New Manty ship ideas.

With Lenny Dets, "pounding from afar" is not going to be an option in all likelihood. The universe has changed and the RMN/GA has to change with it or be as far behind the curve as the SLN is to them.

I suspect LACs will be integral to Lenny Det defense and offense just like small ships--corvettes, sloops, frigates, destroyer escorts--in WW2 were integral to defensive and then later offensive ASW work.

SWM wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Keep in mind, the current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, LACs, like piranhas, finishing off what the podnoughts started.

The current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, with LACs providing a large part of the missile defense. LACs will indeed go after cripples, but only after the enemy wall moves far enough away from those cripples. The massive losses of LACs in the Battle of Manticore shows the wisdom in that.

jgnfld wrote:With Lenny Dets, "pounding from afar" is not going to be an option in all likelihood. The universe has changed and the RMN/GA has to change with it or be as far behind the curve as the SLN is to them.

I suspect LACs will be integral to Lenny Det defense and offense just like small ships--corvettes, sloops, frigates, destroyer escorts--in WW2 were integral to defensive and then later offensive ASW work.

Now, that is certainly possible. It does seem likely that some changes will be necessary to deal with Leonard Detweilers.

Unfortunately, it is rather hard to decide on a design or tactics without more information about them. We don't know their size, we don't know their armaments (other than internal magazines of graser torpedoes), we don't know their defenses (including whether or not they have bubble sidewalls), we don't know what tum-te-tum surprises they might have which David has indirectly hinted at. So all we can do is pure speculation based on assumptions about their nature. Every set of assumptions will lead to a different design or tactic for Manticore to use against the Detweilers. And every one is just as valid as any other--which is to say, it is entirely hypothetical, and we can only evaluate it against that specific set of assumptions and what we know of the Honorverse.

It is a rather different exercise than evaluating a design or tactic against a known quantity, such as the League, or a hypothetical force with technological parity with Manticore.

SWM wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Keep in mind, the current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, LACs, like piranhas, finishing off what the podnoughts started.

The current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, with LACs providing a large part of the missile defense. LACs will indeed go after cripples, but only after the enemy wall moves far enough away from those cripples. The massive losses of LACs in the Battle of Manticore shows the wisdom in that.

And don't forget that, outside of their use with the wallers, LACs are still very effective in the anti-raider role of system defense. A few LAC wings are more than capable of patrolling a system and driving off or destroying anything from garden variety pirates up to at least divisional strength BC raids. (Well not BC(P)s or BC(L)s, but everyone else's)

That lets you horde your system defense missile pods for use against serious forces, wallers, large groups of BC, etc. (Plus it makes it harder for an attacker to discover the pattern of pod placement by trolling light units just outside the hyper limit, to try to draw fire. LACs can run them off without exposing where the other defenses are placed)

The thing I find fascinating about the Battle of the North Atlantic (I live in St. John's, Newfoundland and the bar the officers met in--the Crow's Nest--is still extant and has a U-boat periscope installed to boot) is that many of the technologies that defeated the U-boats were invented early. The problem was not so much the tech as the intricate management of that tech. (For those interested in this area, Blackett--of quantum mechanics fame--had a LOT to say about the point of NOT inventing new weapons but rather using what was at hand effectively.) As well, the Germans did not replace their early superior tech until far too late. At the time of ONS-5--71 years ago this month--the management issues were largely solved and after that battle as epic as it was the U-boat menace in the North Atlantic was largely removed as a real factor. U-boats moved to areas where they could actually operate in remote locations or they were sunk without causing damages. The North Atlantic was simply too much of a U-boat killing ground to operate.

SWM wrote:...
Now, that is certainly possible. It does seem likely that some changes will be necessary to deal with Leonard Detweilers.

Unfortunately, it is rather hard to decide on a design or tactics without more information about them. We don't know their size, we don't know their armaments (other than internal magazines of graser torpedoes), we don't know their defenses (including whether or not they have bubble sidewalls), we don't know what tum-te-tum surprises they might have which David has indirectly hinted at. So all we can do is pure speculation based on assumptions about their nature. Every set of assumptions will lead to a different design or tactic for Manticore to use against the Detweilers. And every one is just as valid as any other--which is to say, it is entirely hypothetical, and we can only evaluate it against that specific set of assumptions and what we know of the Honorverse.

It is a rather different exercise than evaluating a design or tactic against a known quantity, such as the League, or a hypothetical force with technological parity with Manticore.

jgnfld wrote:The thing I find fascinating about the Battle of the North Atlantic (I live in St. John's, Newfoundland and the bar the officers met in--the Crow's Nest--is still extant and has a U-boat periscope installed to boot) is that many of the technologies that defeated the U-boats were invented early. The problem was not so much the tech as the intricate management of that tech. As well, the Germans did not replace their early superior tech until far too late. At the time of ONS-5--71 years ago this month--the management issues were largely solved and after that battle as epic as it was the U-boat menace in the North Atlantic was largely removed as a real factor. U-boats moved to areas where they could actually operate in remote locations or they were sunk without causing damages. The North Atlantic was simply too much of a U-boat killing ground to operate.

Yeah, on the Allied side it pretty much took Operational Research to figure out the best way to combine the tech with tactics to make it effective.

Hunter killer destroyer groups seemed to be a favorite of most Navies, and certainly seem proactive, but they turned out to be a misuse of resources. Better to use those ships defensively to escort big convoys. (Or at least attached to the convoy to stay behind to persecute uboats after they've been found and driven under.)

