Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests

BB(P/C) for rear area security

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by Brigade XO   » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:27 pm

Brigade XO
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3178
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: KY

Streak Drives are great for getting a ship (or ships) somewhere faster than regular drives. That lets you improve your interstellar communications loop. On the other hand, if you send 5 warships with streak drive to attack system X, they still have to deal with whatever is in the system when they get there. The Streak Drive only gives you the speed/elaps time advantage between systems, not in systems.

DDs and CL/CA/CH still have thier scouting, patrol and convoy missions. What they no longer have (as a primary mission) is to provide anti-missile defence to the Wall. That has been take over by LACs with the CLACs they are based on.
That DOES NOT mean that they don't scout for divisions/Wall of SDs nor that they don't contribute to the anti-missile defense of that Wall, just that they are no longer going to be deployed forward or tight edge perimeter other than in-front (where they will not be) of that Wall specifially for counter-missile fire.

Manticore (and the rest of the GA) is going to need a lot of light ships for the roles which require them so they will continue to build "lighter" hyper-capable ships even as the actual designs and sizes of those ships continue to evolve.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by drothgery   » Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:29 pm

drothgery
Admiral

Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:07 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

Tenshinai wrote:The point is that there´s a lot of missions that needs to be done that does not require a warship capable of standing up to "itself".
Missions where a handful or even a single LAC would be plenty enough, but requires a hyper capable unit.


I don't disagree that there are some such missions. Just that there aren't a lot of them, and certainly not enough to keep units around that are useless in combat with a peer navy (which pretty much anything between a LAC and something in the 300-500KTon range is at this point, depending on where RFC's thinking shakes out).

Nothing smaller than a Nike and larger than a LAC has any business being around when capital MDMs are flying; light units attached to combat fleets in the future are for scouting and detached raids only (and the latter case requires something capable of defending itself against a peer).

Tenshinai wrote:And a Roland gets away with a crew of just 62, while a Saganami-C uses almost 6 times that. Even without the marines, it´s still over 3 times the crew. And what is it that Manticore is currently in need of? Crew.


By the time Manticore is capable of building new warships in quantity, this will not be the case. The Star Empire has 17 new full members and 30-odd protectorates (and the RMN shrunk, rather than grew, post-San Martin annexation), and they have years to recruit and train for what they're building in the future. Lack of trained manpower is not a long term problem for the RMN; it's a short term one (and it's not an immediate problem for the Grand Alliance at all because of Haven).

And the 300-odd crew complement of a Sag-C, while much larger than a Roland's, is still in line with pre-first war destroyers.


Tenshinai wrote:
I guess I just think the set of places where

1) you want a presence in a system
AND
2) a Sag-C-sized ship is overkill (or you need multiple ships and multiple Sag-C-sized ships are overkill)
AND
3) there's nowhere to operate a few LACs from / it's impractical to ship said LACs there / it's impractical to station a carrier there

is pretty small.


Experience both from the books and from reality says the opposite.


... but a lot of the books were set before modern LACs were widely available, and that radically changed things, basically eliminating any screening role or long-term system defense role for light warships. The partition of Silesia radically reduced the need for roving convoy escorts for anti-piracy (if nothing else, by allowing the RMN and IAN to set up in-system forces).

Tenshinai wrote:Strategic presence, strategic scouting and any kind of patrolling that doesn´t expect the ships to engage a more powerful hostile (which noone would expect anyway); Manticore is an empire now, they have LOTS of space that needs presence more than it needs lots of bigassed superduper fighting capable cruisers.


... and if it's their space (or allied space, or even enemy space that they expect to be occupying for a non-trivial amount of time), they'll repurpose an existing station to base LACs from or ship one in (they have a design for a modular base that they were shipping out to the TQ already).

