RMN thought about, employed, and evolved tactics to protect those same conoys while in hyper. (see the modified Sarnow deployment Honors ships used to screen the convoy in IEH)

I'd be shocked if they didn't use at least the same care when moving fleet elements; which after all have many more screening platforms available.

Jonathan_S wrote:I'd be shocked if they didn't use at least the same care when moving fleet elements; which after all have many more screening platforms available.

You might note that in tSVW the Bellerophon is running without sidewalls up and that apparently is typically how warships ships operate. So the level of paranoia that people are projecting on the part of the RMN doesn't seem to be matched by the behavior of the RMN.

kzt wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:I'd be shocked if they didn't use at least the same care when moving fleet elements; which after all have many more screening platforms available.

You might note that in tSVW the Bellerophon is running without sidewalls up and that apparently is typically how warships ships operate. So the level of paranoia that people are projecting on the part of the RMN doesn't seem to be matched by the behavior of the RMN.

True, that was a shockingly low level of alert for the beginning of a transit. I would point out that technically Manticore was still in a state of peace at that point, but given the steadily ratcheting tension with Haven you'd expect the navy to be taking more precautions...

kzt wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:I'd be shocked if they didn't use at least the same care when moving fleet elements; which after all have many more screening platforms available.

You might note that in tSVW the Bellerophon is running without sidewalls up and that apparently is typically how warships ships operate. So the level of paranoia that people are projecting on the part of the RMN doesn't seem to be matched by the behavior of the RMN.

Good point.

Tenshinai wrote:

Alizon wrote:What this means is, at least initially, an approaching GA force will probably not have a deep screen of light vessels probing a good distance ahead of them following a screen of drones and they will probably be taking a least time course from across the rift to their target system and will not in h-space be fully utilizing their stealth and ECM systems.

Bold assumptions. I very much doubt their probability. Most of the GA commanders that WOULD proceed in such a way are already dead, and the others have learned that there are no truly "impossible" in war.

Alizon wrote:When the PRN was facing the RMN during operation Buttercup, they faced a similar situation to the one which now faces the SLN. Yet there is no mention from either the Peep side or the RMN side where the issue of h-space fleet combat was ever mentioned much less discussed. As far as I can tell, no RMN admiral took any particular precautions to defend against it nor any Peep Admiral any attempt to employ it.

That we know of. And importantly, how many quality peep admirals at the time were even completely in charge of their commands?

Alizon wrote:Why is that. Well one reason would be that it's because neither the RMN nor the Peeps regarded it as an option and so failed to either employ it or defend against it.

Probably because it is generally not a realistic option.

We didn't get descriptions of how fleets moved and screened themselves through hyper. But we do know that, despite viewing convoy escorts primarily as being present to sanitize and protect the n-space area the convoy would drop into at each, the RMN thought about, employed, and evolved tactics to protect those same conoys while in hyper. (see the modified Sarnow deployment Honors ships used to screen the convoy in IEH)

I'd be shocked if they didn't use at least the same care when moving fleet elements; which after all have many more screening platforms available.[/quote]

See HoS - Grayson space navy usage of destroyers which is similar to that of the RMN.

Both Navies utilise destroyers attached to the fleet to patrol nearby hyper bands whilst the fleet is moving between points.

Also check out HoS for the number of graser mounts on SD(P)s and Battle cruisers (especially note the information on the Nike class - it carries graser that would have been found on smaller capital ships (i.e. DN/SD) pre-war)

As for the DN in SVW, it was a: official at peace, b: in a friendly star system, c: under the command of a very junior officer on a 'milk run' d: very probably hadn't heard about the increasing provocations of Haven due to communication time, e: Didn't know about Argus, f: you don't routinely keep ships at a heightened state of alert if there is no reason due to 1. strain on crew and 2. strain on systems. g: once the enemy was seen the offensive and defensive systems came online fast enough that ship not only destroyed the enemy but came away with minimal damage.

The Graser armed LACs are a new innovation but they are an exception to the GA's emphasize on long range missile combat.

The GSN and RMN transition to an all Grassr armament on hypercapable warships with heavier Grasers is notable only in below the wall combatants and is driven more by the need to free up hull area for PDLs and CMs than a desire to increase energy range combat performance.

Typically; BC sized Grasers are installed on CAs and SD sized Grasers are installed on BCs.

There is no evidence that the GA has developed new, more powerful Grasers for SD(P)s. If anything, energy weapons have been deemphasized to enable devoting more hull surface area to PDLCs and CM launchers.


I will reiterate that given the SLN's earlier rejection of the X-laser warhead which negates conventional missile defenses, it is plausible that the SLN and it's preferred contractors have devoted R&D resources on more advanced, more powerful Grasers. It is possible that they have developed the same advanced gravity lensing technology that the GA uses.

My idea for Phased Array Graser technology is of course very speculative. However; it does suggest an alternative technology path that would not be objectionable to the SLN because it would enhance the effectiveness of their existing fleet of energy weapon optimized SDs and BCs rather than rendering them obsolete. The possibility that SLN Grasers might be effective against manauvwring warships out to a few million kilometers would not negate the GA's advantage in long range missile combat. However; it would make combat inhyperspace far more competitive.

Of course Phased Array Graser technology would theoretically result in effective weapons ranges against non maneuvering targets measured in AUs. SLN raiding strategy might betokened drop out of hyper, fire against orbital infrastructure targets, then jump back into hyper before any MDMs that are fired at them can reach their targets.

kzt wrote:

Garth 2 wrote:doesn't seem like a short or long term solution. Not only is difficult to locate and attack ships in hyper space both sides vessels are optimised for n-space engagements and the SEM ships probably have the following advantages:
* larger gun decks (i.e. more guns)
* all Grasers load out
* more powerful Grasers (i.e. energy through put)
* more accurate Grasers (better sensors etc.)
* longer range Grasers (there must have been some improvements in this field)
* actively involved in a shooting war for the past several years and very well trained in convey tactics

Though an SEM ship would get hurt in a h-space, energy range engagement its very probable that the attackers would not be going home at all.

No, the SLN ships are notable much more loaded with energy weapons than the RMN. It's also not unlikely that they are better at using them then a comparable RMN ship, as people tend to practice the things they are good at. It's unclear what the heck a RHN SD looks like other then the pod bay.