light ships number and type

As I have previously stated the Nike should replace the light ships.

However that wasn't always the case and Manticore has had a shift in its focus and number of patrol worlds. It used to be a customs force for the terminus forces, screening of combat operations and interactions in an independent Silesian Confederacy. Screening against Haven Anderman and verge or rogue worlds plus a lot of pirates.

With the annexation of Silesia, peace with Haven, most of the rogue or independent worlds and aggressive verge worlds neutralised and just about every pirate fleeing GA space plus the terminus now being fortified, the same old same old just doesn't make sense. With the reintroduction of LAC and with Mycroft systems and fleets have no need for DD CL nor CA. Just like DR and BB the BC has become and all have been replaced by the BCL.

Realistically a modern SEM doesn't need anything but LAC & CLAC BCL SD(P) and perhaps some Wolfhound for armed messenger runs and freighter escort.

Okay you all want DD CL CA and little BC. But with the duties being replaced, how many of each do you want and where are you going to use them? Saganami C escorts for freighter's seem like over kill as would Nike be. Let alone the Roland which makes a good pirate but the SEM would never condone that. The Wolfhound is everything the Avalon is as the Nike is better at everything than the Saganami C.

My solution is to gift to Torch and Mesa all the Roland. Trade yard space for Avalon and Saganami C with Haven. Sell BC(P) to either the Andie's or Grayson. Grayson could pay by leasing their SD(P) to the SEM. Retrofit a new set of "Trojan training ships" for each Silesian system, perhaps Talbot as well. Plus Beowulf could get, depending on the vote, training ships or full on SD(P) or Nike. Depending how they wish to interact with the League.

Lord Skimper wrote: Let alone the Roland which makes a good pirate but the SEM would never condone that.

Commerce destruction during war is a secondary objective. Rollands are Secondary ships thanks to their DDM instead of tertiary status. Rollands will be attacking commerce.

Actually, I think your bigger is better argument ignores a number of important aspects.

1) An SD(P) using the same technology as a BCL outmatches it in every aspect other than sheer speed. A fleet equipped with modern Wallers will chew up a fleet made of BCL's in every scenario wherein the BCLs either have to take or defend a position. Since most truly important battles involve one side or the other of this scenario, a fleet made exclusively of BCL's simply can not compete.

2) The argument in favor of bigger is better in that you get more capability per ton with a larger vessel than a smaller vessel ignores the fact that if you can build 20 DD's for the cost of one BCL even if the 20 DD's can't take the BCL, they have one enormous advantage over the BCL. The 20 destroyers can be in 20 different locations doing 20 different missions while the BCL, however capable, can be in exactly one location at a time. This is one reason to build smaller vessels, to attempt to "right size" vessels for the missions they need to have done so that there can be enough of them to deal with all of the various tasks the fleet needs done.

The argument you are using is similar to the DD vs FG but ballooned far out of the realm where the basic precepts continue to make sense.

Now, if you wanted to argue that peace will reign and that the threats that smaller vessels needed to deal with are going to evaporate, well then why have a fleet at all. If you essentially have nothing for the lighter units to do then what use do you have for BC's of any type. You need SD's to face other SD's which your BCL's are going to be close to useless in doing so you'll need some of them and for lesser missions, just build enough small DD's to show the flag and do a bit of reconnaissance without having to invest astronomical sums to build enough BCL's to do the same tasks.

Finally there is one significant problem that I think you are missing and that is the chaos that is likely to engulf the SEM's by far most important trading partner, the Solarian League. The League is about to transform itself into an 1,800 system version of Silesia on steroids and all of the SEM's wealth is built on commercial trade, mostly with the League. If things fall apart the way many are saying it will, you're going to have a HUGE job providing security for your Merchant Marine operating in those areas and for that, you're going to need something other than BCL's. Fact is, you're going to have a horrible time building enough medium and light units to do the job much less investing almost exclusively in BCL's.

1. An SD(P) is out matched by a forte. New fortes can move about, albeit much slower and with Mycroft can be undefeatable. Even lowly SD(P) can't scratch their paint without getting blown into scrap. The forte does require many more things than the SD(P) does and costs even more. More crew, also not being hyper capable they have restrictions.

