What's the chance of a Streek Drive Super Dreadnought?

Weird Harold wrote:Which is why couriers, scouts, and commerce raiders need Streak Drives. SDs sitting parked in defensive deployments don't need Streak Drives, it's just nice-to-have.

drothgery wrote:But the only reason to even have SDs sitting parked defensive deployments is that you might need them somewhere else. Otherwise you'd get more firepower for way less money in forts and system defense pod networks.

Theemile wrote:
I'm with Harold here...

Yes, in a world without resource limits and upgrade priorities, sure, having a strategic force which can move around the chess board faster and raid or reinforce a system before the opponent even knows it moved is a great ability to have.

However, SDs rarely move "balls to the wall" through Hyper now. Look at 2nd Yeltsin for example - White Haven refused to risk SDs at a maximum rate voyage to Grayson to reinforce Honor - he peeled off his BCs and raced ahead with them in the hopes they could return in time - but the SDs followed along at a safer rate.

No where has it been mentioned that the new speed the streak drive has conferred is "safe." While all military ships with conventional hyperdrives have the same theoritical speed limit in hyper - only the small ships are risked in the upper bands. Does it make sense to waste time and money when they are in critical need to do upgrades on ships which probably will never use a technology, or is it wiser to focus first on those which probably will?

I don't remember any SDs were ever sent to Yeltsin to reinforce Honor during 2nd Yeltsin. Just BCs (IIRC, 16 BCs) and their escorts. After Thunder of God was taken out, White Haven then moved on Masada with the same forces (the largest remaining unit the Masadans had was a destroyer, and IIRC, only one DD--not a modern combatant).

Weird Harold wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:Given the sharply reduced range of aircraft at supersonic speed I'm at a loss to see how the B-1A's supersonic abilities can be classified as strategic mobility.

The B1-A was designed for super-cruise, similar to the Concorde's general operating speed -- 3,000 NM or so at Mach 2.2.

The B1-B is capable of short supersonic sprints but not capable of the higher supersonic speeds for long periods the B1-A was designed for.

GlobalSecurity.org's B1-A Specifications lists the cruise speed at 50,000 ft as 648 mph (I'm guessing that the site is using nautical miles per hour here, as aircraft use knots for airspeed), with max speed at 500 ft. (750 mph) and max speed as Mach 2.0 at 50,000 feet (1,320 mph). I.C.A.O. Standard Atmosphere lists the speed of sound in knots at 50,000 feet as 573.8 knots. The National Museum of the US Air Force lists the cruising speed of the B-1A as 647 mph, but does not specify the altitude.

Which works out to Mach 1.13, which is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range. Assuming the website giving the cruising speed was using statute miles per hour, converting to knots gives 563 knots. Which works out to Mach 0.98, which also is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range.

Either case doesn't make a whole lot of sense, unless the wide speed range of the transonic shock waves was reduced using the blended body profile and the swing wings.

Regardless of the cruising speed being given in (statute) miles per hour or knots, the B1-A was NOT designed for supercruise.

Vince wrote:GlobalSecurity.org's B1-A Specifications lists the cruise speed at 50,000 ft as 648 mph (I'm guessing that the site is using nautical miles per hour here, as aircraft use knots for airspeed), with max speed at 500 ft. (750 mph) and max speed as Mach 2.0 at 50,000 feet (1,320 mph). I.C.A.O. Standard Atmosphere lists the speed of sound in knots at 50,000 feet as 573.8 knots. The National Museum of the US Air Force lists the cruising speed of the B-1A as 647 mph, but does not specify the altitude.

Which works out to Mach 1.13, which is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range. Assuming the website giving the cruising speed was using statute miles per hour, converting to knots gives 563 knots. Which works out to Mach 0.98, which also is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range.

Either case doesn't make a whole lot of sense, unless the wide speed range of the transonic shock waves was reduced using the blended body profile and the swing wings.

Regardless of the cruising speed being given in (statute) miles per hour or knots, the B1-A was NOT designed for supercruise.

That's all very interesting, but the numbers match production B1-B performance rather than B1-A design. The B1-A never reached its design speeds because of costly problems with the variable inlet ducting which is one reason the Carter Administration canceled it.

Vince wrote:I don't remember any SDs were ever sent to Yeltsin to reinforce Honor during 2nd Yeltsin. Just BCs (IIRC, 16 BCs) and their escorts. After Thunder of God was taken out, White Haven then moved on Masada with the same forces (the largest remaining unit the Masadans had was a destroyer, and IIRC, only one DD--not a modern combatant).

That's correct. After Alice Truman's own little death ride toward the iota wall, White Haven brought a response force of (IIRC) two battlecruiser squadrons to Yeltsin, then took them on to Endicott to conquer Masada.

