in CoG (very small spoiler)

It is stated when the ship launches the frigates they need it as it is their ride home.

Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Lord Skimper wrote:Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Yes they do, but that wasn't why they were transported by the Hali Sowle:

CoG
CH 11 wrote:So here you are, staffing a slave trading depot, and a frigate arrives in your star system. Gosh, who is it most likely to be?

There would be no such suspicion attached to the Hali Sowle, on the other hand. Tramp freighters were an integral part of the slave trade. Some were slave transports themselves; others provided the slave trade with the supplies it needed. No slaver would think twice at the appearance of such a craft in their star system, even if that particular freighter had never come there before.

And a Nat Turner [Torch Frigate Class] could be handily fitted into many tramp merchantmen’s cargo holds, which had suggested all sorts of devious possibility to the RTN’s operational planners.

(turned out that Hali Sowle wasn't one that could fit a frigate inside, so the were tractored to external cargo hard points.)

It may be that they also needed a "ride home" because of their fuel capacity being too small for the distance home under their own power.

Lord Skimper wrote:It is stated when the ship launches the frigates they need it as it is their ride home.

Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Good question. The Nat Turners are supposed to be hyper-capable versions of the Shrike LAC with two grasers and deeper magazines. (See CoG chapter 11.) According to HoS, the Shrikes are fission-pile rather than fusion-bottle designs, so the Nat Turners ought to have enough endurance to get just about anywhere in hyper.

On the other hand, Major Sydorenko may have been talking about the four Mark 19T heavy assault shuttles, which are definitely not hyper capable.

BTW - it's no longer necessary to put the spoiler tag on for CoG posts. Forum rules say one month after the hardcover is released, and it's been exactly one month.

JohnRoth wrote:

Lord Skimper wrote:It is stated when the ship launches the frigates they need it as it is their ride home.

Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Good question. The Nat Turners are supposed to be hyper-capable versions of the Shrike LAC with two grasers and deeper magazines. (See CoG chapter 11.) According to HoS, the Shrikes are fission-pile rather than fusion-bottle designs, so the Nat Turners ought to have enough endurance to get just about anywhere in hyper.

On the other hand, Major Sydorenko may have been talking about the four Mark 19T heavy assault shuttles, which are definitely not hyper capable.

BTW - it's no longer necessary to put the spoiler tag on for CoG posts. Forum rules say one month after the hardcover is released, and it's been exactly one month.

That's precisely what he was talking about.

JohnRoth wrote:

Lord Skimper wrote:It is stated when the ship launches the frigates they need it as it is their ride home.

Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Good question. The Nat Turners are supposed to be hyper-capable versions of the Shrike LAC with two grasers and deeper magazines. (See CoG chapter 11.) According to HoS, the Shrikes are fission-pile rather than fusion-bottle designs, so the Nat Turners ought to have enough endurance to get just about anywhere in hyper.

On the other hand, Major Sydorenko may have been talking about the four Mark 19T heavy assault shuttles, which are definitely not hyper capable.

BTW - it's no longer necessary to put the spoiler tag on for CoG posts. Forum rules say one month after the hardcover is released, and it's been exactly one month.

People have extrapolated far too much from the vague description of the Nat Turners. Yes, they are described very loosely as being like two Shrikes end-to-end. But that just a comparison of their weapons design. It does not mean that they are powered by fission reactors. David has stated that hyper-capable ships require too much power for fission reactors.

SWM wrote:People have extrapolated far too much from the vague description of the Nat Turners. Yes, they are described very loosely as being like two Shrikes end-to-end. But that just a comparison of their weapons design. It does not mean that they are powered by fission reactors. David has stated that hyper-capable ships require too much power for fission reactors.

There is a post somewhere where David talks about regretting how his description was interpreted. It's a lot more that complex than a lot of people seem to think.

JohnRoth wrote:

Lord Skimper wrote:It is stated when the ship launches the frigates they need it as it is their ride home.

Don't frigates have hyper drives?

