New Manty ship ideas.

The LAC's shipkilling days are counted in any case. They can remain effective against light combatants, but against an enemy wall the future belongs to the Katana, bolstering the missile defense.
I really don't see any use for a Etorp LAC that a Shrike won't do better. If a shrike hits a DD with its graser, you don't need a special LAC to finish the DD off.

Whitecold wrote:A Shrike Grazer is a grazer, and not an energy torpedo.

opp...didn't see torp - thought it said weapon. ooops - E-torps are practically useless (though if a variant could be developed to cover a large area it may prove an effective AMS).

E torps mines could work as wormhole junction defense. For all we know, such mines are part of the mix. True, the books specifically state Graser mines are used, but why not E torp mines? Energy budget would be why not. $$$. For all we know one could build 100 Graser mines for 1 E torp mine. Currently, E torp weapons would be a specialty item. Maybe the SLN still has a factory producing them. Who knows. Maybe Haven or the Andies do. Manty and Grays certainly do not.

Otherwise the only possible way a LAC E-torp could work would be to remain in stealth and go for down the throat or up the kilt shots. Sure, it would work against SLN current tech levels, but even they would quickly wise up and place more RD's in space along with pushing light units out farther increasing their sensor reach negating them.

wastedfly wrote:E torps mines could work as wormhole junction defense. For all we know, such mines are part of the mix. True, the books specifically state Graser mines are used, but why not E torp mines? Energy budget would be why not. $$$. For all we know one could build 100 Graser mines for 1 E torp mine. Currently, E torp weapons would be a specialty item. Maybe the SLN still has a factory producing them. Who knows. Maybe Haven or the Andies do. Manty and Grays certainly do not.

I expect an E torp platform would be relatively large and expensive (for a remote weapons platform)

Also a grazer platform firing against a target w/o sidewalls (just exiting a wormhole) can be quite far back. Far enough back that if equipped with its own sudewall it'd be invulnerable to return energy fire. An E torp is inherently limited enough in range that ships can return fire. Although it's pretty much a mutual kill situation; the slightly slower E torps should gut the ship that just killed it with grasers or lasers.

munroburton wrote:[However, since LACs are able to generate lots of firing angles, it might be worth exploring what it takes to mount ETs on them, since a squadron is able to envelope a single target and thus generate enough firing angles to throw ETs up the kilt or down the throat, which could be quite devastating to people who don't have bow/stern sidewalls.

As was already pointed out by several people, there is no point in doing that. If the target can be hit by an energy torpedo (i.e. you can get into a position without a sidewall interposed), the target can also be hit by a graser from much further out. If a LAC gets a down-the-throat shot at 700,000 km, the LAC's own buckler sidewall will completely protect the LAC from the enemy's return graser fire. In other words, if the LACs can swarm a ship well enough to force down-the-throat and up-the-kilt shots, you don't need to get inside energy-torpedo range. Therefore, LACs don't need energy torpedoes.

SWM wrote:

munroburton wrote:[However, since LACs are able to generate lots of firing angles,...

Since they are pretty much the nonhyper equivalent of corvettes [added: I meant frigates here] and can be built quickly in numbers, I suspect LACs will be an intimate part of Lenny Det defense strategies soon enough. But probably not with energy torpedoes.

That said, would a graser torpedo work in hyper? I guess it might as it is an energy weapon. If so, maybe we need real corvettes again.

To continue the analogy, once a Lenny Det fires a torpedo, it gives away significant positional information. That is why Oyster Bay was so successful once, but would be unlike to succeed so well again.

[/quote]

Since they are pretty much the nonhyper equivalent of corvettes and can be built quickly in numbers, I suspect LACs will be an intimate part of Lenny Det defense strategies soon enough. But probably not with energy torpedoes.

That said, would a graser torpedo work in hyper? I guess it might as it is an energy weapon. If so, maybe we need real corvettes again.

To continue the analogy, once a Lenny Det fires a torpedo, it gives away significant positional information. That is why Oyster Bay was so successful once, but would be unlike to succeed so well again.[/quote]

I don't think a Lenny Det launching a GT is going to give away any information. If you don't use a standard missile launcher "fire" out the GT, you don't have to show any energy spike. I suppose it depends on what is being spotted by sensors when a normal missile tube is used. Is the launch detection a reading of the energy or disturbance caused by the launch mechanism or is it the impeller of each individual missile switching on once it clears the launching ship?