In the run-up to the 'official' start of the First Havenite War, Caparelli detached four superdreadnaught squadrons from Home Fleet to reinforce Sebastian D'Orville's fleet defending Yeltsin, having correctly predicted that Haven's opening offensive would include a strike at Yeltsin as it was the shallowest point in the Manticoran Alliance's defensive glacis.

Weird Harold wrote:

Vince wrote:GlobalSecurity.org's B1-A Specifications lists the cruise speed at 50,000 ft as 648 mph (I'm guessing that the site is using nautical miles per hour here, as aircraft use knots for airspeed), with max speed at 500 ft. (750 mph) and max speed as Mach 2.0 at 50,000 feet (1,320 mph). I.C.A.O. Standard Atmosphere lists the speed of sound in knots at 50,000 feet as 573.8 knots. The National Museum of the US Air Force lists the cruising speed of the B-1A as 647 mph, but does not specify the altitude.

Which works out to Mach 1.13, which is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range. Assuming the website giving the cruising speed was using statute miles per hour, converting to knots gives 563 knots. Which works out to Mach 0.98, which also is in the transonic band (sound barrier) range.

Either case doesn't make a whole lot of sense, unless the wide speed range of the transonic shock waves was reduced using the blended body profile and the swing wings.

Regardless of the cruising speed being given in (statute) miles per hour or knots, the B1-A was NOT designed for supercruise.

That's all very interesting, but the numbers match production B1-B performance rather than B1-A design. The B1-A never reached its design speeds because of costly problems with the variable inlet ducting which is one reason the Carter Administration canceled it.

If performance can't measure up to design, then it wasn't designed, it was either wishful thinking or what is known in the computer software industry as vaporware.

Vince wrote:If performance can't measure up to design, then it wasn't designed, it was either wishful thinking or what is known in the computer software industry as vaporware.

You'd have to take that up with Rockwell. The cancellation of the B1-A in 1977 probably predates the term "Vaporware" and it certainly predates most of the computer modeling that so improved aircraft design in the last quarter of the 20th century.

All I know for sure is that one big problem with the B1-A was the "variable inlet geometry" which is only required for prolonged supersonic flight near, or beyond, Mach 2.

Dafmeister wrote:

Vince wrote:I don't remember any SDs were ever sent to Yeltsin to reinforce Honor during 2nd Yeltsin. Just BCs (IIRC, 16 BCs) and their escorts. After Thunder of God was taken out, White Haven then moved on Masada with the same forces (the largest remaining unit the Masadans had was a destroyer, and IIRC, only one DD--not a modern combatant).

That's correct. After Alice Truman's own little death ride toward the iota wall, White Haven brought a response force of (IIRC) two battlecruiser squadrons to Yeltsin, then took them on to Endicott to conquer Masada.

In the run-up to the 'official' start of the First Havenite War, Caparelli detached four superdreadnaught squadrons from Home Fleet to reinforce Sebastian D'Orville's fleet defending Yeltsin, having correctly predicted that Haven's opening offensive would include a strike at Yeltsin as it was the shallowest point in the Manticoran Alliance's defensive glacis.

Yes, I seem to have remembered that wrong, my appologies. I believe my mis-remembering comes from thinking that White Haven was too experienced to be commanding just 2 BC squadrons, and must have comodeered the BCs under his command (and 3 others) for the mission.

None the less the point still stands, White Haven was sent to Yeltsin with BCs because they could get there faster than SDs (and deal with the problem adequately), though not as fast as a light cruiser who could be risked to bounce off the Iota wall. Larger ships, though they could be driven just as hard, are not risked. It has not been stated that even with the new technlogy that the Iota and Kappa bands do not impose just as much risk as the Theta band currently does. And unless the new technology makes those speeds as safe as the lower bands, SDs will not be risked in those bands for the majority of operations.

So while it makes sense to design any new builds with the streak tech (or streak tech in mind), If retrofits are possible, retrofitting lighter units which are more likely to use the technology should have a priority over SDs, given the limited ability currently to maintain ships.

Weird Harold wrote:

Vince wrote:If performance can't measure up to design, then it wasn't designed, it was either wishful thinking or what is known in the computer software industry as vaporware.

You'd have to take that up with Rockwell. The cancellation of the B1-A in 1977 probably predates the term "Vaporware" and it certainly predates most of the computer modeling that so improved aircraft design in the last quarter of the 20th century.

All I know for sure is that one big problem with the B1-A was the "variable inlet geometry" which is only required for prolonged supersonic flight near, or beyond, Mach 2.

