New Manty ship ideas.

Theemile wrote:

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

Which opens up another old question - Will orphans from one destroyed ACM jump to another open shipkiller slot on another ACM? But then again, is there even time in the engagement window for it to matter?

i don't think so...

by the time the ACM missile is in range of the defender's counter missiles, the attack birds are already locked into their final attack patterns. MDMs can be travelling at .5c by the time they reach cm range and would be crossing the edge of that distance to their attack/detonation range at a maximum of a couple of seconds, you really cant make a lot of delta v at that speed in that short amount of time.

Rakhmamort wrote:

Theemile wrote:Which opens up another old question - Will orphans from one destroyed ACM jump to another open shipkiller slot on another ACM? But then again, is there even time in the engagement window for it to matter?

i don't think so...

by the time the ACM missile is in range of the defender's counter missiles, the attack birds are already locked into their final attack patterns. MDMs can be travelling at .5c by the time they reach cm range and would be crossing the edge of that distance to their attack/detonation range at a maximum of a couple of seconds, you really cant make a lot of delta v at that speed in that short amount of time.

I tend to agree. Plus the ACMs are trailing slightly behind the attack missiles; so they're trickier targets for the defenders than the attack birds. So it should be fairly rare for them to get taken out before the attack birds get within firing range.


But I guess the fallback modes of Apollo missiles might become pertinent if you're attacking someone with really in depth missile defense; like an previously undetected anti-missile screen of LACs pushed way down the threat axis. Those could devastate the first few salvos if they're undetected and not subject to ECM right up until CM launch.

After the first few salvos you can just reroute missiles around their defensive envelope; which is the risk of getting pushed out that far forward.

One problem with switching to a secondary Apollo control missile is acquiring it. An Apollo control missile is right behind the missiles it is controlling, and each cluster of control missile and controlled missiles move independantly of other clusters. The control missile uses whisker lasers to communicate. So to switch, the attack missiles would have to locate and acquire another control missile which is moving independantly at high acceleration, hit it with a whisker laser, and follow it's instructions.

Another problem is that the control missile AI was designed to control missiles which were clustered together, right in front of it. It is not clear that the AI would also be able to suddenly control another group of missiles which is thousands of kilometers away, has a different vector, and possibly a different target.

Not saying it is impossible, just that it's not clear that it is possible.

Jonathan_S wrote:
But I guess the fallback modes of Apollo missiles might become pertinent if you're attacking someone with really in depth missile defense; like an previously undetected anti-missile screen of LACs pushed way down the threat axis. Those could devastate the first few salvos if they're undetected and not subject to ECM right up until CM launch.

After the first few salvos you can just reroute missiles around their defensive envelope; which is the risk of getting pushed out that far forward.

That's a nasty thought - Current RMN MK 32 engagement envelope is about 3.8 MKM if memory serves. Place a tier of Katana LACS @3.8 MKm out from your main force with Vipers (~3.8Million Mkm engagement window) with a 2 tier of the Ferrets and Shrikes @7.6 Mkm downrange with their Mk 31s (~2 MKm engagement envelope IIRC). That would increase your engagement envelope out to ~9.5 MKm and your defensive ECM "Cloud" would ~8 MKm thick. Of course Against a Single drive foe, youe outer tier would be on the far side of the opposition (So useless), but against a multidrive foe, sucha formation could really eat into enemy salvos. Each teir of course would be sending detailed information of th leakers from their zone back so the next zone would have extremely good tracking.

Capacitor birds would be next to useless, as their defensive ECM either wouldn't turn on until too late or eat up their energy budget millions of KM short of the target (OHH - IF the ECM in a Cap bird was forced on too early, would it eat into the 3rd drive's energy budget, lowering the range the 3rd drive would last?)

SWM wrote:One problem with switching to a secondary Apollo control missile is acquiring it. An Apollo control missile is right behind the missiles it is controlling, and each cluster of control missile and controlled missiles move independantly of other clusters. The control missile uses whisker lasers to communicate. So to switch, the attack missiles would have to locate and acquire another control missile which is moving independantly at high acceleration, hit it with a whisker laser, and follow it's instructions.

Another problem is that the control missile AI was designed to control missiles which were clustered together, right in front of it. It is not clear that the AI would also be able to suddenly control another group of missiles which is thousands of kilometers away, has a different vector, and possibly a different target.

Not saying it is impossible, just that it's not clear that it is possible.

Which brings up another old Apollo question - Do the ACMs mesh network to share targeting data and relay data through gunsmoke? Or is each alone and only coordinating through the firing ship?

We havn't seen any textev that they do. But if they did they would have a fuller picture of the battle than "just" that allowed by their 8 missile's sensors. They would then know if a ACM was lost and where it's brood was.

Personally, I think they are acting alone. But if I were designing such a "smart" system, a mesh network would be on the list of wants.

Theemile wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:
But I guess the fallback modes of Apollo missiles might become pertinent if you're attacking someone with really in depth missile defense; like an previously undetected anti-missile screen of LACs pushed way down the threat axis. Those could devastate the first few salvos if they're undetected and not subject to ECM right up until CM launch.