Since the GT is using Spider Drive, it isn't going to register as a drive when it is operating. You could push or throw GTs out of a ship with something similar to an aircraft catapult on a wet navy carrier, you could use a tractor/pressor combination, you could even used compressed air. Heck, you could drag it over to a hatch and throw the thing out manually. Think ejecting a spent cartriage. You could use internal gravity to "drop" the GTs through the floor or sideways out ports on the side of the LD like laying mines that just switch on after X time and putter off slowly (relatively speaking compaired to impeller based weapons).

Why would you want or design a stealth warship that would announce that it had fired one or 20 to 50 GTs (which are SLOW) from a point in the system and give your target a place to start looking for both the launching ship and the weapons?
The whole idea of using Spider Drive weapons and launch vessels it to hid the fact that they are in your system and that they (the weapons) will not be see until they are actualy striking. You don't want the launching ship seen at all. Period.
If you can see the launching ship, someone is going to get within range (particularly with MDMs fairly quickly and then POOF, no LD.

jgnfld wrote:That said, would a graser torpedo work in hyper? I guess it might as it is an energy weapon. If so, maybe we need real corvettes again.

Don't see any reason a graser torp wouldn't work in hyper; after all spider drive ships have driven themselves through hyper. Now I assume one wouldn't work in a grab wave but then neither would a conventional missile.

But (since as far as we know honorverse Corvettes are, like LACs, built without a hyper generator I'm not sure why graser torps being usable in hyper has any link to your statement that we might need "real corvettes again"

Brigade XO wrote:

Since they are pretty much the nonhyper equivalent of corvettes [added: I meant frigates here] and can be built quickly in numbers, I suspect LACs will be an intimate part of Lenny Det defense strategies soon enough. But probably not with energy torpedoes.

That said, would a graser torpedo work in hyper? I guess it might as it is an energy weapon. If so, maybe we need real corvettes again.

To continue the analogy, once a Lenny Det fires a torpedo, it gives away significant positional information. That is why Oyster Bay was so successful once, but would be unlike to succeed so well again.[/quote]

I don't think a Lenny Det launching a GT is going to give away any information...[/quote]

Weber is clear that there is in fact a radar signature available on the torpedoes if one is looking and the computers are programmed correctly to ID them:

Now the Mesan attack came sweeping in out of the darkness. The incoming weapons had extraordinarily low radar signatures, and they were coming in at barely 60,000 KPS. Even if some of them had been detected, their velocity was so low it was unlikely to pop through the defenders' threat filters. As it happened, however, none of them were picked up as they sliced deeper and deeper in-system, unseen and undetected, like the talons of some huge, lethal, invisible bird of prey.

Since the torp and ship are both slow, there will be at least some positional information available in my thinking at least. Like at least what general quadrant to search. Sure, like Oyster Bay against targets which are neither actively looking around nor maneuvering you can get a long way away from the firing point. But I can't believe a smart military won't put in countermeasures which will prevent this situation from happening again. The Detweilers (the clone group, not the ships) admit this elsewhere.

I meant frigate, not corvette, should we need hyper escorts. The point is that for escort duty against submarines, lots of little ships is much better than a few big ships. And they don't even need to be all that heavily armed as submarines are fundamentally weak when exposed. If MWW/RFC is going the WW2 route, which I suspect he is, I look forward to the GA working out the necessary techniques to defend against the threat: What will a 3D Raspberries, Pineapples, and Strawberries look like?!

jgnfld wrote:

...The incoming weapons had extraordinarily low radar signatures, and they were coming in at barely 60,000 KPS. Even if some of them had been detected, their velocity was so low it was unlikely to pop through the defenders' threat filters. ...

Looking at this quote--which is from the MoH ARC--something seems off. 60,000 KPS is 17% of the terminal speed of a Mark 23 after expending all 3 drives. What kind of filter would be set so low as not to report an object at that velocity???

Was this changed in the final version, I don't have it here on my computer.