New Manty ship ideas.

lyonheart wrote:Hi The E,

You forgot he wants IT to be 3-4 times the size of a Nike.

While 3 times is just over 7.25 MT, 4 times of course would put at 9.667 MT. much bigger than any SD but rather pitiful as you point out.

When it gets piled that ridiculously high, its time to go somewhere else.

To be fair, he said "Volume" not "Size", and that I don't have a problem with. The volume would scale roughly in that proportion, the problem is that available broadside space doesn't scale to the same degree.

The E wrote:

lyonheart wrote:Hi The E,

You forgot he wants IT to be 3-4 times the size of a Nike.

While 3 times is just over 7.25 MT, 4 times of course would put at 9.667 MT. much bigger than any SD but rather pitiful as you point out.

When it gets piled that ridiculously high, its time to go somewhere else.

To be fair, he said "Volume" not "Size", and that I don't have a problem with. The volume would scale roughly in that proportion, the problem is that available broadside space doesn't scale to the same degree.

Ship mass is a measure of volume.

I would like to see the plans for such a ship.

Although they'd have to be better than the bare-bones blueprint that I did for General Zod's ship...

My artwork skills really ain't all that great...

An Invictus sized Super Battle Cruiser.

Twice the broadside space of a Nike. Similar to Invictus PD and CM. Using a Roland based Keyhole III, one could pack 3 plus Katana LAC into the up armoured space that the Nike keyhole I space has. The Mk23 missile is not significantly larger around than a Mk16 tube. The length isn't a problem as while the broadside is twice as large the volume is 3-4 times as much. Allows it to carry a similarly amount of the larger missiles. The Nike is noted to carry around 160-240 missiles per tube. A lot of missiles. 8,000-12,000 per ship. Carrying 160 Mk23 per 50 tubes per broadside. A SBC would be able to stack a lot of missiles per salvo. And would be able to maximize the defensive firepower. Add in twice the Nike Grasers and a better spaced 15% greater armour levels than a Nike it gives you a great powerful ship.

Modularity options are not so much for refitting but shutting down portions of a ship for usages of different types and crew levels. Yes ships could be configured and reconfigured for other uses. Modular soft systems. But using a modular design that merely turns off and possibly disguises sections of a ship would allow a big ship to use a smaller crew to perform smaller duties. Depends how you make it.

One would also add a similar to the Roland chase systems, 6 Apollo tubes per chase would add control to the Mk23's, a quad stacked 400 missiles 48 Apollo salvo would he the same as a

As for a Roland based Keyhole III, such a system might allow an Invictus or Nike to carry a set of LAC docked in the space of the keyhole. With life support and rearming repair facilities. 80,000 tons volume space on a Nike would allow two or three 5,000 ton volume space, and 50,000 tons repair rearm and living space. 120,000 ton volume for the keyhole II. Double Nike Keyhole I 160,000 ton space could carry 4-6 LAC per broadside. A SBC could carry 8-12 LAC each. A Nike 4-6 LAC, an Invictus 6-8 LAC.

No access to the main ship need be added, connections already exist to the Keyhole systems. The space just needs be filled up. The tractor systems for towing docking and deploying the keyhole system could also be used with LAC.

Roland Keyhole III would offer at least Keyhole II telemetry, perhaps even more. PD and CM, full chase Roland armament and 50-62 crew. All laser broadside crew reassigned to telemetry duties further expanding telemetry capabilities. The Roland Keyhole doesn't need be in the wall but can be behind the wall, 1-2 million km. And not in relay sight to the wall. Having humans on board for targeting duties. Roland Keyhole would have better survivability than Keyhole I & II. Given the range of the telemetry the Roland Keyhole can be almost anywhere in the system and are capable of punching out any screening opposition ships.

As a Stand alone the Roland Keyhole would have a huge range advantage over the standard Roland. Would lose 5 lasers per broadside but would still have its chase Grasers. Those 10 lasers are likely to do very little ever.

Lord Skimper wrote:An Invictus sized Super Battle Cruiser.
***Snipped***

NO.

Skimper, you need to get your Honorverse books out of storage. Then read them. Then read them again. And again and again and again. And then and only then post about points that you have read. I've told you this before.

I've told you before that the cure for ignorance is education. I've also told you that ignorance does not equal stupidity. What I haven't said up until now is that willful ignorance does equal stupidity. And not just plain stupidity, but gross stupidity (144 times worse than plain stupidity).

You have deliberately and willfully chosen to remain in ignorance on the topic of the Honorverse. Therefore, (I will leave it up to the reader to draw their own conclusions).

Hey

I have skimmed the topic and the pearls, but dont treat me as if i said "Jehova" if it sound ridicoulos:

What about a large (bigger than CA up to maybe DN/SD) dedicated Anti-Missile-Ship, bit like US Navy Aegis maybe? Crammed with the best and most powerful EW/ECM systems, a huge broadside of (maybe longer-range) anti-missile-missiles and positioned between LACs and wall or inside the wall?

Would it even be cost effective? Had the idea before LACs were used mainly as Anti-Missile-Systems though...

Welcome to the boards.

