Control Missile for shipboard launched missiles

Weird Harold wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Saturating the enemy's defenses = more hits. You can fire 10 salvos of 24 missiles at a BC squadron and not even take one BC out. Send out 240 missiles at once and you'll mission kill at least 1, more likely 2 BCs. That is why we see stacked broadsides, which is severely limited by the number of control links the ship has.

One thing demonstrated at Saltash was that a double-stack salvo of Mk-16Gs from five Rolands was severe overkill against the defenses of four BCs. We can't quantify exactly how much overkill is demonstrated or how much SLN defenses or missile ranges might improve, but we know, positively, that Five Double-stacked Salvos of Mk-16Gs does a LOT more damage than a simple "mission kill."

Again. How is Saltash an example of overwhelming numerical and tonnage advantage of solly ships over manty ships?

Is this how the RMN improves itself? Only thinking of easy scenarios? People keep harping about Saltash, Saltash, Saltash. Hey, the SLN knows about Saltash too! They won't get themselves into the same scenario again if they can help it. If they are going to go about commerce raiding, I'm sure they aren't going to pull the trigger if all they are outnumbered in hulls like that.

Rakhmamort wrote:Again. How is Saltash an example of overwhelming numerical and tonnage advantage of solly ships over manty ships?

It is an indicator of just what "Numerical/Tonnage Advantage of SLN Ships" would have to consist of. Specifically, the ammunition shortage problem of the Rolands might not be as big a problem as assumed.

In blunter terms, it can help us establish how many "missile sponges" the SLN needs to deploy in each task force to run RMN ships out of missiles so they can get into energy range.

Weird Harold wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Saturating the enemy's defenses = more hits. You can fire 10 salvos of 24 missiles at a BC squadron and not even take one BC out. Send out 240 missiles at once and you'll mission kill at least 1, more likely 2 BCs. That is why we see stacked broadsides, which is severely limited by the number of control links the ship has.

One thing demonstrated at Saltash was that a double-stack salvo of Mk-16Gs from five Rolands was severe overkill against the defenses of four BCs. We can't quantify exactly how much overkill is demonstrated or how much SLN defenses or missile ranges might improve, but we know, positively, that Five Double-stacked Salvos of Mk-16Gs does a LOT more damage than a simple "mission kill."

Why they didn't have a better gauge of the effectiveness of the G warhead I don't know. Zavala could have been just as effective with a one-shot-per-tube salvo. On the other hand, sooner or later a Solly commander is going to realize, "hey, they've captured a lot of our ships intact; we need to change the default settings on our defense systems' software!"

Bill Woods wrote:Why they didn't have a better gauge of the effectiveness of the G warhead I don't know. Zavala could have been just as effective with a one-shot-per-tube salvo. On the other hand, sooner or later a Solly commander is going to realize, "hey, they've captured a lot of our ships intact; we need to change the default settings on our defense systems' software!"

I'm not sure that the RMN has employed the Mod-Gs against SLN BCs enough to know how many are required. There was probably allowance for the "ideal" effectiveness of systems like HALO as opposed to the low standard of "functional" shown as acceptable to SLN crews to date.

I suspect that a) Capt. Zavala intended about a 200% overkill to allow for better warheads, and B) He under-calculated the increased effectiveness of the Mod G over previous MK-16s. As a result, he got about five times the amount of overkill he intended.

Weird Harold wrote:

Bill Woods wrote:Why they didn't have a better gauge of the effectiveness of the G warhead I don't know. Zavala could have been just as effective with a one-shot-per-tube salvo. On the other hand, sooner or later a Solly commander is going to realize, "hey, they've captured a lot of our ships intact; we need to change the default settings on our defense systems' software!"

I'm not sure that the RMN has employed the Mod-Gs against SLN BCs enough to know how many are required. There was probably allowance for the "ideal" effectiveness of systems like HALO as opposed to the low standard of "functional" shown as acceptable to SLN crews to date.

If only the RMN had some expendable Solly hulls to use for testing the effectiveness of their weapons....

Weird Harold wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Again. How is Saltash an example of overwhelming numerical and tonnage advantage of solly ships over manty ships?

It is an indicator of just what "Numerical/Tonnage Advantage of SLN Ships" would have to consist of. Specifically, the ammunition shortage problem of the Rolands might not be as big a problem as assumed.

In blunter terms, it can help us establish how many "missile sponges" the SLN needs to deploy in each task force to run RMN ships out of missiles so they can get into energy range.

It is obvious 1 Roland wouldn't be able to destroy a whole squadron of Solly BC's using only the missiles in it's internal magazine. Even if it stacked 36 missiles in a salvo that it has control links for it can only do that 7 times and 36 missiles in a salvo isn't going to saturate an integrated defense net of 8 BCs enough to kill 1 BC. Even if it is towing a full complement of non-apollo pods, it wouldn't take out the whole squadron before it runs out of missiles if it can only control 36 missiles per salvo.

