Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 39 guests

Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by JeffEngel   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 6:32 pm

JeffEngel
Admiral

Posts: 2074
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:06 pm

kzt wrote:
Weird Harold wrote:How would you go about releasing them when you need to deploy them?

Blasting caps. :)

Tiny ones would do! Firecrackers, almost.

Reginald Houseman would adore the newfound sense of economy in the RMN.
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by Relax   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 8:15 pm

Relax
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3214
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:18 pm

JeffEngel wrote:
kzt wrote:Blasting caps. :)

Tiny ones would do! Firecrackers, almost.

Reginald Houseman would adore the newfound sense of economy in the RMN.


Now if only they could use power cords in the Honorverse.
Too expensive? :roll:
_________
Tally Ho!
Relax
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by StealthSeeker   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 8:24 pm

StealthSeeker
Commander

Posts: 240
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2015 2:31 am

SWM wrote:Can I point out once again that RFC has already nixed this idea? http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... ngton/73/1


Yes, yes, I have read it and thank you again for showing me the location of that site. However, I think when he wrote that BCs were half the size of a Nike and he was talking about 16 LACs. So I figure if you double the size of the BC and half the number of LACs maybe you could have something workable.... :P :D
-
-
I think therefore I am.... I think
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by kzt   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:53 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

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

StealthSeeker wrote:
SWM wrote:Can I point out once again that RFC has already nixed this idea? http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... ngton/73/1


Yes, yes, I have read it and thank you again for showing me the location of that site. However, I think when he wrote that BCs were half the size of a Nike and he was talking about 16 LACs. So I figure if you double the size of the BC and half the number of LACs maybe you could have something workable.... :P :D

Nope. The armor layers that make it tougher reduce the available space inside. Essentially you would lose about 1/3 of the space of the core hull, plus the 150-200 meter 25x25 passage you need through the center of the ship, plus any space needed for maneuvering around a LAC to get it into a bay, plus the space needed for magazines and spare parts. My guess is you lose about 600,000 cubic meters for this, all inside the armor system. This is going to have severe effects on what else you can stuff in the ship.
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by stewart   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:51 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

[quote="Brigade XO"]If the GA is going to go after FF Logistic bases, it might be a good idea to bring along extra sets of crew for captured ships.

The idea of destroying the Logistic chains for FF/BF is a good one but it has already been noted that it isn't so much killing SLN personel as eliminating the ships that could cause trouble. RMN and RHN would be picking up survivors or surrendered crews of SLN ships and then you have to decide what to do with them. If you go after a OFS sector governemnt center and engage the warships there, you are going to probably destroy at least some but may get a lot of surrenders. If you are in a system (as the OFS control points tend to be on planets) you can probably dump most of the FF crews on the planet. You may not want the FF warships and just scuttle them if a plan does not include turning them over to future "liberated" systems that sign treaties with the GA


--------------

And ONCE AGAIN we discuss what to do with captured SLN ships.

the SD's and SLN BC's are best as scrap.
The small boys can go to treaty signees as initial "coast guard" -- they will thump the opportunistic pirates and the active FF / BF ships will be busy against GA ships

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by stewart   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:55 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

[quote="Brigade XO"]If the GA is going to go after FF Logistic bases, it might be a good idea to bring along extra sets of crew for captured ships.


The non-warships are another matter. What are you likely to find?
Fleet Train ships with supplies and materials. You can just destroy them (and the goods) or you could send them back to the GA. Sending them back (with your own crews) puts usefull transports that are built to at least SLN military spec for speed etc. If nothing else (like using them in the variouis GA navies) you could sell them to private companies as transports. Either way, it takes them out of use by the SLN and any SL/OFS associated planitary government control

Repair ships. The tech will not be up to Haven or Manticore standard but they will be outfitted (and partially supplied) to at least perform repair and general construction on starships and probably stations. You don't have to staff them up to take a capture done home, just have a crew to run the engings, navigate and generals life support for a trip back to somewhere that the capailites of the ship can be used. As above, you could just destroy them but taking them away and using them to both rebuild and as at least temporary Fleet Aux ships will deny thier use to the SLN- and any system that would inherit them with the crumbling of the SL.


-----------------

See use of captured small-boys.
1 repair ship / stores ship at each treaty partner system.
spare parts and the support equipment for a small task force or local fleet.

