| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
by Montrose Toast
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:05 am
|
|
|
Montrose Toast
Posts: 874
|
Maybe I misunderstood.
I was interpreting "different" as different parts of the EM spectrum since all current and Honorverse tactical sensers [active and passive] are EM - just differing portions of the spectrum. All limited to Light Speed. Gravics appear to be different - FTL - or are they? I'm suspecting the entire discussion of this is a case of imprecise terms and how people are interpreting the wording vice error... "Who Dares Wins"
|
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by solbergb
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:35 am
|
|
|
solbergb
Posts: 2846
|
Gravitics are FTL, I think 64x the speed of light but I might be misremembering. There is still a lag, which is why Apollo has range limits, but it is quite fast. Gravitics are always portrayed as passive and all they really show are impeller wedges, their strength and vector.
Short range lightspeed sensors are used in both active and passive mode in the books, the latter mostly by ghost rider drones trying not to be noticed. Eg, the drones that recorded the destruction of 3 DDs at New Tuscany by Byng were in passive mode and had full spectrum recordings. ("short range" sensors can work from halfway across the star system as long as you don't need the information in a hurry, although discrimination is better at shorter range). The sensors the Peeps were using to record activity in various border systems prior to the start of the first war were probably also full spectrum, not just gravitic. |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Lord Skimper
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:39 pm
|
|
|
Lord Skimper
Posts: 1736
|
If the receivers are km's wide. The transmitters transmitting in a cone of dispersion, I'll let one of you physics people figure that out, from a 5 metre point source to a km's wide receiver which will be receiving many signals from many transmitters. All low powered so not to damage passing ships. Transmitters and receivers are inter mixed. And not in a single plane, a sphere, planets may line up but ships don't need to. Something like a dyson sphere but not enclosed. Plus the transmitters will scan between receivers and possibly allow for reflected radar type interactions.
Plus all the other uses what ever they might be. ________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars. |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Lord Skimper
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:55 pm
|
|
|
Lord Skimper
Posts: 1736
|
Ship uses / modification option.
Rowland DD but with docking pods on its sides for LAC. 2 to 3 LAC per side. Allows a new way to take LAC with you. Triples the Rowland defensive capabilities, adds 4 to 6 BC grazers and improves the telemetry links for missile capabilities. For the LAC the Rowland gives it hyperspace access and would impart greater acceleration rates until release. Rowlands don't have broadside missile ports so they can still fire missiles while accelerating with the LAC attached. Not sure how it would alter the ability to tow pods? Decrease or enhance? ________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars. |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Duckk
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:34 pm
|
|
|
Duckk
Posts: 4200
|
So, what are you taking out which will let you dock those LACs inside the ship's compensator field? A SD can pull the LAC limpet trick fairly easily because its own relative hull and compensator field size is so much bigger. Hauling LACs on a CL sized platform, however, is nigh impossible without carving out chunks of the broadside to make room.
Sure, it's not as if the broadsides don't mount fire control links, point defense lasers, counter missile batteries, search radars and lidars, or energy mounts. Oh wait, they do. In numerous books we see commanders sweat how limpeted pods restrict sensor and firing arcs, and how they want to quickly clear those systems for action, even if it meant jettisoning unused pods. Carrying LACs on a destroyer would multiply headache that a hundredfold.
Since it's almost guaranteed that 4 to 6 LACs won't fit inside the compensator field, it's a moot point. -------------------------
Shields at 50%, taunting at 100%! - Tom Pope |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Grashtel
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:45 pm
|
|
|
Grashtel
Posts: 449
|
Ok, this has been bugging me for a while. The Manty DDM equiped DD is the Roland class, note the lack of a 'w' in the name, the name is IIRC from a knight in the Arthurian myths. Anyway spelling rant over, just been making me twitch everytime I read it for a while |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Lord Skimper
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:25 pm
|
|
|
Lord Skimper
Posts: 1736
|
Presumably the compensator operates in some kind of sphere the length of the Roland being 450 odd metres but only 50 metres wide and tall the LAC should be within the compensator range, the idea coming fromRFC's idea of attaching LAC to the outside hull of a freighter. (As mentioned by one of the admirals).
If not one speculates the compensators on the LAC might be able to be used. Also as long as the crew are inside the DD they wouldn't need to have a compensator covering the LAC. Sure broadside weapons or defenses would be useless with LAC attached, but they would be inside the wedge, and wouldn't themselves be slowing down the DD. The life support from the LAC could also be pumped into the DD without needing added life support on the DD and if the lasers were removed from the broadsides, being replaced by the BC grazers on the LAC. The Roland is after all 6 x the length of a Shrike - B and more than twice its diameter. Also one could always detach the LAC once out of hyperspace. Again adding firepower telemetry and defensive capabilities plus for convoy escort or scouting having 5 to 7 points of interaction allow one to be in multiple places at the same time. Even being able to enter a system look around and then leaving a surprise behind for anyone in hiding would be of benefit. ________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars. |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Jonathan_S
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:58 pm
|
|
|
Jonathan_S
Posts: 8760
|
Almost. I believe it's 62x the speed of line (in normal space). My understanding is that Grav signals propagate as ripples along the next higher hyper wall at the speed of light in that next higher band. So 62x FTL in normal place, but only 1.324x FTL in the Delta bands (Epsilon Velocity Multiplier 2884 / Delta Velocity Multiplier 2178 = 1.324x) |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by SWM
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:37 pm
|
|
|
SWM
Posts: 5928
|
I am one of the physics people...
I already showed you that you would need hundreds of millions to hundreds of billions of receivers to do this. The distribution I described was an optimized distribution of transmitters and receivers. Your proposal requires even more transmitters or receivers in order to be effective.
What other uses do you think these transmitters and receivers scattered all over empty space can do? Maybe a few hundred will be near useful locations--hundreds of millions will be nowhere near anything at all, just monitoring the empty space where enemy ships would want to through. If you are only going to put receivers and transmitters near useful locations like planets and habitations, you will have a useless detection network. To be useful, you have to detect the enemy while they are far beyond your habitations, not passing between them. And a few hundred beams between known locations will not detect an enemy ship. --------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine |
| Top | |
| Re: New Manty ship ideas. | |
|---|---|
|
by Lord Skimper
» Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:02 pm
|
|
|
Lord Skimper
Posts: 1736
|
Unless I'm mistaken, and its entirely possible that I am, an if the sensor grid is located in a sphere 20 light minutes out and 1 light minute apart, then it should only require less than 165,000 arrays.
Remember your not trying to fill the entire area just a random set of pathways. Constantly changing every few seconds. Also you have to remove the arrays that are where the solar system bodies are. And the inner most half likely are not needed, one could probably get away with 25,000. May not find one ship but 100's or 1000's would likely trip quite a few sensors, and we know they don't accelerate very fast. ________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars. |
| Top | |