BB(P/C) for rear area security

Jonathan_S wrote:Although it seems to me that the FTL transceiver is what's really driving a dual-drive CM's extreme size gain.

But Manticore's current extended range CMs are already pushing the effective range for light-speed control from the ship; so you need to do something to increase effectiveness before you bother to further increase their range. (And given the way RFC has set up the rules that 'something' is unlikely to be radically improved fire-and-forget capabilities)

But if someone can come up with a trick or mechanism to cut the fire control link latency (without making a CM approaching the size of an Apollo control missile) then dual drive CMs might, just maybe, become practical.

The realistic options are most likely either a control relay missile like the Apollo, or using LACs to control long distance CM fire(either directly, or via gravcomlink).

Probably better off to pack more LACs and have them rotate back to "base" to refill more regular CMs instead when running out.

Tenshinai wrote:Probably better off to pack more LACs and have them rotate back to "base" to refill more regular CMs instead when running out.

You know pods of CMs are not terribly useful to a SD(P). But towed by a LAC out to their missile defense position they might be very useful...

Tenshinai wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:Although it seems to me that the FTL transceiver is what's really driving a dual-drive CM's extreme size gain.

But Manticore's current extended range CMs are already pushing the effective range for light-speed control from the ship; so you need to do something to increase effectiveness before you bother to further increase their range. (And given the way RFC has set up the rules that 'something' is unlikely to be radically improved fire-and-forget capabilities)

But if someone can come up with a trick or mechanism to cut the fire control link latency (without making a CM approaching the size of an Apollo control missile) then dual drive CMs might, just maybe, become practical.

The realistic options are most likely either a control relay missile like the Apollo, or using LACs to control long distance CM fire(either directly, or via gravcomlink).

Probably better off to pack more LACs and have them rotate back to "base" to refill more regular CMs instead when running out.

Rather than Apollo style control missiles I was thinking more like a set of free flying ftl relays for CM fire control. Since each waves of CMs are all going to be flying down roughly the same, call it, 20-30 million km long cone away from the ships.

Push the relay up the threat axis to cut the comm loop; you should have plenty of time, even with the lower accel of a drone, to get them on station before the first wave of inbound missiles enters the threat zone.

With persistent relays you aren't using big expendable Apollo style control relay missiles when you're mostly covering the same defensive volume.



But yes, more likely (especially in the short term) we'll see additional LACs deployed in anti-missile roles and evolving tactics on how to sustain that capability. Possibly even new LAC designs further optimized for it. (Or the modular LACs RFC mentioned once or twice; so they could have a dedicated anti-missile weapons module)

Jonathan_S wrote:Rather than Apollo style control missiles I was thinking more like a set of free flying ftl relays for CM fire control. Since each waves of CMs are all going to be flying down roughly the same, call it, 20-30 million km long cone away from the ships.

Push the relay up the threat axis to cut the comm loop; you should have plenty of time, even with the lower accel of a drone, to get them on station before the first wave of inbound missiles enters the threat zone.

With persistent relays you aren't using big expendable Apollo style control relay missiles when you're mostly covering the same defensive volume.

Yeah, but problem then is you´re placing those relays in or close to where a LOT of missiles pass through, and there´s just zero chance to protect the relays (not big enough, OR if you do make it big enough well then you make it a single target by itself, far from the cover of a friendly wall of battle, either way it´s out of luck ) or keeping them hidden(as their very reason for existance is to be constantly transmitting).

Jonathan_S wrote:But yes, more likely (especially in the short term) we'll see additional LACs deployed in anti-missile roles and evolving tactics on how to sustain that capability. Possibly even new LAC designs further optimized for it. (Or the modular LACs RFC mentioned once or twice; so they could have a dedicated anti-missile weapons module)

Aye, that feels far more likely.

kzt wrote:You know pods of CMs are not terribly useful to a SD(P). But towed by a LAC out to their missile defense position they might be very useful...

Quite true. A good question however then becomes just how much they can manage without needing additional equipment(tractors or power for them etc) or have their acceleration or agility affected...

So, is it a good idea or does it cause more trouble than it´s worth?

kzt wrote:

Tenshinai wrote:Probably better off to pack more LACs and have them rotate back to "base" to refill more regular CMs instead when running out.

You know pods of CMs are not terribly useful to a SD(P). But towed by a LAC out to their missile defense position they might be very useful...

A quick way to rearm LACs?

Of course a missile pod sized drone with say a 10,000 gee impeller drive to get forward deployed, an FTL FC relay and sensors, and launching tubes with magazines for dozens of CMs would be really useful.

namelessfly wrote:Of course a missile pod sized drone with say a 10,000 gee impeller drive to get forward deployed, an FTL FC relay and sensors, and launching tubes with magazines for dozens of CMs would be really useful.

No, the LAC just uses the pod as the source of CMs. You should get at least 50 CMs in a flatpack.

kzt wrote:

namelessfly wrote:Of course a missile pod sized drone with say a 10,000 gee impeller drive to get forward deployed, an FTL FC relay and sensors, and launching tubes with magazines for dozens of CMs would be really useful.

No, the LAC just uses the pod as the source of CMs. You should get at least 50 CMs in a flatpack.

Hmm, it occurs to me that (assuming the rest of the tradeoffs work out) you could combine anti-missile LACs with dual-drive CMs from wallers.

You can't necessarily push out as far forward as LACs would with their onboard CMs, but even with the size of a dual drive-CM an SD(P) should have a heck of a lot deeper CM magazines than any LAC.

If the LACs take control of the CMs then you don't have the control lag at range, or need on-missile FTL transceivers, or massively more capable sensors. And anti-missile LACs are reasonably tough targets (much more so that any plausible FTL transciever drone)



Of course we've no idea if the rest of the size / cost tradeoffs make sense for dual-drive CMs.

Jonathan_S wrote:

kzt wrote:No, the LAC just uses the pod as the source of CMs. You should get at least 50 CMs in a flatpack.

Hmm, it occurs to me that (assuming the rest of the tradeoffs work out) you could combine anti-missile LACs with dual-drive CMs from wallers.

You can't necessarily push out as far forward as LACs would with their onboard CMs, but even with the size of a dual drive-CM an SD(P) should have a heck of a lot deeper CM magazines than any LAC.

If the LACs take control of the CMs then you don't have the control lag at range, or need on-missile FTL transceivers, or massively more capable sensors. And anti-missile LACs are reasonably tough targets (much more so that any plausible FTL transciever drone)



Of course we've no idea if the rest of the size / cost tradeoffs make sense for dual-drive CMs.

A CM is basically just the drive system and a very small sensor package - they don't need much to see those 'noisy' missile wedges - so making them dual-drive would amount to strapping two CMs together end to end. A factory-finished product might mass something like 90% that of two individual CMs, the savings from ancillaries which don't need to be duplicated.

kzt wrote:

namelessfly wrote:Of course a missile pod sized drone with say a 10,000 gee impeller drive to get forward deployed, an FTL FC relay and sensors, and launching tubes with magazines for dozens of CMs would be really useful.

No, the LAC just uses the pod as the source of CMs. You should get at least 50 CMs in a flatpack.

If the ship in question is deployed with a CLAC to carry LACs, you are right. I am thinking of a system for BCs, CAs,