New Manty ship ideas.

Whitecold wrote:The point of interception matters insofar that you want time to analyze the result of your fire, so you can shoot only at those you missed.

That's kind of the point of pushing LACs out in a layered defense. Two or three layers of LAC CM zones, spaced so that each layer has time to track and fire one or two CM salvos.

The question at hand is how either CM range and fire control can be increased or how LAC CM capacity can be increased. Or both.

SWM wrote:I don't recall any text evidence that missiles have grav detectors. We know they have some kind of sensors, but I don't think we have been told exactly what kind or how sensitive they are.

It would be logical for them to have grav detectors. But it seems logical that a big reason the Apollo missile is so big, even though it has no warhead, is because of the FTL comm.

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned in the story text, but the tech data appendix to, among others, SftS showing the details of the Mk16 refers to the target's gravitic signature being passed to the individual laserheads' seeker systems. If the laserhead sensors can pick up gravitics, then a CM definitely should be able to.

Regarding the Apollo control missile, we need to remember that it's not just an FTL comm relay. It also carries a tactical computer which makes the final decisions for the missiles it's controlling, based on the most recent data provided by the controlling ship's tactical section, or it can operate autonomously (at reduced effectiveness) if contact with the control ship is lost. That's going to account for some of the additional mass and volume.

Weird Harold wrote:Also, the Viper anti-LAC missile has an AI that makes it "fire and forget;" Vipers are used in anti-missile mode rather than equip Katanas with two types of missiles. A canister of Vipers instead of standard CMs might be programmable so that a canister would be "fire and forget" and not need control links at all.

Just a nitpick. We know the Viper can be "fire and forget" against LACs. It may or may not be able to do the same when used as a CM.

After all a LAC is a lot easier target to track. Bigger, slower, less accel, closer (because it's going slower, so you don't have to launch so early to get an intercept out near max CM range)

Dafmeister wrote:

SWM wrote:I don't recall any text evidence that missiles have grav detectors. We know they have some kind of sensors, but I don't think we have been told exactly what kind or how sensitive they are.

It would be logical for them to have grav detectors. But it seems logical that a big reason the Apollo missile is so big, even though it has no warhead, is because of the FTL comm.

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned in the story text, but the tech data appendix to, among others, SftS showing the details of the Mk16 refers to the target's gravitic signature being passed to the individual laserheads' seeker systems. If the laserhead sensors can pick up gravitics, then a CM definitely should be able to.

Regarding the Apollo control missile, we need to remember that it's not just an FTL comm relay. It also carries a tactical computer which makes the final decisions for the missiles it's controlling, based on the most recent data provided by the controlling ship's tactical section, or it can operate autonomously (at reduced effectiveness) if contact with the control ship is lost. That's going to account for some of the additional mass and volume.

Thanks Dafmeister, forgot about that in the mk16 diagrams.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:Also, the Viper anti-LAC missile has an AI that makes it "fire and forget;" Vipers are used in anti-missile mode rather than equip Katanas with two types of missiles. A canister of Vipers instead of standard CMs might be programmable so that a canister would be "fire and forget" and not need control links at all.

Just a nitpick. We know the Viper can be "fire and forget" against LACs. It may or may not be able to do the same when used as a CM.

That is why I said they MIGHT be programmable as fire and forget against missiles.

Weird Harold wrote:

The E wrote:Because you want your LAC screen in a position where it can react to the maneuvers your wall is pulling.

In that case, I'd want them -- or some of them -- as close to the enemy as possible. They'd have less distance to move to stay between my wall and the enemy wall.

In which case they have to travel a lot of ground to get rearmed.

THey would also be out of the defensive envelope of the wall and would be vulnerable if the enemy decides to 'sweep' up the pesky anti missile cover.

One still wonders how a missile can survive 90,000 gees of acceleration. 900 yeah maybe, 9,000 if you say it has special technology that let's it but 90,000?

This also has one wondering how fast / far a keyhole system can travel. Supposedly it has a large battle computer could have powerful sidewalls and should be able to carry launch CM / Vipers. Plus all the PD. One could also put a LAC Shrike sized graser or two or three on it. With 3000+ gee acceleration, it has no crew, it would make a great defense CM PD platform and super Apollo. Plus with Grasers could sneak up for a surprise graser attack.

A CLAC type ship could carry 20 to 40 of these launch them then fall back. This might also counter the missile pods. With 6 CM / Viper launchers Roland Chase mounted style. Such a craft / Platform could cause all sorts of havok offensively and defensively in large groups without risking any lives and being very fast may replace LAC.

Rakhmamort wrote:In which case they have to travel a lot of ground to get rearmed.

Agreed. Magazine space in LACs can be a problem, hence the suggestion of loading CM canisters in flat-pack pods set for single-fire as LAC CM reserves.

Rakhmamort wrote:THey would also be out of the defensive envelope of the wall and would be vulnerable if the enemy decides to 'sweep' up the pesky anti missile cover.

Aren't LACs the "defensive envelope of the wall?" The wall itself is only the inner layer of the defensive envelope. the further out layers of LACs can be pushed, the better the defense.

As for "sweeping up the pesky anti-missile cover" I'm sure that any commander would like to see his opponent try that:

1) LACs are harder to hit than wallers.
2) an enemy who is shooting at LACs is NOT shooting at my wallers.
3) Ultimately, LACs are expendable and losing LACs instead of wallers is a grim profit, but profit nonetheless.

Lord Skimper wrote:One still wonders how a missile can survive 90,000 gees of acceleration. 900 yeah maybe, 9,000 if you say it has special technology that let's it but 90,000?

Nothing special about missile tech, it's just built so that nothing can shift under acceleration. A missile is effectively one solid mass accelerating in a vacuum -- encountering significant amounts of "space dust" could cause problems, but there's little-to-none resistance to cause problems.

Lord Skimper wrote:One still wonders how a missile can survive 90,000 gees of acceleration. 900 yeah maybe, 9,000 if you say it has special technology that let's it but 90,000?

DW has said that missile wedges generate some level of compensation reducing the felt acceleration. Also working out or looking up the acceleration experienced by an artillery round when fired would probably surprise you, while it is a single impulse rather than a sustained acceleration (OTOH single impulses are harder to deal with than sustained forces) it gets up into the same ranges as Honorverse missiles and some WW2 anti-aircraft shells used vacuum tube based radar systems that had to survive them