(The late war groups based around CVEs were different, both because they did work around convoys, and because the reach of radar equipped aircraft made blue ocean searches much more practical)


Or OR can inform you on what allocation of long ranged 4-engine bombers to offensive bombing, vs coastal patrol makes the best use of your resources. The planes exist, but figuring out how best to use them is in a lot of ways harder to do that building the tech in the first place.

Ah...you obviously know about the Bay of Biscay!

I'm curious as to where the Lenny Det's Bay of Biscay will be! Surely MWW/RFC will not forget that!

Jonathan_S wrote:...
Or OR can inform you on what allocation of long ranged 4-engine bombers to offensive bombing, vs coastal patrol makes the best use of your resources. The planes exist, but figuring out how best to use them is in a lot of ways harder to do that building the tech in the first place.

I wonder if an artificial terminus might show up. It would totally kill off the hyperdrive for many uses. Make the Galaxy a much smaller place.

Theemile wrote:We have to use the Author's existing framework as a basis of this entire exercise or else conversations will just devolve to sillyness. Here are Logical reasons, which, inside the boundaries set by the author, prohibit or allow a design, idea or strategy.

If we do not use those boundaries - we quickly reach a point where all probabilities are equally possible and conversations are pointless. For instance, why not use Star Trek Warp drive? Why not use Star Wars TIE fighters? How about guns that shoot Hurricanes - Or Black Holes?

In a short time, we will have on the table a shipkiller missile 3 feet long which has a range of 3 light hours which can skip the entire point defense envelope by jumping into "null" space and jumping back again just meters before the target's hull (A hull which is made of super dense unobtanium which will fend off every attack possible).

Why not?

Now I understand why there is such a need to stick to what tech has been discovered/used. lol!

Ignoring your over the top and absurd suggestions:
The tech advances that I am inferring is simply more improvement of current tech items existing in Honorverse. They are not that far fetched as far as tech advances go. Hell, compared to a completely new drive system, the tech advances I'm suggesting is minor. Miniaturize ETorp launchers that use micro fusion plants so they can be installed in LACs. I don't know why there's such a huge effort that say
1) ETorp launchers cannot fit into LACs
2) micro fusion plants cannot be made to power ETorp launchers.

ETorp launchers are probably very low on the totem pole for research but I wouldn't be surprised if at this point if BuWeaps announced that they can build an ETorp launcher with the same output as the ones that was installed in HMS Fearless but at half the size. Look at the advances they made with the Grayson based compensators. Year after year they have better models and they are still tweaking the sh!t out of it. I don't know why it's suddenly impossible to develop a better, smaller ETorp launcher? I'm not even suggesting the improvement would impact the range of the torpedoes (which can be achieved by prolonging the 'life' of the stabilizing field).

Ditto on shielding micro fusion plants so they can be used in LACs. Why is that such an insurmountable engineering problem? It's just shielding! you need reactor mass for the ETorp production? Use drop tanks! We have drop tanks on our planes now. Why would it be impossible for them to design one for LACs?

---

You have LAC missile boats that are specialized in providing the missile cover for LAC based assaults. These missile boats don't have grasers so once they's shot out their load, they're more or less, only in the formation for improving counter missile cover during the main attack.
Why would it be such a big deal if, say 2 LACs in the squadron don't have missiles but carry ETorp launchers? Yes, the squadron would lose 8 missiles per salvo (or just 4 if only 2 launchers are going to be replaced for each LAC) but they'd gain the ability to take out a moderately damaged ship quickly if they happen to bring down one sidewall generator.

@kzt
yes, 95% of them died because the haven wall of battle is still partially intact and they also had LACs of their own. Manticore's LACs were defending their home star system, they just saw Home fleet get smashed, they don't know if the the other Manty fleets can come in and take out the invaders so they had no choice but to continue their attack run. An attack run where the enemy is prepared for them, knows they are coming and know how to defend against them. An attack run where the enemy does not need to concentrate on defending against Manticoran missile salvos because the Manticoran warships are gone.

However, since you've used that battle as a counter argument. Damaged wall of battle. Damaged SD(P) being hit with LAC missiles. Meh! However, if ETorp equipped LACs were in that suicide run, they would have had a better chance of dealing out more KILLS (against enemies that got pounded on by capital missiles) than what the Home Fleet LACs were able to accomplish.

Yes, that is conjecture. Unless somebody can put it up on a simulator and prove or disprove it, it's going to remain a conjecture.

SWM wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:Keep in mind, the current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, LACs, like piranhas, finishing off what the podnoughts started.

The current fleet mix is podnoughts pounding from afar, with LACs providing a large part of the missile defense. LACs will indeed go after cripples, but only after the enemy wall moves far enough away from those cripples. The massive losses of LACs in the Battle of Manticore shows the wisdom in that.

Wouldn't you agree that those cripples would be more susceptible to ETorp armed LACs?

If I'm the captain of a damaged ship who is in danger of getting left behind by my wall of battle, which system would I try to get online first? Engines or sidewalls? Yes they are equally important in the midst of combat. But I can always turn my wedge towards the enemy if my sidewalls are down. It's not a 100% fix to not get damaged but I'd rather be wedge towards the enemy, sidewalls down while in the middle of my wall with supporting point defense of my fleet rather than lagging all alone 2 million kilometers, sidewalls up with no supporting point defense in range.

MaxxQ wrote:Don't go giving Skimper new ideas, now.

I already got 1 private message accusing me of being this Skimper. Go ask the mods or admins to check IPs before throwing out your accusations.

No offense but, Skimper isn't a handle I'd ever pick. No identity nor originality. Kinda bland handle IMHO.