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by stewart   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 10:59 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

[quote="Brigade XO"]If the GA is going to go after FF Logistic bases, it might be a good idea to bring along extra sets of crew for captured ships.


Merchant Freightes/transports. Same thing. Take the ships, leave the crews (or take them under heavy guard) back to GA space and use either as Fleet Aux or sell to people who want to use them as merchant transports.

-----------------------

Recommend re-purpose the Freighters / Transports (assuming life-support) as personnel transports to transport the captured SLN crew to the island paradise camps in Spindle (Club Spindle T-Shirts optional)

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by stewart   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:05 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

Vince wrote:
Somtaaw wrote:For having LACs limpeted to a BC hull, we have the textev from HotQ that a Sultan-class Peep BC can reasonably haul 2 Masadan LAC's.

...Snip...

In The Honor of the Queen, BC Thunder of God (ex People's Navy Saladin), towed the LAC's astern of the ship, outside the wedge and the inertial compensator field.

For an example of having ships (frigates, which are both larger than LACs and hyper-capable) being carried limpeted to the hull, see the Hali Sowle in Cauldron of Ghosts, a one million ton tramp freighter.



-------------

Note that the Masadan Navy's use of Thunder of God as a transport was a supreme waste of the use of that ship, both as a tow-mule and it limited the speed of the Sulton BC.

In a more modern era (30 years later), tractoring or limpiting LAC's to a BC hull will block many of the BC's hull mounted sensors. Probably not a good idea.

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by stewart   » Sat Feb 28, 2015 11:26 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

[quote="StealthSeeker"]"Somtaaw"]


The BC/LAC that I have in mind would be a cross between a Agamemnon-class pod BC and a Nike-class BC. It would carry it's 8 LACs racked internally which it would launch sequentially out a single hatch in the aft hammerhead just like the Agamemnon would launch missile pods. It would limpet 8 to 12 Mk16 missile pods to the outside of the hull. It would most likely have a reduced missile tube count from the Nike, say only 40 tubes rather than 50. But each tube would be the same double launch off-bore tubes firing Mk16s that the Roland-class destroyers have. If it could launch 4 pods of Mk16s with a full double launch broadside, it would send 136 missiles down range at a time. That would be enough to at least mission kill 2 SLN BC's on each of it's first 3 broadside launches. It could then use just it's internal tubes to send 80 missile broadsides at remaining ships. Defensively it would be an incredibly tough target as it would maintain the armor of the Nike and be able to fire it's broadsides while maintaining a wedge to target aspect just like the Nike-class BC and that would be supported by it's 8 LACs anti-missile capabilities.

------------

The description is similar to the current wet-navy Aviation capable Destroyer made by Japan a few years ago.
Think of a Spruance or Burke DD, bridge shifted to Stbd, with aft deck and port side as an angle deck.

limited Helo / STOVL capability and too much rock-and-roll for easy aircraft recovery.

CLAC's, like CV's need to carry a minimum number of craft to both project power (primary purpose) and defend themselves (it's nice to have a home to return to).

In our 20th/21st Cen world, the Midway-sized carrier (French DeGaule, Brit QEII / Prince of Wales) is basically the minimum size for doing both those jobs. CV59 thru CVN88 are better.

In the Honorverse, keeping the LAC's inside the hull facilitates maintenance and provides some limited protection as well as not blocking hull mounted sensors.
The size of the LAC's and the number needed for an effective wing determine the CLAC hull size -- DN or larger (note the Graysons and RHN chose larger -- SD-sized).

In short, hull mounted LAC's should be considered ONLY as a short-term, less than optimal solution.

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Beating up Frontier Fleet, mercilessly
Post by Somtaaw   » Sun Mar 01, 2015 12:41 am

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1204
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

Good points Stewart, but you got the CLAC's flipped. GSN and RMN navies chose DN CLAC's, blending speed with carry capacity for offensive actions.

The RHN chose SD's because their LACs were crap, and they were more intended to stop Shrikes, and protect their own wallers.

We also don't truly have data on what the IAN chose, as far as we're aware they haven't (yet), but they were starting to play around with new and improved LACs, when they started rolling out podlayers.

http://honorverse.wikia.com/wiki/LAC_carrier
Top

Return to Honorverse