Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 25 guests

Technical questions re military hardware.

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Technical questions re military hardware. DISPATCH BOATS
Post by hanuman   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 2:53 am

hanuman
Captain of the List

Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:47 pm

Jonathan_S wrote:Unless the wave between Manticore and Grayson forces you to dive into lower bands I don't see how grav waves are going to make much difference. (And the numbers don't work for that; see below)

Yes a grav wave going your way will give you roughly a roughly 10x acceleration boost (not to mention fuel savings). But your dispatch boat's particle shielding tops out at the same 0.6c. So once you hit that you're cruising at constant velocity; and any accel advantage is useless.

With no grav wave assist a dispach boat that can pull 700g will hit top speed after only about 18 hours. Ok, you can do that in 1.8 hours with a grav wave, assuming the system you're departing is located in one; but the further you have to go to reach the grav wave the less time it'll save you.(And you don't save anything on the far end because the energy loss from dropping hyper bands decelerates you; the ship's accel is irrelevant for slowing down at the end of the hyper journey) But that's it; just a useful grav wave can't explain more than 16.2 hours saved; no mater how many lightyears the trip is.

(Again, unless the boats need to drop out of the highest bands and reenter them later; doing that kills most of their velocity so you cold get another roughly 16 hour saved each time you need to reenter the Theta band where there's a grav wave handy)

-----
Ok, I originally was writing this up with a parenthetical admission that I was too lazy to crunch the transit time numbers for the Manticore - Grayson run. But as I was about to hit submit I decided I really did want to see; so I rewrote the post with this addition.

The hard part was actually digging up the distance references. the best I found for Trevor's Star to Haven is actually an outer limit (since I don't know how far off the direct line Hera is) but I failed to quickly find a better one.

"Hera System was just over sixty light-years from Trevor's Star . . . and barely thirty light-years from the Haven System itself" [AAC]

Grayson is 30 light-years from Manticore [EoH]

So call the two trips 90 ly and 30 ly.
Just taking that raw distance, it should take a ship cruising at top speed in the Theta bands 10.9 and 3.6 days respectively. It's tight to reach Grayson in "under four days for a dispatch boat" once you factor in acceleration time; you really do need a handy grav wave to shave some hours off; plus a boat pre-positioned by the hyperlimit.

But the Trevor's Star to Haven run is way out - that time is more like a 53 light-year transit. Now, that's not impossible from the At All Costs quote; it simply requires that Hera be a fair bit off the direct line. However it does make one of the exchanges in House of Steel decidedly odd.
House of Steel: I Will Build My House of Steel wrote:the closest edge of Havenite-claimed space is still better than two hundred and fifty light-years from the Manticore Binary System. [snip] Oddly enough, however, neither Mr. Lebrun nor the rest of the Opposition leadership seemed to be aware that that meant the People’s Republic is now less than fifty-four light-years from Trevor’s Star.
But if the Haven System itself is basically that far away that doesn't seem very alarming. (We do know they've been gobbling up systems by this point; but getting the numbers to add up seems to require that they weren't, yet, gobbling in the direction Trevor's Star) :D

(The one possibility that might reconcile these apparent discrepancies is that 0.6c is just an average particle shielding limit for a warship in hyper. In areas of very low particle density you can go faster. If the Trevor's Star to Haven path is low density areas you could go farther in the allotted transit time)


Jonathan, thank you for that very informative response. And thank you for taking the time to write it.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 10:35 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8803
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

WLBjork wrote:Jonathan, it's worth rereading Storm from the Shadows, particularly the scene where Helen has to calculate the route.

Some grav waves limit you to the lower hyper bands - can't remember if RFC explained why.

There are also times when you need to travel more slowly to avoid the rogue waves, e.g The Selker Shear.

I remember it, though I believe the passage you're thinking of was actually in Shadows of Saganami (when Helen was asked the plot a least time course from the Lynx Terminus to the Spindle System). I had it in mind when I alluded to being forced to drop into a lower band (because of something like a rouge wave).

But the transit times compared to the velocity multipliers RFC gave us for each hyper band show that in this specific instance there isn't time for the ships to have had to go into a lower hyper band. They could barely make the stated transit times if they bee-lined straight there in the Theta bands at full speed. There's barely time for them to accelerate; much less to drop a band or two, come back up, and reaccelerate.


Though I'm still unclear why a warship in a hurry would ever want to follow a wave into a lower hyper band. Yes, avoiding a rouge wave might force you to. But Helen's example made no sense to me; least time courses pretty much mandate that you keep to the highest hyper band you can (to keep your velocity multiplier up) and that you deviate from the straight line path as little as practical. (Though at the beginning it can be worth following a grav wave a little out of the way where the 10x accel bonus outweighs the extra distance. But once up to cruising speed there's no speed advantage to being in a wave)

If there are areas to avoid then the routing gets more interesting. How big an area, does it extend to all bands, is it quicker the pay the energy losses and reduction in velocity multiplier to dive "under" in in lower bands and have to climb back - or to add lots of distance to go around in in your current band. But that didn't seem to be what Helen was calculating <shrug>

(And More than Honor had a background essay that included some historical limitations of sails; like having to tack when going "up wind"; but gave the impression those basically didn't apply anymore)

Now a warship on a long patrol might prioritize fuel over speed; so you'd make tradeoffs for following grav waves whenever that didn't overly delay you (where that's a bit of a subjective determination). But that wasn't the request in SoS - that was to plot a least time course.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by namelessfly   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:35 am

namelessfly

Which is why I want to see a battle scene where BC(P), perhaps the royal yacht variant, gets to do some serious ass kicking.


wastedfly wrote:
Amaroq wrote:According to House of Steel an Invictus-class SD(P) can hold 1074 missile pods before needing to reload. I don't know if those are flatpack pods though. I assume they are.