RFC is pretty adamant that serious navies in the Honorverse will not build frigates, and the arguments against doing so don't become any less effective when you're talking about a 200Kton frigate instead of a 60Kton one.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by Brigade XO   » Sun Mar 09, 2014 12:55 pm

Brigade XO
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3178
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: KY

All those former Peep conquests will be making a choice to stay or leave the new Republic of Haven. Those are ALL going to want at least some form of local protection for themselves. That may only be in the form of LACs (and the baseing capasity for them) but some are going to want to obtain reasonably current hyper-capable ships. Affording those, well, that's a different story. Haven might want to provide some of that equipment, if only in the form of much older "surplus" Haven equipment that is being phased out of the 1st line fleets. That still lets the former Peep concored systems have things that can deal with garden-variety pirates and present level SLN light units.

The smaller Systems Manticore was alligned with in the old Manticore Alliance are already independt Systems and can be expected to be able to aquire Manticore Export Grade equipment (once Manticore can produce it again).

Its all those systems that are breaking away from OFS, transstellars or the classicly portrayed dictator/tyrant-despot "friends" of OFS are the ones that will need more help. They are out in the rather large and fluid boarder areas and are in significant danger from at least three things.
1) SLN/OFS-FF looking to "liberate" them and return them to the care of the SLN in whatever form seems most usable.
2) Pirates. Mercenaries and opportunists of many sorts looking to loot systems and commerce.
3) Opportunists of various sorts such as neighbors looking to take them over. Some of the transstellar corporations might think this a good opportunity to grab a System and make it a Corporate System such as Beowulf with the original Transstellar in total control and creating a Homeworld situation, not just stripping it of resources.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by SWM   » Sun Mar 09, 2014 4:37 pm

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

Tenshinai wrote:The point is that there´s a lot of missions that needs to be done that does not require a warship capable of standing up to "itself".
Missions where a handful or even a single LAC would be plenty enough, but requires a hyper capable unit.

I'm afraid that you'll have to explain what missions those are. Remember, David was not talking about the near future, but about a further future in which DDM missiles are the standard on "small" ships in every navy, and necessarily in the pirates, too.
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by Tenshinai   » Sun Mar 09, 2014 8:53 pm

Tenshinai
Admiral

Posts: 2893
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm
Location: Sweden

SWM wrote:I'm afraid that you'll have to explain what missions those are. Remember, David was not talking about the near future, but about a further future in which DDM missiles are the standard on "small" ships in every navy, and necessarily in the pirates, too.


So? Are you saying the Roland class doesn´t have DDMs?
Or are you saying that pirates suddenly become able to get their hands on twice(or potentially much more) as expensive ships just because the militaries upgraded?

I have already stated several mission types where size is utterly pointless beyond being capable of basic defense and offense, but requires hyper capability.

Strategic scouting for one thing is the most obvious. And with the whole freaking League as potential enemies, they need a crapload of light units to keep their scouting to even MINIMAL levels.

And as already mentioned by others, if the SL breaks up, it is almost guaranteed to spawn lots of privateers and pirates, and they most certainly wont have the latest and greatest tech.

What units are you going to send out checking on hyper translation echoes? Real or imagined, they will need as many units as possible, ALL hypercapable, to make sure they´re not missing something again.

This alone might mean they will need MANY MORE light units than before just to make sure they have enough coverage.

This is also a reason why a new "big" DD or CL might be the best place to fit any brand new streakdrives ASAP, as that high level mobility would make them perfect as a fleets "eyes and ears" as well as messenger boys on a strategic level.

And being able to pound on a hyper echo even minutes faster will be highly valuable when you´re dealing with stealth ships.

And for commerce protection in hyper, are you seriously saying you want to do ALL jobs there with heavy cruisers as the smallest unit?

If you have the same convoy guarded by either 2 BC+2CA, or 2BC+4DD, guess which one is more likely to get all the cargo safely to its destination...

I´ll repeat myself: Wether those DDs are capable of standing up to their equals in a fight doesn´t matter. It´s irrelevant. Sensor drones means each ship can scout larger areas sure, but with DDMs around, that also means hostiles can take easy shots at merchants from much further away.

And in case you missed it from the books, a big deal with the drones abilities is thanks to their gravcom units, BUT, even the Sollies notices when those are used(and roughly from where), so just switching ships for more drones, hostiles could use that as a neon sign pointing out where there´s free targets for lunch.