Face it, out of that 36, at least 6 would be ECM. 30 Attack missiles vs 8 BCs is just a bit over 4 missiles for each each BC to take out or spoof for the squadron to remain unscathed. With that measly amount of missiles coming at me, I'm gonna use my broadside energy armament as long range anti-missile batteries before the many ECM missiles can f@ck up my anti-missile tracking systems. The effective range of those huge energy weapons' might be listed at 1 million km only but a missile running full into a graser/laser is going to get it's sensors/seekers damaged even if it is 3 or 4 million kilometers away.

If the Roland however fired its entire magazine in 1 salvo (easily if a control missile can handle 6 attack/penaid missile, 36*7 = 252), then it can allocate 30 missiles per BC (20-24 attack missiles each). That amount of Mark 16 mod G x-ray damage is probably enough to take out even a BC.

Rakhmamort wrote:Again. How is Saltash an example of overwhelming numerical and tonnage advantage of solly ships over manty ships?

Is this how the RMN improves itself? Only thinking of easy scenarios? People keep harping about Saltash, Saltash, Saltash. Hey, the SLN knows about Saltash too! They won't get themselves into the same scenario again if they can help it. If they are going to go about commerce raiding, I'm sure they aren't going to pull the trigger if all they are outnumbered in hulls like that.

There is a reason we keep bringing up Saltash. We have seen exactly 2 times where the RMN went up against the SLN with out pods, and New Tuscany is not exactly a "battle" that you can draw information from. We are attempting to draw information from the battle to try to predict future outcomes.

In this specific case, we know that 120 Mk 16 missiles, 100 attack missiles and 20 EWs, slipped through the interlocked defense of 4 BCs with almost 5 minutes of flight time to prepare, losing only one single attack missile. Even if, after they figure out what happened, update software, improve EW, and fix hardware, the SLN's missile defense becomes 20 times more effective, it will still not be enough to save the targeted ship with 120 missiles incoming on 4 BC targets.

We do not know, however, the minimum number of MK16G that are required to mission kill any SLN ship, but I suspect that it is low, considering how badly the ships were destroyed. You have to figure, these are waller level warheads coming out of destroyers.

Now, we know from Mr. Weber that a Roland has 36 offensive control links. We also know that a Roland has a magazine of 240 missiles. That means that it has less then 7 full control link salvos. If they get into the situation where they need to use a maxed out control link salvo, SOP should be to run away. If they are escorting a convoy, the merchies run away, while the Rolands distract the attackers and attempt to degrade their drives enough that they can't chase the merchies, then run away.

Long story short, the point of a destroyer is to kill destroyers and, under the right circumstances, light cruisers. They are designed to escape what they can't fight.

As for how the RMN improves it self, they will be analyzing Slatash from here to Heck and back, looking for ways to make their ships better. I just do not feel that "how can one destroyer fight a full squadron of BC's?" is a good question to expend the currently limited resources of the RMN on.

crewdude48 wrote:There is a reason we keep bringing up Saltash. We have seen exactly 2 times where the RMN went up against the SLN with out pods, and New Tuscany is not exactly a "battle" that you can draw information from. We are attempting to draw information from the battle to try to predict future outcomes.

In this specific case, we know that 120 Mk 16 missiles, 100 attack missiles and 20 EWs, slipped through the interlocked defense of 4 BCs with almost 5 minutes of flight time to prepare, losing only one single attack missile. Even if, after they figure out what happened, update software, improve EW, and fix hardware, the SLN's missile defense becomes 20 times more effective, it will still not be enough to save the targeted ship with 120 missiles incoming on 4 BC targets.

Thank you for supporting my calculations. 120 missiles / 4 BCs = 30 missiles per BC ===> over saturation of the solly defenses.

Unless there is proof that a solly BC cannot even stop 5 missiles coming at it, then I am standing my ground that a 36 missile salvo is pissing in the wind vs an integrated defense of 8 BCs.

Now, we know from Mr. Weber that a Roland has 36 offensive control links. We also know that a Roland has a magazine of 240 missiles. That means that it has less then 7 full control link salvos. If they get into the situation where they need to use a maxed out control link salvo, SOP should be to run away. If they are escorting a convoy, the merchies run away, while the Rolands distract the attackers and attempt to degrade their drives enough that they can't chase the merchies, then run away.

And how will a single destroyer who can't touch them manage to 'distract' the BC squadron? The BCs are just going to wait until the DD is out of missiles and then they're going to run after the merchies. Modern or not, a Roland is not going into energy range of a BC.

Long story short, the point of a destroyer is to kill destroyers and, under the right circumstances, light cruisers. They are designed to escape what they can't fight.

You cannot tell the enemy that they should only send a force that you can destroy against you. Or that they should only send something you cannot destroy only if you have the option of running away.

As for how the RMN improves it self, they will be analyzing Slatash from here to Heck and back, looking for ways to make their ships better. I just do not feel that "how can one destroyer fight a full squadron of BC's?" is a good question to expend the currently limited resources of the RMN on.

