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

Hutch wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:Eventually, most SDs will have Streak Drives, but there is going to be a fairly long period where there will be a mix of Slow-SDs and Fast-SDs while virtually every other class of ships will all be "Fast-ships."

I respectfully disagree with your last sentence. While I concur that there may be a compelling need to convert some of the 'smaller' ships (BC's down to dispatch boats), I doubt that all will be modified--...

I think Slow-Ship classes smaller than SDs will be upgraded or replaced before SDs become universally "fast." That doesn't mean "Next Year," just that the normal replacement of older ships without at least Mk-16 capability will happen before older SDs are replaced.

There may be one or two older classes relegated to convoy duty for a while, where Streak Drive couldn't be used if they had it, but the RMN can't afford such narrowly useful designs in the long-term.

For example, since Rolands are supposedly a "transitional type" and are the smallest class capable of standing up to SLN commerce raiders, I would expect them to be among the relegated to convoy escorts rather than upgraded as soon as a better DD(L) enters service. Older destroyers that can't stand up to SLN commerce raiders as well will get retired/replaced with a class that has Streak Drive and MK-16G capability.

Castenea wrote:Due to politics of the SLN, Frontier fleet has the most combat experience, but is the junior service and is not allowed to have SDs. Thus FF has a lot of BCs.

According to Chyort that decision makes FF less versatile.

When FF was first formed, there wasn't the political divide that exists now -- FF got the smaller screening elements because their tasking required mobility and numbers over brute force. A division of destroyers is sufficient to police (conquer) most verge systems; a single BC is overkill.

Weird Harold wrote:But according to you, SDs are more versatile than smaller ships of comparable technology. Why doesn't FF use the "greater versatility of SDs" to make their policing/enforcing more effective?

once again a flawed argument taking things out of context.

Chyort wrote:A SD will be far more Versatile on a one for one basis than Any Other Class.

One for One basis. You are trying to compare hundreds or thousands of what are effectivly small police forces to a small force fighting a war. Give it up troll.

Weird Harold wrote:As for war vs peace, Frontier Fleet has far more combat experience than Battle Fleet because they are constantly fighting or intervening in "brush-fire wars" -- small wars, but still wars.

So your saying criminals fighting a "Gang war" would have equal experience to a military force that has been fighting a real war? And why are you using battle fleet as your "Real" warrior comparison? All they do is sit back and play with themselves in simulators.

Weird Harold wrote:If SDs are more versatile, then they're more versatile with comparable technology. A BC(P) can do everything a SD(P) can do, including launching Apollo pods. The only things it lacks are magazine capacity and Keyhole II's FTL fire-control.

Anything can launch a Apollo pod... what i care about is the FTL fire control which you yourself admit a BC(P) cant do, so i fail to see the argument here.

Weird Harold wrote:When Frontier Fleet was formed, SLN SDs and BCs had comparable technology; by your logic, SLN SDs would be more versatile and better suited to the kind of environment FF works in.

1) that isn't my logic
2) Why are you trying to compare old formations/strategies/tactics to Modern day?
3) Why are you trying to use the Invincible SLN as the foundation of your argument, when they are a)Knee breaking enforcers, Or b) stuck in their simulators playing with themselves.
4) What are you trying to say here?

Once again.

Chyort wrote:A SD will be far more Versatile on a one for one basis than Any Other Class.

What this means is, If you are limited on streak drives and can only upgrade a limited number of ships. You are better off upgrading the SD(P)... If you are not limited, then the number advantage of smaller ships comes into play. That however was not the argument. Which you consistently seem to fail to understand.

Once again, try reading...

Chyort wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:I have never said that couriers, scouts, and commerce raiders were the ONLY ships that need Streak Drives. I said they should get Streak Drives FIRST because the flow of information is more time sensitive than the flow of missiles.

*Snip*
If for some reason they have to pick between using a streak drive on a courier boat, or an SD(P)... I have a sneaking suspicion they will pick the SD(P) every time. Because it can also bring harm to the enemy that much faster in addition to messages.

I don't know why they would hit that kind of a bottleneck though. I assume they would do both at the same time.

You are trying to compare hundreds if not thousands of smaller ships that can be in multiple places to a single SD. Once again. That. Was. Not. The. Argument.

Weird Harold wrote:Another question:

With the expectation of facing Frontier Fleet forces, Adm Gold Peak chose a division of Cruisers for one trouble spot and a squadron of Roland class destroyers for another. Since she had "more versatile" SD(P)s available, why didn't she send them to both places?

