New Manty ship ideas.

MaxxQ wrote:

Grashtel wrote:Unknown based on the generally available information. DW and probably people who have read the tech bible may well know more but I doubt that they will tell.

Given the nature of control links in the Honorverse I doubt that an ACM has many more than 8 of them as they require discrete hardware and the ACM is oversized to begin with so they wouldn't want to add any extra gear without good reason. OTOH I doubt that adding extra links in reasonable numbers would be hard, would just need a modified ACM.

Remember too, that these were designed to fit in pods, which at the time of field delivery, were of a standard size to fit existing launch rails and pod bays on SD(P)s. After having to try to squeeze 8 Mk23s and an ACM into a standard sized pod myself, there's no room to add any more missiles.

The only way I can think of to add more missiles (assuming that the ACM doesn't need to grow in size to increase control channels for more Mk23s) is to make the pods thicker. This might allow another 4-5 Mk23s per pod, at the expense of the number of pods a current generation podlayer can carry. This is irrelevant for system defense pods, as those could be any size that can be delivered by freighter or whatever.

That said, I think David has mentioned in the past that there are going to be new warship designs coming out of the yards once Manticore gets production underway. I belive he said that there are some shortcomings of the current podlayer designs, and that new ones will be better, having benefitted from lessons learned. So I suppose we might see something that might be able to handle larger pods.

Don't try to get any more info out of me about this, though. I'm just as in the dark about it as anyone else here (except maybe one or two others with BuNine that have better access to David's Tech Bible - I have none at all). I'm simply speculating on what I recall RFC having mentioned once in a post, I think.

I doubt very much that any new design coming from RFC will be *anything* like what skimper keeps trying to propose.

Rakhmamort wrote:

MaxxQ wrote:Remember too, that these were designed to fit in pods, which at the time of field delivery, were of a standard size to fit existing launch rails and pod bays on SD(P)s. After having to try to squeeze 8 Mk23s and an ACM into a standard sized pod myself, there's no room to add any more missiles.

The only way I can think of to add more missiles (assuming that the ACM doesn't need to grow in size to increase control channels for more Mk23s) is to make the pods thicker. This might allow another 4-5 Mk23s per pod, at the expense of the number of pods a current generation podlayer can carry. This is irrelevant for system defense pods, as those could be any size that can be delivered by freighter or whatever.

That said, I think David has mentioned in the past that there are going to be new warship designs coming out of the yards once Manticore gets production underway. I belive he said that there are some shortcomings of the current podlayer designs, and that new ones will be better, having benefitted from lessons learned. So I suppose we might see something that might be able to handle larger pods.

Don't try to get any more info out of me about this, though. I'm just as in the dark about it as anyone else here (except maybe one or two others with BuNine that have better access to David's Tech Bible - I have none at all). I'm simply speculating on what I recall RFC having mentioned once in a post, I think.

I doubt very much that any new design coming from RFC will be *anything* like what skimper keeps trying to propose.

actually, the reason I'm asking the question is I am wondering how 'thick' a missile salvo one can throw if you combine Apollo with what Shannon Foraker did with Haven's 'rotating' fire control algorithm.

MaxxQ wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:
actually, the reason I'm asking the question is I am wondering how 'thick' a missile salvo one can throw if you combine Apollo with what Shannon Foraker did with Haven's 'rotating' fire control algorithm.

I honestly have no idea. I suppose it might be possible to do something like that...

Rakhmamort wrote:I was just thinking something like this.

suppose 1 Apollo control missile can handle 15 missiles.

You can pair 1 Apollo pod - 1 control + 7 MDMs with 1 pod of 8 MDMs. (It can even be your standard 10 MDMs with 2 of them being ECM birds. You really don't need that much targeting control for those birds, they just need to maintain station with the salvo and activate at the proper time)

With Shannon's algorithm,

We can have 8 of the above pairs being controlled by an Apollo control missile from 1 Apollo pod (the other 7 'extra' links being used to control the 7 missiles in its pod)

That's 120 + 7 MDMs (you choose the % of attack birds and ECM birds) controlled by one fire control channel.
----

A keyhole 2 equipped destroyer is now capable of throwing and controlling enough missiles to take out an SD or two on its own. Even without Keyhole 2, using Ghost rider platforms to relay targeting info to the Appolo control birds same as what they've done in one of the TQ battles (or is it Monica), would give destroyers the capability of controlling huge salvos. If the pod supply holds up of course.

