BB(P/C) for rear area security

You want a cheap ship but powerful to defend semi-important areas against moderately serious threats that don't include tech peer BatRons? Simple, build an SD(P) and only load it 50% with pods. The full ammo loadout costs more then the entire cost of the rest of the ship per DW.

Oh, and when it turns out that you need to actually fight someone serious those rear-area defense ships are fully capable of this too, though you might want to add more ammo. Though, based on BoM, maybe not.

Another thing that you are overlooking is future missile development.

From the Manticoran side:
Improvements in the Apollo system. Possibly with even larger missiles. With a SD(P), this becomes simply a matter of new pods, not a need for new missile tubes. Or improvements in the Mk-16 you are equipping your ship with. Anything that improves their range will still probably increase their size, requiring new tubes. Either way, your ship becomes definitely second class almost before it leaves the yard.

From the Solly side:
Development of pod based warfare using tractored pods with a 2 or three drive missile. Once the SLN realizes that this is the fastest way to come close to equalizing combat power and once they have a missile to base this kind of warfare on, the pods are a short build time item. Depending upon how long it takes them to develop such a missile, they could have them in production in less than a year. As soon as the SLN deploys a pod based system, your Mk-16 armed ship is outclassed by anything that can carry pods. As long as they outrange you, your ship is at a disadvantage. Their fire control does not even have to be Apollo quality. They don't even need new ships to use it.

If the SL is given the time (3-4 years) development of this new ship of yours would take to get into production, they will find a counter to most of the current Manti advantages. Once they start to negate those advantages, your idea is useless.

May be we should be thinking of "fixed fortifications" rather than a hyper capable warship?

These were very prominent in the early books and remain relevant for protecting wormhole junctions and termini. It appears that a prefab, 20+ million ton fort is both cheaper and tougher than an SD because it has minimal impellers, no hyperdrive and need not operate independently.

The might not be KH2 and Apoloo capable, but would have Mk-23. Given FTL comm via recon drones it would be nearly Apollo capable.

namelessfly wrote:May be we should be thinking of "fixed fortifications" rather than a hyper capable warship?

These were very prominent in the early books and remain relevant for protecting wormhole junctions and termini. It appears that a prefab, 20+ million ton fort is both cheaper and tougher than an SD because it has minimal impellers, no hyperdrive and need not operate independently.

The might not be KH2 and Apoloo capable, but would have Mk-23. Given FTL comm via recon drones it would be nearly Apollo capable.

Why wouldn't it be KH2 and Apollo capable? The forts being built now are.

SWM wrote:Why wouldn't it be KH2 and Apollo capable? The forts being built now are.

Expensive and much greater risk of an enemy being successful with a techraid against lots of semi-fixed equipment spread out nearly everywhere, than few heavily forted up locations and ships moving about.

Sure, enemies will start picking up on the tech eventually anyway, but giving them easier pickings to start with, preferably not.

As Theisman confirmed in ART, you wont learn much from just picking up stuff. RMN security protocols work very well.

A valid point.

However; Weber has made the point that a full Apollo pod load out for an SD(P) costs as much $$$ as the SD(P). May be the Mk-23s without pods are cheaper. Mk-16s are even cheaper than Mk-23s. Given a ballistic phase, a mk-16 has the same range as a Mk-23. Given the Mk-16G, it has SD killing power.


Skimper's idea of a lower cost defense platform for secondary systems is valid, it just need not be a ship.

SWM wrote:

namelessfly wrote:May be we should be thinking of "fixed fortifications" rather than a hyper capable warship?

These were very prominent in the early books and remain relevant for protecting wormhole junctions and termini. It appears that a prefab, 20+ million ton fort is both cheaper and tougher than an SD because it has minimal impellers, no hyperdrive and need not operate independently.

The might not be KH2 and Apoloo capable, but would have Mk-23. Given FTL comm via recon drones it would be nearly Apollo capable.

Why wouldn't it be KH2 and Apollo capable? The forts being built now are.

namelessfly wrote:A valid point.

However; Weber has made the point that a full Apollo pod load out for an SD(P) costs as much $$$ as the SD(P). May be the Mk-23s without pods are cheaper. Mk-16s are even cheaper than Mk-23s. Given a ballistic phase, a mk-16 has the same range as a Mk-23. Given the Mk-16G, it has SD killing power.

Which is why I suggested partially loaded SD(P)s. IIRC, the cost difference and build time between a SD(P) and a BC(P) isn't that huge.

kzt wrote:

namelessfly wrote:A valid point.

However; Weber has made the point that a full Apollo pod load out for an SD(P) costs as much $$$ as the SD(P). May be the Mk-23s without pods are cheaper. Mk-16s are even cheaper than Mk-23s. Given a ballistic phase, a mk-16 has the same range as a Mk-23. Given the Mk-16G, it has SD killing power.

Which is why I suggested partially loaded SD(P)s. IIRC, the cost difference and build time between a SD(P) and a BC(P) isn't that huge.

I'm thinking about a fort, not a BC or BB. The RMN & GSN already have a 100+ BC(P)s. May be they will be temporay system control platforms?

namelessfly wrote:A valid point.

However; Weber has made the point that a full Apollo pod load out for an SD(P) costs as much $$$ as the SD(P). May be the Mk-23s without pods are cheaper. Mk-16s are even cheaper than Mk-23s. Given a ballistic phase, a mk-16 has the same range as a Mk-23. Given the Mk-16G, it has SD killing power.

If Manticore is going to pay the high cost of building a fort in a system, I would assume that Manticore intends to keep that system. If they intend to keep the system, then there is no point in not building it to be MK23 and KH2 compatible. Sure, MK16 may be able to kill old-style superdreadnoughts, but a fort is built to last years or decades. It needs missiles that will work not only against the targets available today, but also the targets three or four years away. The MK16 is a cruier-weight weapon in Manticoran standards, and a fort needs to be designed to Manticoran standards because that is the quality it is likely to be facing in the foreseeable future.

Manticore would not build a fort if they intend to give it away eventually. It makes no sense for Manticore to do that; if the system could benefit from a fort and is unable to build a fort on their own, then they will not be able to crew or maintain that fort, either. In a system like that, Manticore would put a mobile force, not a fort.

So, either Manticore would not want to build a fort in the system, or it will want to build a fort to it's current standards.