The Nike BCL is basically the same tech missiles and costs which much less crew requirements as the smaller craft.

With less systems to patrol in the SEM, 55 safe a secure, 110 Nike can do everything in the SEM that would have required 800 smaller craft. The crew levels are comparable to older CL. Unlike SD(P) which still have 1000's of crew. A Roland with 62-65 crew just can't send anyone off ship. Can't take 300 prisoners let alone doesn't have anywhere to put them. Not a problem with a Nike. Add to that no training space for new crew members, not just officers, no prize crew numbers, not enough crew to do inspections from pinnace. Even the Wolfhounds 87 is problematic. Not a problem with a Nike.

Saganami C is great but anything it can do, the Nike is better at. For not much more cost. The Nike is always enough ship if it isn't you need the wall, but the wall is only for active military uses.

For use with a failed SL which will have ships up to SD current SL tech levels around. Anything lighter than a Saganami C will be hard pressed, even A saganami C will be at the edge and a Nike will be able to sail in do what it wants and leave with any problem from any current SL tech. With the SL fractured they will disperse their SD 4-6 per system. Vs an Avalon the SD not only has a good chance but the Avalon would need to run away and call for help. Even a Roland against 4 SD just doesn't have the depth of fire or ammunition levels to pose a major problem. A Roland also doesn't have the defensive capability to defend itself from an SD. It can run but it can't outrun a Sollie Missile. One good hit and it is dead. Not so with a Nike. Not only can it raid a system but capture a nice prize, take and hold a rogue Sollie system.

The advantage of the current SEM is that there are not that many places that need be patrolled. 30 some Silesian systems and a dozen terminus. The rest have the wall present and or system defenses. A few systems in Talbot and the verge will ask to join but 100 Nike are all that are needed any of these systems.

Alizon wrote: The 20 destroyers can be in 20 different locations doing 20 different missions while the BCL, however capable, can be in exactly one location at a time.
.

Right, if you have some BCLs & I have a few SDs & a bunch of light ships, my SDs can cover any vital infrastructure from you while my light forces can split up and attack anything you lacked ships to protect. Even a frigate can take out an orbiting supply station.

Alizon wrote: This is one reason to build smaller vessels, to attempt to "right size" vessels for the missions they need to have done so that there can be enough of them to deal with all of the various tasks the fleet needs done. .

Right, this is the concept of a “balanced fleet”. Don’t send a battleship to do what a cruiser can do. The whole principle of the BC is to build a ship “fast enough to out run anything it can’t out-fight & out-fight anything it can’t outrun” the 2 inherent flaws in this are 1) anything you can’t out fight can protect whatever they want & you can’t do anything about it & 2) even if you can out fight any 1 thing you can’t out run, you can’t out fight “all” of them. This was the same basic concept used on the German Pocket Battleships (though the 3 remaining British BCs were the exception – at the time). Some classify them as “cruisers” but they had 28cm capitol ship guns & were more powerful than most pre-dreadnought battleships. They were more properly classified as BCLs. Anyway, Graf Spee ran into opponents which she could clearly out fight & easily send to the bottom, but…she ran into 3 of them together and was over whelmed. Even so she still fought them off but took damage in the process with nowhere to repair. In the end, though all her foes were badly damaged (2 almost fatally) all of them survived to be repaired where she was ultimately lost.

Alizon wrote:… just build enough small DD's to show the flag and do a bit of reconnaissance without having to invest astronomical sums to build enough BCL's to do the same tasks.