---
I know, the birds wouldn't be as accurate if they are getting targeting data from the firing platform on a 1 FC link per Apollo control missile but if its going to be against SLN ships and equipment in the near future, I'm quite sure it's going to be good enough. After all, Haven used the rotating FC effectively vs Manticoran defenses.

Theemile wrote:Apollo control currently requires at least 1 120KTon KHII Drone and 60+ ktons of computer support on top of an SD's normal computer and sensor capabilities. There is no way Apollo control is fitting into a Destroyer (or Heavy Cruiser, for that matter) anytime in near future in the Honorverse. Current plans are do not even exist for them to be installed in the 2.5 Kton Nike BCs, let alone the 1.8 Kton BC(p)s.

MaxxQ wrote:The only way I can think of to add more missiles (assuming that the ACM doesn't need to grow in size to increase control channels for more Mk23s) is to make the pods thicker. This might allow another 4-5 Mk23s per pod, at the expense of the number of pods a current generation podlayer can carry. This is irrelevant for system defense pods, as those could be any size that can be delivered by freighter or whatever.

Theemile wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:I was just thinking something like this.

suppose 1 Apollo control missile can handle 15 missiles.

You can pair 1 Apollo pod - 1 control + 7 MDMs with 1 pod of 8 MDMs. (It can even be your standard 10 MDMs with 2 of them being ECM birds. You really don't need that much targeting control for those birds, they just need to maintain station with the salvo and activate at the proper time)

With Shannon's algorithm,

We can have 8 of the above pairs being controlled by an Apollo control missile from 1 Apollo pod (the other 7 'extra' links being used to control the 7 missiles in its pod)

That's 120 + 7 MDMs (you choose the % of attack birds and ECM birds) controlled by one fire control channel.
----

A keyhole 2 equipped destroyer is now capable of throwing and controlling enough missiles to take out an SD or two on its own. Even without Keyhole 2, using Ghost rider platforms to relay targeting info to the Appolo control birds same as what they've done in one of the TQ battles (or is it Monica), would give destroyers the capability of controlling huge salvos. If the pod supply holds up of course.

---
I know, the birds wouldn't be as accurate if they are getting targeting data from the firing platform on a 1 FC link per Apollo control missile but if its going to be against SLN ships and equipment in the near future, I'm quite sure it's going to be good enough. After all, Haven used the rotating FC effectively vs Manticoran defenses.

Apollo control currently requires at least 1 120KTon KHII Drone and 60+ ktons of computer support on top of an SD's normal computer and sensor capabilities. There is no way Apollo control is fitting into a Destroyer (or Heavy Cruiser, for that matter) anytime in near future in the Honorverse. Current plans are do not even exist for them to be installed in the 2.5 Kton Nike BCs, let alone the 1.8 Kton BC(p)s.

drothgery wrote:

MaxxQ wrote:The only way I can think of to add more missiles (assuming that the ACM doesn't need to grow in size to increase control channels for more Mk23s) is to make the pods thicker. This might allow another 4-5 Mk23s per pod, at the expense of the number of pods a current generation podlayer can carry. This is irrelevant for system defense pods, as those could be any size that can be delivered by freighter or whatever.

How about filling the pods for one rail entirely with shipkillers, and have them divided among different control missiles?

Jonathan_S wrote:And based on comparing the size of the HoS drawing of the Invictus-class with the Keyhole that appears in the same picture we can get an approximate size for it. I got roughly 166m long x 78m high - or about 40% the length of even a Roland-class; and 170% the height.

Without immense, implausible, further miniaturization I agree that no destroyer is going to be carrying a Keyhole II type FTL fire-control relay.


I think at best Rakhmamort would have to go with the Ghost Rider drone 1/2 FTL approach.

MaxxQ wrote:Yep. That could work as well. Again, depending on whether or not an ACM can control more than eight Mk23s.