David has weighed in on dedicated antimissile vessels before:

http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/163/1
http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/283/1

And part of a response originally posted to Baen's Bar:

In addition, it's probably worth noting that the Royal Manticoran Navy has come to the conclusion that while additional light anti-missile platforms are highly desirable, destroyers, light cruisers, and even battlecruisers aren't the way to go to provide them. That's what LAC carriers are for, and it's one reason why the Manties are continuing to build the type. Katana-class LACs have pointed the way towards a new Manticoran missile-defense doctrine. They can carry counter missiles that are highly capable, fire them in not-insignificant numbers, and manage the control links for them themselves. They are also extremely difficult to target successfully, and steps are being taken to make that even more difficult. To be brutally blunt about it, a modern LAC is more survivable in a long-range, MDM exchange than a Roland, simply because it's so much harder to hit with aimed fire. Of course, neither a Katana nor a Roland is going to be immune to the "golden BB" of an MDM which has lost its original target, goes looking for another one, and lucks out by locking up one of the small fry instead of the capital ship it was originally supposed to attack. The Katana is still a lot less likely to be picked as a target, however, and if it is picked, it's probably got at least as good a chance of evading or picking off the attacking missile as a Roland would have. And, of course, if you lose a Katana, you still lose less personnel than you would lose if you lost a Roland. (Note that this is significantly different from saying "I can afford to write off the crews of my LACs." The entire point of using the LAC in the first place is is that it's harder to kill for the same -- or possibly even greater -- contribution to the entire task force's defensive umbrella. The fact that when you actually lose one you lose less people is simply serendipity.)

. The advances in automation accepted aboard the RMN's combatants has, indeed, gone a long way to reducing their manpower requirements. At the same time, the proliferation of LACs has pushed up manpower requirements in certain specific areas. And the fact remains, that building one of these specialized defense ships would require an investment in trained manpower pretty much equal to the manpower requirements of a pod superdreadnought. Platform operating expenses would also be equivalent. Money per se is not the governing factor in Manticoran construction policies at this time, and neither is scarcity of building capacity. They are having to ramp up construction capabilities -- by reinstating their use of dispersed yards once more -- and I'm not trying to say that the economic/resource allocation side of their building decisions isn't significant. But the governing factor is their requirement for trained personnel. Not just missile technicians, or reactor technicians, but trained, experienced bridge officers. Tactical officers. Electronic warfare officers. These are very precious commodities at the moment, and will be for the foreseeable future, and Manticore is unlikely to tie up either building capacity or trained manpower in vessels which have no offensive capability and do not significantly contribute to the enhanced defensive capability for the Maybe as a whole.

Okay, no specialized defense ships for Manticore. Both from a doctrinal as from a logistics point.

But those restrictions don't stand in the way for the SLN which has, after their SDs are more or less useless pretty uch "trained" spare personnel and the strong necessity to defend against HUGE salvos. On the other hand, they are maybe the most traditionat strategists and tacticians in the Galaxy.

It's the thing that bothers me most: How defend against Salvos in that strength fired between two equally capable, modern-day Navys? I don't think the LACs are the best for the Task. And the uncontrolled Technodyne Cataphracts did "some" damage to the Grand Fleet nonetheless, even in the "dug-in" positions the GF is in, which shows that even against a technologically inferior fleet the Screen is not at the maximum tightness.

friessomecircuits wrote:But those restrictions don't stand in the way for the SLN which has, after their SDs are more or less useless pretty uch "trained" spare personnel and the strong necessity to defend against HUGE salvos. On the other hand, they are maybe the most traditionat strategists and tacticians in the Galaxy.

Problem is that they don't have a defensive ship design ready to go. I agree, if anyone is going to build a heavy defense ship, it's going to be the SLN or one of the SDFs, but whether they can produce those ships in sufficient numbers to do any good is up in the air.

It's the thing that bothers me most: How defend against Salvos in that strength fired between two equally capable, modern-day Navys? I don't think the LACs are the best for the Task. And the uncontrolled Technodyne Cataphracts did "some" damage to the Grand Fleet nonetheless, even in the "dug-in" positions the GF is in, which shows that even against a technologically inferior fleet the Screen is not at the maximum tightness.

No missile defense doctrine will ever be 100% effective. As such, what would you propose the Navies of the Honorverse do? The forward deployed LAC screen used by GF seems to be the most effective screening tactic on the field so far, based on what we know of the tech in the Honorverse, it seems to me that radical changes in that doctrine aren't to be expected unless some corresponding radical changes in the tech occur.

The E wrote:Problem is that they don't have a defensive ship design ready to go. I agree, if anyone is going to build a heavy defense ship, it's going to be the SLN or one of the SDFs, but whether they can produce those ships in sufficient numbers to do any good is up in the air.

You're right. Given the lower technological level of the SLN it is - even given the Solly will produce them - very unlikely that they are very effective against Apollo.

The E wrote:No missile defense doctrine will ever be 100% effective. As such, what would you propose the Navies of the Honorverse do?

I'm aware that no doctrine is 100% effective. What i want to state is, that two technologically roughly equal Navys, which are currently on the one side RMN,GSN,RHN and IAN and on the other side the MAN engage each other in Battles of Ships of the Wall,these will turn into massive carnage, which I'm not very fond of. What to do against that - I honestly dont know.

The E wrote:The forward deployed LAC screen used by GF seems to be the most effective screening tactic on the field so far, based on what we know of the tech in the Honorverse, it seems to me that radical changes in that doctrine aren't to be expected unless some corresponding radical changes in the tech occur.

With the Mesan Alignment as new major political force, and the work of Hemphill/Foraker combined, there ist always the possibility of new Game-Changing technologys, i think.
SD(P), CLAC, FTL coms, Apollo all more ore less changed the whole doctrine of the participating Navys overnight, and it is yet to see which impact the mostly undisclosed Mesan systems have.