antimissile antiLAC

Problem: missile swarms are too big for ones defenses. Any side in Pod based engagements are in deep trouble, when their EW tech levels are either met or exceeded.

Problem: counter missile are based on a fluid abaltive missile counter missile basis one missile to one counter missile with a traditional 40% success rate. Thus one needs comparable tech or such solutions and a reverse of the age old ground attack defense solution, 3 to 1 advantage. This is typically made up by the LAC in defensive mode.

Problem: Advanced LAC in large numbers create a firing at and defending from problem of their own. luckily LAC do not have hyperdrives, limiting in system movements and deployment to such systems.

Solution 1. Develops and make Counter Missile Counter LAC / LAC. The Manty GA version is the Katana. Good in this role bad in any other.

Solution 2. The Long Range CounterMissile. Either an ERM tech or dual stage Counter Missile. Could possibly be made to standard missile size, fired from standard missile tubes on ships that do not have CM tubes. Just have the missile fed to the standard tubes. Without the CM tubes the ship would have greater standard missile tube numbers and without separate crews for CM tubes emplacements possible crew number reductions. Larger ammunition storage etc...

Aiming such Long Range Counter Missiles can be handed off to the Keyhole systems which have excessive telemetry particularly in the 9-16 million km band width / range that is no longer used. LRCM range telemetry levels.

Solution 3. The minefield approach. A Point Defense Laser Cluster is a known Missile and LAC killer. It is the in close Katana weapon of choice. A mine with a sensor pack, fusion mini bottle and single SD PD cluster. This could be arranged in a grid around a ship or fleet. Deployed to engage any missile or LAC approaching and with large numbers engage and kill any such targets. While a ship could largely ignore such weapons, a missile and even an LAC can not.

Mines could either be deployed from missile tubes, or in pod packs. Think of it as a very small very weak graser torpedo. Carried in large numbers and deployed in the thousands by each ship to make a field of defensive PD fire, firing in either direct detection / attack mode, or if overwhelmed in a Flak box pattern. 5000 deployed by each ship, large numbers, with a 5% hit rate would eliminate 250 missiles. More with active seeking or greater groupings.

Adding a smaller wedge and close placement would also allow for missiles closing to be abated with wedge on wedge strikes. Or to allow a weak wedge to act as a shield against laser warheads.

Such PD mine fields could be deployed around the gaps in wedges to further increase density and effectiveness.

The problems with these ideas is that you are expecting to get free 'features' without having to put them on the ship.

5,000 mines? Where will these mines be stored? In the magazines or in the pod bays?

How much of the missile load out would be sacrificed for carrying these mines?

If the mines don't have drives then they will quickly separate away from the battle formation as well, so they are worse than useless. Don't forget that hitting a missile is probably three or four orders of magnitude more difficult than hitting a ship, so that will decrease their effectiveness or involve tying down the entire fleet's fire control.

DDMs (and MDMs) are already available that can be used to take out LACs. This is just not done in combat situations because the top priority is to take out the opposing side's offensive launchers.

The times that LACs are targeted are when they are either the only target on the board or when the commander of the opposing side believes there is no chance of doing meaningful damage to the larger ships.

Having PD mines not being able to keep up isn't a problem if they can defeat missiles. Having maneuverability but getting killed because someone is shooting 1000's of missiles at you doesn't work. So you change your tactics.

Lord Skimper wrote:Having PD mines not being able to keep up isn't a problem if they can defeat missiles. Having maneuverability but getting killed because someone is shooting 1000's of missiles at you doesn't work. So you change your tactics.

Which is fine, if both parties agree not to maneuver relative to each other.

which sounds rather unlikely to me.

Although one must remember each mine is a light weight system made to last an engagement or two not a lifetime of the ship. Weak wedge with aft mounted weapon, either a heavy SD PD individual laser to ultra light LAC individual laser. With lots of them they cluster together. Heavy mines suitably larger than light ones.

The mines use a very weak, light wedge. And when near stationary can form a wall with near vertical 180 or so degree wedges and tiny kilt opening which it fires through. Keeps communications fully open with the guarded ships and arrow slits to the incoming missiles they are shooting at. Light wedges will slow them down, but they only need to keep up with the miniscule accelerations of the ships not the missiles. Less than 1% of missile accelerations. Ships will also be able to look through the weak mine wedges. While each wedge will cut the missiles incoming sensors.

Each tiny light weight PD mine will take up little space, a full SD(P) or tubed ship can carry thousands of these PD-Mines, lesser numbers of larger SD heavy PD mines. Mixed in with the rest. Longer range hard hitting slower firing but also good against LAC. Plus they will further deflect missile sensors with bright spots in the mine "wall".

Ships so protected will fire their own CM and PD through the gaps in the shield wall. With its passive sensors further enhanced to take in the additional sensor data the mines will provide. Not all that much, but more is always better than less.

Lord Skimper wrote:The mines use a very weak, light wedge. And when near stationary can form a wall with near vertical 180 or so degree wedges and tiny kilt opening which it fires through. Keeps communications fully open with the guarded ships and arrow slits to the incoming missiles they are shooting at. Light wedges will slow them down, but they only need to keep up with the miniscule accelerations of the ships not the missiles. Less than 1% of missile accelerations. Ships will also be able to look through the weak mine wedges. While each wedge will cut the missiles incoming sensors.

Basic wedge geometry says that your wedge is parallel to the generating ships' (or missile's) long axis. If you interpose a wedge between yourself and someone else, you don't get to see through it (or at least, not well). If you position your interceptors so that they can fire at incoming missiles, you cannot at the same time interpose those interceptor's wedges against incoming fire.

This is a basic Honorverse 101 rule, as you should know. Why are you ignoring it?

As RFC just pointed out the flatter the wedge, parallel to the missile ship etc... the faster it accelerates, so the more open it is the slower it goes. Fully open or near to that stopped. Now a missile like wedge which is operating at 1% of top speed would be very open. Hence firing out the aft with its aft mounted PD, (the PD mounted aft would be more or less the only thing on the mine so it would be aft aiming. It would turn and run with the ship but mainly be aft mounted and firing. Could even stop and coast when firing, as there are lots of the mines and it can accelerate so fast compared to the ship it 'literally' can stop and go on a dime.

Using a Weak missile wedge close to a ship and close ship can peer through the mine wedge where as a distant ship either won't see it at all and likely not see whatever is behind it. The missiles themselves won't see through the mine wedges as their sensors are unable to see through even weak wedges.

Thus it acts as a multiple PD cover, acts as a minor shield (weak wedge) and can hide or mask or jam seeing a ship behind it versus distant ship and close missiles.

Potato you just made my day with your post.

Skimper, you seem to be missing a fundamental idea is ship design. Along with a lot of other things, but let's address one problem at a time.

Your ship has a finite amount of both volume and mass to dedicate to defensive systems. Currently ships use this allowance for counter missiles, ECM and laser clusters, along with the fire control for them.

If you are going to add another defensive system (absurd laser mines for example, henceforth to be known by the abbreviation "ALMs") it has to fit inside that same mass / volume budget. This means that by adding ALMs, you have to remove existing counter missiles or laser clusters.

As such, you can only add your new defensive system if it's going to be more effective than what it is replacing. Your own post indicates you're expecting a 5% kill rate for your ALMs. That's quite bad. Which means that you need to fire off absurd amounts of them to kill even fairly small salvos. As in you would have to put twenty thousand ALMs in space to kill off a one thousand missile salvo.

Counter missiles already do better than that. Your system is actually worse than what is already in place. Idea is dead now. You can drop it and come up with something else absurd instead.