After the first few salvos you can just reroute missiles around their defensive envelope; which is the risk of getting pushed out that far forward.

That's a nasty thought - Current RMN MK 32 engagement envelope is about 3.8 MKM if memory serves. Place a tier of Katana LACS @3.8 MKm out from your main force with Vipers (~3.8Million Mkm engagement window) with a 2 tier of the Ferrets and Shrikes @7.6 Mkm downrange with their Mk 31s (~2 MKm engagement envelope IIRC). That would increase your engagement envelope out to ~9.5 MKm and your defensive ECM "Cloud" would ~8 MKm thick. Of course Against a Single drive foe, youe outer tier would be on the far side of the opposition (So useless), but against a multidrive foe, sucha formation could really eat into enemy salvos. Each teir of course would be sending detailed information of th leakers from their zone back so the next zone would have extremely good tracking.

Capacitor birds would be next to useless, as their defensive ECM either wouldn't turn on until too late or eat up their energy budget millions of KM short of the target (OHH - IF the ECM in a Cap bird was forced on too early, would it eat into the 3rd drive's energy budget, lowering the range the 3rd drive would last?)

The tricky bit is that at ~7.6 million km downrange the attacking missiles have a lot of flexibility to arc high, low, or to either side of the direct threat axis. That makes for a harder intercept (or possibly even overflying the intercept zone entirely).

You'd potentially need a lot of LACs out that far to give decent coverage. And those LACs are going to run out of CMs fast; but be too far out to cycle back to any attached CLACs to reammo.

I suspect that tactic works best against a dumb opponent who is using only towed pods. If their alpha strike comes straight down the middle at the LACs, and all their pods get used for the first salvo or two, you could really tear a hole in their offense.

Against a smart opponent (who's willing to use scattered and somewhat sub-optimal routing) that's harder to pull off. And against pod layers, who can just run the LACs out of CMs while continuing to launch massive salvos, it's still nice but not necessarily decisive.


(Although if those podlayers have to stack pods really deeply to be able saturate the onboard defenses of your wall then shredding the first salvo or two before running out of CMs would still make it very likely that those podlayers would run out of pods before they did decisive damage. Then you get a free shot at them with your remaining pods... Ouch)

Agreed. It probably could work against alpha strikes, and system pod augmented , but as you said, its probably ONLY really effective at stopping alpha strikes. Although, that could make it a decent short term strategy against the SLN until they can build podnaughts and podlayers, or use it against system pods. I suspect the GA wouldnt go with this plan though, due to the small amount of situations its good for in their current tactical setup of having to be able to fight podnaughts, so leaving those lacs out against podnuaghts is pretty much a guarantee you'll start losing them if the engagement carries on for long.

Probably a pretty good tactic against weaker opponents though, so long as you dont face podships.

Jonathan_S wrote:1
he tricky bit is that at ~7.6 million km downrange the attacking missiles have a lot of flexibility to arc high, low, or to either side of the direct threat axis. That makes for a harder intercept (or possibly even overflying the intercept zone entirely).

You'd potentially need a lot of LACs out that far to give decent coverage. And those LACs are going to run out of CMs fast; but be too far out to cycle back to any attached CLACs to reammo.

I suspect that tactic works best against a dumb opponent who is using only towed pods. If their alpha strike comes straight down the middle at the LACs, and all their pods get used for the first salvo or two, you could really tear a hole in their offense.

Against a smart opponent (who's willing to use scattered and somewhat sub-optimal routing) that's harder to pull off. And against pod layers, who can just run the LACs out of CMs while continuing to launch massive salvos, it's still nice but not necessarily decisive.


(Although if those podlayers have to stack pods really deeply to be able saturate the onboard defenses of your wall then shredding the first salvo or two before running out of CMs would still make it very likely that those podlayers would run out of pods before they did decisive damage. Then you get a free shot at them with your remaining pods... Ouch)

With all the LACs buffing the CM coverage discussion, has there been a proposal for 'donkeyed CM pods towed by LACs'???




---
I'm in the mood of mixing up Manticoran tech with Haven's 'solutions' to keep combat power parity with less advanced tech.

Rakhmamort wrote:With all the LACs buffing the CM coverage discussion, has there been a proposal for 'donkeyed CM pods towed by LACs'???

CM pods have been dismissed as not useful. The problem is in fire control and fire coordination, not that they can't get enough CM's into space.

Whitecold wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:With all the LACs buffing the CM coverage discussion, has there been a proposal for 'donkeyed CM pods towed by LACs'???

CM pods have been dismissed as not useful. The problem is in fire control and fire coordination, not that they can't get enough CM's into space.

That's more true for starships than for LACs. (Well, LACs can put enough CMs into space; they just can't do so for long)

That said, I suspect there would be issues, tactically, trying to tow a pod of CMs behind a LAC that's trying to deploy downrange as an anti-missile picket. (And you'd want the pod modified to launch CMs serially; not flush them all at once)

And LACs are definitely too small to bring a pod inside their wedge. So it'll affect stealth and acceleration, and also be vulnerable to being taken out by 'nearby' nukes.