And the only thing the Roland class lacks for the cases i´ve stated, is an extra platoon or two of marines.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by kzt   » Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:07 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

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

You want to argue with David about his universe you can feel free, but that's what he says.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by SWM   » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:10 pm

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

You still aren't getting it. The League is not relevant for this discussion. Manticore is not looking to get rid of destroyers during this war. The R&D brains are looking at long-range planning, ten, twenty, thirty years or more down the road. They hypothesize that eventually EVERYONE will have DDMs as the very minimum missile armament, legitimate navies and pirates both. They are evaluating this potential future, and are at the very beginning of speculating what kind of forces Manticore might need in that threat environment. Their current speculation is that the smallest hyper-capable warship which is survivable in that environment is the size of a current cruiser.

Manticore had always known that the Roland was an interim solution, and that future destroyers would probably have to be even bigger. The Roland is already the size of a light-cruiser, almost the size of a small cruiser.

So, ignoring all your mention of the current war with the League:

For strategic scouting, I would need something the size of a cruiser. Even in the current environment, destroyers are not used for strategic scouting--they use at least light cruisers and more often cruisers.

Checking out hyper transit echoes? Send out a CLAC and escort, and use 100+ LACs to search the volume.

Commerce protection in hyper? Darn right I need something the size of a cruiser. It needs enough endurance, a deep enough magazine, and enough armor to take a couple shots from the DDM of that time period.

The Roland is not the ship of the future, and it was never intended to be. It was to be an interim platform only, leading the way to the new future. The future is bigger.
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by drothgery   » Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:18 am

drothgery
Admiral

Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:07 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

SWM wrote:You still aren't getting it. The League is not relevant for this discussion. Manticore is not looking to get rid of destroyers during this war. The R&D brains are looking at long-range planning, ten, twenty, thirty years or more down the road. They hypothesize that eventually EVERYONE will have DDMs as the very minimum missile armament, legitimate navies and pirates both. They are evaluating this potential future, and are at the very beginning of speculating what kind of forces Manticore might need in that threat environment. Their current speculation is that the smallest hyper-capable warship which is survivable in that environment is the size of a current cruiser.


That's overstating things a bit. I don't imagine pirates with DDMs any time soon; I don't think RFC is either, or he wouldn't be speculating about LAC modules for freighters in the rare (post-Silesian annexation) scenario where you need to bring your own protection with you. But even if only first-tier navies have DDM-equipped light warships, Rolands are not survivable in combat with a peer navy and so will not be built by the RMN in peacetime (and will only be built in wartime if the opponent has no hope of matching their capability any time soon AND sufficient resources are not available to build something with more long-term use).

SWM wrote:Commerce protection in hyper? Darn right I need something the size of a cruiser. It needs enough endurance, a deep enough magazine, and enough armor to take a couple shots from the DDM of that time period.
And in any case that's a really niche role where it doesn't matter too much if you're throwing too much ship at the problem. With some notable exceptions (which have happened in the novels, granted), commerce in hyper doesn't need to be protected as it's almost impossible to intercept traffic in hyper. As per RFC, virtually all piracy and commerce raiding in the Honorverse is in normal space.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by kzt   » Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:15 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

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

drothgery wrote: commerce in hyper doesn't need to be protected as it's almost impossible to intercept traffic in hyper. As per RFC, virtually all piracy and commerce raiding in the Honorverse is in normal space.

It all depends. If your commerce protection strategy is based mostly on LACS then I'm going to sit on the Alpha side and wait for customers.
Top
Re: BB(P/C) for rear area security
Post by drothgery   » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:02 am

drothgery
Admiral

Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:07 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

kzt wrote:
drothgery wrote: commerce in hyper doesn't need to be protected as it's almost impossible to intercept traffic in hyper. As per RFC, virtually all piracy and commerce raiding in the Honorverse is in normal space.

It all depends. If your commerce protection strategy is based mostly on LACS then I'm going to sit on the Alpha side and wait for customers.

And if you do that, it's apparently very easy to completely avoid you except in a handful of places with unusual hyperspace conditions.
Top

Return to Honorverse