Good question. The Nat Turners are supposed to be hyper-capable versions of the Shrike LAC with two grasers and deeper magazines. (See CoG chapter 11.) According to HoS, the Shrikes are fission-pile rather than fusion-bottle designs, so the Nat Turners ought to have enough endurance to get just about anywhere in hyper.

On the other hand, Major Sydorenko may have been talking about the four Mark 19T heavy assault shuttles, which are definitely not hyper capable.

BTW - it's no longer necessary to put the spoiler tag on for CoG posts. Forum rules say one month after the hardcover is released, and it's been exactly one month.

Just came out five days ago in Canada.

kzt wrote:

SWM wrote:People have extrapolated far too much from the vague description of the Nat Turners. Yes, they are described very loosely as being like two Shrikes end-to-end. But that just a comparison of their weapons design. It does not mean that they are powered by fission reactors. David has stated that hyper-capable ships require too much power for fission reactors.

There is a post somewhere where David talks about regretting how his description was interpreted. It's a lot more that complex than a lot of people seem to think.

Exactly. The fission-fusion tradeoff isn't that simple. IIRC, the big problem with the Shrikes is that they're power-limited - they don't have enough power for both the wedge and the graser at the same time without using stored power, which affects their cycle time significantly. On the other hand, the fission pile means they don't need a lot of volume for hydrogen bunkerage.

I'd assumed that the Nat Turners had two of those fission reactors, not one, which would go along with the original description of them being two Shrikes end-to-end. That goes along with the two grasers and the additional magazine capacity, and it also goes along with the Hauptman Cartel being able to design a completely new frigate class without the years of work that would usually be done by a star nation's weapons design department. Now obviously a Nat Turner isn't just a pair of Shrikes bolted together, but that design approach is a whole lot simpler than either starting with a blank sheet of paper or trying to upgrade a conventional frigate design. It also gives Hauptman another export line - or at least it did before Oyster Bay.

With all that, I would be highly surprised if the Nat Turners didn't have significant weaknesses beyond what you would expect in a frigate.

JohnRoth wrote:Exactly. The fission-fusion tradeoff isn't that simple. IIRC, the big problem with the Shrikes is that they're power-limited - they don't have enough power for both the wedge and the graser at the same time without using stored power, which affects their cycle time significantly. On the other hand, the fission pile means they don't need a lot of volume for hydrogen bunkerage.

I'd assumed that the Nat Turners had two of those fission reactors, not one, which would go along with the original description of them being two Shrikes end-to-end. That goes along with the two grasers and the additional magazine capacity, and it also goes along with the Hauptman Cartel being able to design a completely new frigate class without the years of work that would usually be done by a star nation's weapons design department. Now obviously a Nat Turner isn't just a pair of Shrikes bolted together, but that design approach is a whole lot simpler than either starting with a blank sheet of paper or trying to upgrade a conventional frigate design. It also gives Hauptman another export line - or at least it did before Oyster Bay.

With all that, I would be highly surprised if the Nat Turners didn't have significant weaknesses beyond what you would expect in a frigate.

No, they don't have fission reactors. Shrike's are already power starved--even a pair of fission reactors would not be enough for a hyper generator. The comparison to a pair of Shrikes is only about the weapon design. Consider: a ship twice the size of a Shrike is at the bottom end for a dispatch boat. Such a small ship could not possibly be big enough to carry any weapons at all.

A Nat Turner is not really the equivalent of two Shrike's end to end, in any way except weapons mounts.

As I understand it, Torches frigates are modern designed ships built for Torch by the Hauptman Cartel and they have a quite a bit more punch than older design frigates which most modern navies no longer use.

There is no reason to believe that these ships are range limited. In fact, Potawatamie Creek, Anton Zilwicki's normal way of getting to and fro is a frigate, although I don't remember if it is a Nat Turner.

The reason for attaching them to the freighter has to do more with the "stealth feature" of what was needed in approaching stations where slavers were transferring cargo. I don't quite remember the logic, but I think that it had to do with getting in suddenly before the slaves could be spaced by whoever they were targeting at the time.

Don