Since there is an ongoing project to have apollo like control missiles for light combatants, then I'm going to say that the RMN has decided to spend the resources. They are actually spending a lot more compared to what I am suggesting. The only thing needed for my concept is to put everything together into a replacement warhead much like the existing ghost rider penaids. Every needed component already exists. They don't need to miniaturize the grav receivers/emitters anymore to fit into a mark 16 missile.

Rakhmamort wrote:Unless there is proof that a solly BC cannot even stop 5 missiles coming at it, then I am standing my ground that a 36 missile salvo is pissing in the wind vs an integrated defense of 8 BCs.

Why do you keep wanting a single freeking destroyer to take on a BC Squadron?

Rakhmamort wrote:And how will a single destroyer who can't touch them manage to 'distract' the BC squadron? The BCs are just going to wait until the DD is out of missiles and then they're going to run after the merchies. Modern or not, a Roland is not going into energy range of a BC.

I don't remember seeing a convoy in a war zone ever covered by only a single destroyer. When they send convoys into dangerous teritory, the RMN covers them better than that. Having only two Rolands on hand would let you fire max salvos of 72 missiles, forcing either the BC squadron to honor you as a threat and deploy against you or risk receiving a handful of capital strength laserheads up their rear. And every hit you make makes the next few easier.

Rakhmamort wrote:You cannot tell the enemy that they should only send a force that you can destroy against you. Or that they should only send something you cannot destroy only if you have the option of running away.

The point of war is to fight battles you can win and avoid battles you can't. If there is something you can't afford to run from, you need to defend it well. Better than with just a destroyer.

Rakhmamort wrote:Since there is an ongoing project to have apollo like control missiles for light combatants, then I'm going to say that the RMN has decided to spend the resources. They are actually spending a lot more compared to what I am suggesting. The only thing needed for my concept is to put everything together into a replacement warhead much like the existing ghost rider penaids. Every needed component already exists. They don't need to miniaturize the grav receivers/emitters anymore to fit into a mark 16 missile.

Just out of curiosity, do you have Word of Weber that they are working on a control missile. We have from him that they are working on a smaller keyhole platform for sub BC ships, but the closest we have to Apollo for even BCs is what has been budded "Apollo lite," basically parking an RD near the target to cut control loops in half. I don't remember anybody in universe, or Himself on the boards talk about a control missile.

crewdude48 wrote:Why do you keep wanting a single freeking destroyer to take on a BC Squadron?

I am using it as an example since the obvious thing for SLN to do to have a successful encounter is to pounce on RMN ships that they have huge numerical and tonnage advantage on. I am not asking for the mod so DDs are going to go out there and hunt solly BC squadrons. The control module is going to be helpful in such cases. When in normal situations and with multiple other ships whose combined throw weight is adequate to swamp the solly formation's defenses, obviously there won't be any need for the control missile mod.

The control modules will also be helpful during emergency situations where most of the control links are down but the tubes are undamaged.

I don't remember seeing a convoy in a war zone ever covered by only a single destroyer. When they send convoys into dangerous teritory, the RMN covers them better than that. Having only two Rolands on hand would let you fire max salvos of 72 missiles, forcing either the BC squadron to honor you as a threat and deploy against you or risk receiving a handful of capital strength laserheads up their rear. And every hit you make makes the next few easier.

Who says SLN commerce raiders are just going to pounce in the war zones?

As for the number of escorts, we've seen a convoy being escorted by just 2 ships (HH2). If SLN will throw 3 squadrons at those two ships (to make sure of the outcome), what then?

The point of war is to fight battles you can win and avoid battles you can't. If there is something you can't afford to run from, you need to defend it well. Better than with just a destroyer.

Yep. That's what I'm thinking too. That's why I'm saying the sollies are going to throw a lot of ships vs a very small number of RMN ships. They are not going to hit manty formations that can easily send salvos that will overwhelm their combined missile defenses (and take them out one by one) because they now know how weak those defenses are. They are going to attack manty detachments that are not likely to hurt them, that means low throw weight that they can defend against.

Put enough control missile modules in each ship to enable it to flush its entire magazine and have the ability to control the entire load and no solly squadron would look forward into 'ambushing' even single ships they come upon.

Just out of curiosity, do you have Word of Weber that they are working on a control missile. We have from him that they are working on a smaller keyhole platform for sub BC ships, but the closest we have to Apollo for even BCs is what has been budded "Apollo lite," basically parking an RD near the target to cut control loops in half. I don't remember anybody in universe, or Himself on the boards talk about a control missile.

Somebody posted something about apollo lite early in this thread and said it is something similar to what I was proposing except it was FTL. My bad if it is not about a control missile.

Anyway, if recon drones have that much bandwidth to control a hell of a lot of missiles, I don't see why they need to use Apollo missiles at all. Just park enough drones to control the salvo sizes they are throwing. Not only can they recover the drones and reuse them, they can go back to 10 missiles per pod.