The recon role is very important & greatly ignored in fleet compositions. While the DD & CL are generally used for this role. In the HH universe the smaller the hull the smaller the footprint & the closer you can transit to a system without being detected. This is another reason why the FF should not be considered “obsolete” it is the smallest warship hull and thus has the smallest footprint when inserting into a system for recon. Most are disdained and thus those who do have them have poor sensors but this is no rule. An FFR with the sensors from a CL would be the idea recon platform both for 1) the tiny footprint {one so small no one would likely even look for it} & 2) for its cheapness in both material and manpower terms 2A) for mass production to get as many out as possible and cover more areas and 2B) if one dose get caught its less of a loss (& its small size/high accel. make it hard to catch)

RFC explained in the info dumps why the frigate fell out of use for reconnaissance. The FG has very marginal improvement in its sensor signature compared to the DD. The DD meanwhile, can carry more RDs and can fight free of opposition. And the economics of building umpteen FGs was very heatedly debated when Cheeopis kept trying to advance the idea. The frigate is not going to return.

Potato wrote:RFC explained in the info dumps why the frigate fell out of use for reconnaissance. The FG has very marginal improvement in its sensor signature compared to the DD. The DD meanwhile, can carry more RDs and can fight free of opposition. And the economics of building umpteen FGs was very heatedly debated when Cheeopis kept trying to advance the idea. The frigate is not going to return.

And the DD is dying, and the CL may be as well.

drothgery wrote:

Potato wrote:RFC explained in the info dumps why the frigate fell out of use for reconnaissance. The FG has very marginal improvement in its sensor signature compared to the DD. The DD meanwhile, can carry more RDs and can fight free of opposition. And the economics of building umpteen FGs was very heatedly debated when Cheeopis kept trying to advance the idea. The frigate is not going to return.

And the DD is dying, and the CL may be as well.

The DD isn't dying, the class is just getting bigger and bigger to keep it combat viable. Not all recon can be done with recon drones; navies still need small-ish hyper-capable units to scout systems.

The role of the destroyer isn't going anywhere, so there are always going to be destroyers.

Actually I think the CL is going to stay, the second gen CA(L), which by 1900 PD standards is a light BC, is going to be too expensive for routine deployment in minor systems, you will after all need something other than a DB for monitoring the other side of the alpha wall (though I suppose you could build armed scout boats for that purpose).

The thing is that at the start of the series ships, when classified by roles were escorts (FG or DD), light combatants (DD or CL), medium combatants (CA), heavy combatants (BC), light capital ships (BC or BB) and heavy capital ships (SD and DNs) , and wallers (which had in living memory just become synonymous with heavy capital ship). The escort role was mostly obsoleted by RDs and LACs, but not the light combatant role.
Destroyers, in the RMN at least (other powers may have differng ideas about the priority of long duration independent cruising capability) are probably on the way out because even in the short EDM era (Wolfhounds and Avalons), the lifetime difference in price was shrinking, while the capability gap was widening, and the mass differencial was proportionally about half what it had been. For balanced DDM designs the propotion will be likely cut in half again, thought the armanment gap might disapear.

drothgery wrote:

Potato wrote:RFC explained in the info dumps why the frigate fell out of use for reconnaissance. The FG has very marginal improvement in its sensor signature compared to the DD. The DD meanwhile, can carry more RDs and can fight free of opposition. And the economics of building umpteen FGs was very heatedly debated when Cheeopis kept trying to advance the idea. The frigate is not going to return.

And the DD is dying, and the CL may be as well.

Crown Loyalist wrote:The DD isn't dying, the class is just getting bigger and bigger to keep it combat viable. Not all recon can be done with recon drones; navies still need small-ish hyper-capable units to scout systems.

The role of the destroyer isn't going anywhere, so there are always going to be destroyers.

Very true. There will long be a need for something smaller and cheaper than a CA for scouting and other work. Now it may happen that the DD and CL classes effectively merge, but even that might not happen.

Although, recon drones are getting effective enough, and with sufficient endurance (at least the Manticoran ones) that they're forming a bigger part of scouting remote systems. Yes you need the hyper-capable ship to bring and manage them - but in the past that ship would need to sneak deep into the system to observe using its onboard sensors. Now, more and more, they're holding back (even staying entirely beyond the hyperlimit) and using recon drones to probe the inner system. (Given the the drones have pretty capable sensors, are faster and stealthier than the ships, and are definitely more expendable you can see why.)

But as you said, you still need the ship to bring them, and it's overkill to send some future CA(L) designs, or a BC(L), just to skulk out around the hyper limit and monitor drones.