New Manty ship ideas.

kzt wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:How about LACs mounting energy torpedoes? Since the new generation LACs have become a close strike specialists whose main targets are smaller ships and or damaged capital ships, it would be a good idea to have a variant with energy torpedo launchers. The resulting space freed up from the missile magazine can be used to upgrade the power plant to provide the necessary energy to supply the ETorp launchers.

Well, first several people have theoretically decided that energy torps are directly fed by the ships fusion reactor. As far as I can tell David has never said anything to support this, but he's also never said it doesn't work that way. So if they are right then you need a DD sized fusion reactor, which is not something that a modern RMN LAC has.

Not to mention that Energy Torps do nothing against a sidewall or buckler, which will pretty much always be interposed by anyone who isn't smoking crack.

That is why I'm suggesting it for LACs. They won't go toe to toe with healthy ships. They hit ships that have been softened up by missile strikes. Add the fact that I'm suggesting that this variant be used against the solly ships where LACs have greater chances of crossing the throats and/or kilts of their ships.

As for requiring fusion bottles for them, that's kind of 'stupid'. I've read in one of these threads that putting conduits for plasma from the engine room to the weapons' ports is highly dangerous due to combat damage. One failed plasma conduit is going to cause a hell of a lot of internal damage to the ship.

Rakhmamort wrote:That is why I'm suggesting it for LACs. They won't go toe to toe with healthy ships. They hit ships that have been softened up by missile strikes. Add the fact that I'm suggesting that this variant be used against the solly ships where LACs have greater chances of crossing the throats and/or kilts of their ships.

Why put LACs at the big risk of going into energy range of SDs when missiles can do the job just as well? With how energy heavy Solly SDs are any LACs getting into range of them are going to get chewed up. Also Solly SDs are already obsolete so designing and building a whole class of LACs to take them on which is useless against more modern designs and is only useful against its target designs under specific circumstances is not a good idea, particularly as it will displace more useful designs of LACs from your carriers if you want to have them in useful numbers.

As for requiring fusion bottles for them, that's kind of 'stupid'. I've read in one of these threads that putting conduits for plasma from the engine room to the weapons' ports is highly dangerous due to combat damage. One failed plasma conduit is going to cause a hell of a lot of internal damage to the ship.

Mr Weber says that etorps require a fusion reactor to power them and its his universe so etorps require a fusion reactor to power them.

Rakhmamort wrote:That is why I'm suggesting it for LACs. They won't go toe to toe with healthy ships. They hit ships that have been softened up by missile strikes. Add the fact that I'm suggesting that this variant be used against the solly ships where LACs have greater chances of crossing the throats and/or kilts of their ships.

You're further specializing an already specialized unit. Building ships that are only capable of engaging ships that have already been softened up is a waste of ressources; Even if a conventional LAC would take longer to get the job done, building a ship class for the express purpose of cleaning up a battlefield does not sound like a good idea.

At this point, you can stand a couple of LACs off from a damaged SLN SD and demand surrender or just keep it from going anywhere. Think pack of Jackals with a wounded Cape Buff. If it can't get into hyper it has very few options unless the commander wants to take a death ride in order to damage an enemy's assets in a system.
Besides, nobody is going to even a CA into energy range of a SLN SD, damaged or otherwise.

Grashtel wrote:Mr Weber says that etorps require a fusion reactor to power them and its his universe so etorps require a fusion reactor to power them.

that's not right - the Shrike has a BC Grazer and is fission powered not fusion.

MAD-4A wrote:that's not right - the Shrike has a BC Grazer and is fission powered not fusion.

A Shrike Grazer is a grazer, and not an energy torpedo.

For the idea of mounting it on a LAC, it is a very bad idea. It is purely a weapon of opportunity. IF a sidewall went out, you can finish off the ship. A waller is large enough so it doesn't matter if the launcher is useless most of the time to have it ready for the few chances where it can be employed.
But a SD doesn't have to rely on it, while a LAC would be completely useless in 99% of all combat situations.

Whitecold wrote:A waller is large enough so it doesn't matter if the launcher is useless most of the time to have it ready for the few chances where it can be employed.
But a SD doesn't have to rely on it, while a LAC would be completely useless in 99% of all combat situations.

Do note, however, that there are no current RMN designs that mount energy torpedo batteries.

The E wrote:

Whitecold wrote:A waller is large enough so it doesn't matter if the launcher is useless most of the time to have it ready for the few chances where it can be employed.
But a SD doesn't have to rely on it, while a LAC would be completely useless in 99% of all combat situations.

Do note, however, that there are no current RMN designs that mount energy torpedo batteries.

Energy torpedoes were only ever really useful in a ship of the wall, as a coup de grace weapon if an enemy waller's sidewall went down, allowing you to move on to the next target more quickly. If memory serves, the effective range of an energy torpedo was only 300,000km, barely half the effective range of a shipboard laser or graser even when fired through a sidewall. They made sense when energy weapons were a waller's primary offensive system, but in the missile/laser head age the main energy battery itself is only a backup to the launch tubes, be they shipboard or pod-mounted.

MAD-4A wrote:

Grashtel wrote:Mr Weber says that etorps require a fusion reactor to power them and its his universe so etorps require a fusion reactor to power them.

that's not right - the Shrike has a BC Grazer and is fission powered not fusion.

It's the E Torps that require a Fusion reactor, not grasers. Since Shrikes et al have Fission reactors, they cannot mount E-Torps. The Graser is (obviously) fine.

Besides what has been mentioned, Etorps have a range of 450K kms or less. Grasers have a range of ~1M km. Any non-damaged SDs are "vulnerable" to the upgraded Shrike's Graser inside of ~500k KM, while any damaged SDs (and everything else) can be ripped apart at max graser range.

The Graser allows Shrikes to engage Damaged SDs further out and undamaged SDs at E-torp ranges. The E-torps do more damage, but their ineffectiveness against sidewalls makes them 3rd teir combatants at best. Even damaged ships in formation can protect damaged areas by rolling ships and shifting formation to deny e- torp hits. And If no one is able to take down a sidewall on a modern combatant, they are useless.

Dafmeister wrote:

The E wrote:Do note, however, that there are no current RMN designs that mount energy torpedo batteries.

Energy torpedoes were only ever really useful in a ship of the wall, as a coup de grace weapon if an enemy waller's sidewall went down, allowing you to move on to the next target more quickly. If memory serves, the effective range of an energy torpedo was only 300,000km, barely half the effective range of a shipboard laser or graser even when fired through a sidewall. They made sense when energy weapons were a waller's primary offensive system, but in the missile/laser head age the main energy battery itself is only a backup to the launch tubes, be they shipboard or pod-mounted.

Energy torpedoes were only really useful when combined with TWTMNBN, which also has a very short range.

However, since LACs are able to generate lots of firing angles, it might be worth exploring what it takes to mount ETs on them, since a squadron is able to envelope a single target and thus generate enough firing angles to throw ETs up the kilt or down the throat, which could be quite devastating to people who don't have bow/stern sidewalls.

Unfortunately, by introducing those themselves, the RMN has effectively created a ticking time bomb as far as crossing the T with energy torpedoes is possible. If they did build LACs with ETs, those would be obsolete as soon as their opponents catch up, unlike the graser-armed Shrike.

And let's not even speculate about a TWTMNBN-armed LAC.