That number is before flatpack pods.

Numbers given in HoS are for initial production of the class.

For instance Medusa value is given as 492. That is its initial value. Due to all the changes in pod design, actual pods carried in 1922 are upwards of 700. An Invictus would tabulate around 1400-1500 pods. This would also increase BCP to around 500 pods.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by Amaroq   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 12:15 pm

Amaroq
Captain of the List

Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:39 pm
Location: Princess Anne, Maryland

I guess my question of how exactly the "off-bore" targeting works could have gone in here as well? Lol.
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Goodwill.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by dreamrider   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:00 pm

dreamrider
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1108
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:44 am

Amaroq wrote:I guess my question of how exactly the "off-bore" targeting works could have gone in here as well? Lol.


My presumption is that general vector of target is sent to fill a variable in the on-board guidance program. After launch, missile maneuvers to that heading as soon as feasible. Then other target vector and signature data is processed to refine the flight path.

The only REAL question is: Why would it take so long to develop? And for that my assumption is that the extreme power/acceleration wedges of missiles have been historically very very difficult to warp subtly for radical steering, and that Manticore had a breakthrough in configuring high-power wedges for maneuvering. Possibly from working with LAC wedges??

dreamrider
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by kzt   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:11 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Makes no sense. You can use RCS to get the missile aimed at the right vector prior to wedge ignition.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:21 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8803
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

kzt wrote:Makes no sense. You can use RCS to get the missile aimed at the right vector prior to wedge ignition.
Yeah. Though I guess the energy budge of a microfusion powered missile could allow you to make more efficient powerful RCS thrusters.

But it's not the end of the world if the missile takes an extra second or two to flip end-over-end. In some ways that might be better because that could give time for your ship to accelerate it's wedge clear leaving the disengaged broadside's missiles a straight shot back at the enemy; without having to maneuver around your ship's wedge.


Reestablishing the control links after the missiles flew by should actually be easier than the constant need to restablish them that a DD that's pulling the "spinning like a dervish" maneuver to pump out alternate broadsides down the same bearing. That's going to cut line of sight to your outbound missiles many times a minute as you spin.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by Amaroq   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 4:39 pm

Amaroq
Captain of the List

Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:39 pm
Location: Princess Anne, Maryland

Jonathan_S wrote:

Reestablishing the control links after the missiles flew by should actually be easier than the constant need to restablish them that a DD that's pulling the "spinning like a dervish" maneuver to pump out alternate broadsides down the same bearing. That's going to cut line of sight to your outbound missiles many times a minute as you spin.


Good point about it maybe being easier to deal with the missiles rapidly changing direction than the ship itself.

Are Manticoran/Grayson ships the only ones that can do this? I've only found references to the Havenites figuring out that the Manties have this capability not whether they have it themselves.
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Goodwill.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware. SHIPS & WEDGES
Post by hanuman   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 6:24 pm

hanuman
Captain of the List

Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 3:47 pm

Okay, please forgive me if I don't use the correct terms here, but I'm not technically-inclined in the first place, so sometimes people (and yes, Mr Weber too) go right over my head. I'll try and explain what I mean to ask as clearly as possible.

In the Honorverse, ships are essentially shaped like tubes, right? And they move forward in line with the tube. That's basic stuff, no explanation needed.

When they enter combat, however, they basically flip sideways so that the length of the tube faces their opponents' ships, much like old sailing ships would have done, in order to present their broadsides to their opponents. I get that.

What I don't get, is how the impeller wedge looks. Does it look like this: <- with the 'less than' symbol being the wedge & the colon being the ship? Except of course that the wedge will basically run the length of the ship?

If that is right, is the opening in the wedge at the back end of the tube larger than the one at the front end?

Also, if that is right, then the sidewalls will be triangle-shaped, with the 'angle' towards the front end of the tube & the wide side of the triangle towards the back end. Am I right?

Does anyone have a link to a picture or a blueprint or something that will demonstrate what exactly is meant by 'wedges'?

As for the double broadside thing, wouldn't the initial speed of the missiles on the back side of the ship mean that those missiles will have to travel quite a distance before their thrusters will be able to change their direction back towards the enemy ships?

I hope you guys understood what I meant to ask, but like I said, technospeak is something I don't always understand very well. And sometimes it's very difficult to express myself properly therein.
Top
Re: Technical questions re military hardware.
Post by kzt   » Sun Jul 06, 2014 6:32 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Try this link, and see if that (and the drawing at the bottom) doesn't help.
http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/100/0
Top

Return to Honorverse