But that prolonged supersonic flight was to penetrate the many hundreds of miles of Soviet air defense. It wasn't designed to travel it's entire 5000 mi (+ refueling) mission at supersonic.

I guess if you were strategically repositioning it over short enough distances you could use that tactical sprint ability to cut the transit time. Or you could crunch the numbers to see whether providing more frequent tankers (and the need to slow down for that) to spend more time supersonic lowered the total mission time.

But the supersonic ability wasn't designed to lower the nuclear response time (a strategic mission); that was covered by ICBMs. It was designed to meet a tactical need; to minimize exposure to Soviet air defenses.


Now the hypersonic bomber paper designs that get kicked around occasionally these days are being presented as a strategic capability. Specifically to be able to respond to a fleeting target of opportunity when our nearest bases are hours away by conventional bombers. And since there's no current tactical need for a hypersonic bomber that a clear case of strategic mobility (but whether its worth the cost to build is another question ).

Theemile wrote:Yes, I seem to have remembered that wrong, my appologies. I believe my mis-remembering comes from thinking that White Haven was too experienced to be commanding just 2 BC squadrons, and must have comodeered the BCs under his command (and 3 others) for the mission.

None the less the point still stands, White Haven was sent to Yeltsin with BCs because they could get there faster than SDs (and deal with the problem adequately), though not as fast as a light cruiser who could be risked to bounce off the Iota wall. Larger ships, though they could be driven just as hard, are not risked. It has not been stated that even with the new technlogy that the Iota and Kappa bands do not impose just as much risk as the Theta band currently does. And unless the new technology makes those speeds as safe as the lower bands, SDs will not be risked in those bands for the majority of operations.

So while it makes sense to design any new builds with the streak tech (or streak tech in mind), If retrofits are possible, retrofitting lighter units which are more likely to use the technology should have a priority over SDs, given the limited ability currently to maintain ships.

It all comes down to info we don't know. I think a lot of it revolves around the "sub-bands". Based on Alice's speed run it seems that you can get marginally better velocity multipliers in the higher sub-bands, so a ship riding the Iota wall will travel marginally faster than one lower in the Theta bands. (Otherwise why risk "bouncing off the Iota wall")

But is the Theta band itself highly dangerous, or just its highest sub-bands? (How does the risk increase as you increase bands and sub-bands, and how to the rewards vary as you do?)

Is the lowest sub-band in the Iota bands (with a streak drive) more dangerous than the lowest sub-band in the Theta bands (for a non-streak military drive)? More dangerous than the highest sub-band in the Theta bands?


We know next to nothing about the sub-bands, and also very little about the risks per band (and nothing about the risks in the Iota and Kappa bands). That all makes it impossible to judge the tradeoffs involved.

Theemile wrote:

Dafmeister wrote:That's correct. After Alice Truman's own little death ride toward the iota wall, White Haven brought a response force of (IIRC) two battlecruiser squadrons to Yeltsin, then took them on to Endicott to conquer Masada.

In the run-up to the 'official' start of the First Havenite War, Caparelli detached four superdreadnaught squadrons from Home Fleet to reinforce Sebastian D'Orville's fleet defending Yeltsin, having correctly predicted that Haven's opening offensive would include a strike at Yeltsin as it was the shallowest point in the Manticoran Alliance's defensive glacis.

Yes, I seem to have remembered that wrong, my appologies. I believe my mis-remembering comes from thinking that White Haven was too experienced to be commanding just 2 BC squadrons, and must have comodeered the BCs under his command (and 3 others) for the mission.

None the less the point still stands, White Haven was sent to Yeltsin with BCs because they could get there faster than SDs (and deal with the problem adequately), though not as fast as a light cruiser who could be risked to bounce off the Iota wall. Larger ships, though they could be driven just as hard, are not risked. It has not been stated that even with the new technlogy that the Iota and Kappa bands do not impose just as much risk as the Theta band currently does. And unless the new technology makes those speeds as safe as the lower bands, SDs will not be risked in those bands for the majority of operations.

So while it makes sense to design any new builds with the streak tech (or streak tech in mind), If retrofits are possible, retrofitting lighter units which are more likely to use the technology should have a priority over SDs, given the limited ability currently to maintain ships.

It's not clear exactly what reasoning was behind the decision to send White Haven's BC squadrons. (Yes, he actually was just commanding BC squadrons--the Reliant was his flagship.) Headquarters did not know that White Haven planned to take out interlocks, so it seems to me unlikely that dangers of the high theta bands were part of the decision.

Since White Haven left orbit a mere 15 minutes after the message from Alice Truman arrived, it could simply be that they were sent because they were available and ready to go. As it was, 3 ships had to be substituted into his squadrons to replace ones which were temporarily unavailable.