Once again i fail to see the point of your statement. Gold Peak didnt have any SD(P) before the battle of spindle IIRC. She did use her smaller, More Numerous, ships to do general rear duty work. Anti piracy, surveying, patroling, whatever. But Again...

You are trying to compare hundreds if not thousands of smaller ships that can be in multiple places to a single SD, or group of SDs launching offensive operations. Once again. That. Was. Not. The. Argument.

Please, if your going to try and troll at least put a little effort into making Some sense.

Weird Harold wrote:

Castenea wrote:Due to politics of the SLN, Frontier fleet has the most combat experience, but is the junior service and is not allowed to have SDs. Thus FF has a lot of BCs.

According to Chyort that decision makes FF less versatile.

When FF was first formed, there wasn't the political divide that exists now -- FF got the smaller screening elements because their tasking required mobility and numbers over brute force. A division of destroyers is sufficient to police (conquer) most verge systems; a single BC is overkill.

How Cute! Your once again trying to misrepresent my argument. Either because you are a troll. Or your refuse to actually read my arguments.

It is also flawed because FF brass has said they often times Don't have enough military power on hand to enforce their protection rackets. They send one ship as a representaion of the rest to intimidate/cowl people into keeping their heads down. Not exactly the same thing

Weird Harold wrote:
I think Slow-Ship classes smaller than SDs will be upgraded or replaced before SDs become universally "fast." That doesn't mean "Next Year," just that the normal replacement of older ships without at least Mk-16 capability will happen before older SDs are replaced.

There may be one or two older classes relegated to convoy duty for a while, where Streak Drive couldn't be used if they had it, but the RMN can't afford such narrowly useful designs in the long-term.

For example, since Rolands are supposedly a "transitional type" and are the smallest class capable of standing up to SLN commerce raiders, I would expect them to be among the relegated to convoy escorts rather than upgraded as soon as a better DD(L) enters service. Older destroyers that can't stand up to SLN commerce raiders as well will get retired/replaced with a class that has Streak Drive and MK-16G capability.

Harold, the older classes will be replaced on a schedule that has nothing to do with standing up to SLN commerce raiders, as with electronics upgrades any GA ship should be able to handily defeat a SLN ship of the same class. Priority replacement will be those ships that are worn out, can only use missiles of at least 3 generations ago, and have major components with an unacceptable failure mode. Some of the oldest ships will be sent to the breakers since they would have trouble finding a place to put the latest ECM suites, never mind a significantly larger hyperdrive.

Chyort wrote:You are trying to compare hundreds if not thousands of smaller ships that can be in multiple places to a single SD. Once again. That. Was. Not. The. Argument.

That is precisely the argument. For the personnel and number of missile tubes, a great deal more can be done by smaller ships that can cover more than one system.

SDs are great for pounding the crap out of other SDs, but almost any ship class can perform other missions better than SDs. SDs are too slow to run down pirates -- LACs are probably best at that, but anything is better than and SD.

An SD can certainly blow away FF cruisers and destroyers and rescue captive merchant spacers, but it is overkill and keeps a bunch of personnel and missiles from being available to rescue other spacers or support a revolutionary groups against OFS and FF.

Chyort wrote:Once again i fail to see the point of your statement. Gold Peak didnt have any SD(P) before the battle of spindle IIRC. She did use her smaller, More Numerous, ships to do general rear duty work. Anti piracy, surveying, patroling, whatever. But Again...

Adm Gold Peak dispatched Terekhov and his cruisers and Zavala's destroyer divisions after she conquered Meyers with all of tenth fleet, including the SDs she declined to move her flag to. She had SDs available, but didn't even use them to run down the escaping system governor and FF detachment.

She had SDs available and SDs certainly could do the job, so why didn't she send single SDs instead of divisions and squadrons of smaller ships?

Weird Harold wrote:

Chyort wrote:You are trying to compare hundreds if not thousands of smaller ships that can be in multiple places to a single SD. Once again. That. Was. Not. The. Argument.

That is precisely the argument. For the personnel and number of missile tubes, a great deal more can be done by smaller ships that can cover more than one system.

Rofl. And still you miss the point.

Chyort wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:I have never said that couriers, scouts, and commerce raiders were the ONLY ships that need Streak Drives. I said they should get Streak Drives FIRST because the flow of information is more time sensitive than the flow of missiles.

*Snip*
If for some reason they have to pick between using a streak drive on a courier boat, or an SD(P)... I have a sneaking suspicion they will pick the SD(P) every time. Because it can also bring harm to the enemy that much faster in addition to messages.

I don't know why they would hit that kind of a bottleneck though. I assume they would do both at the same time.

Saying smaller ships should get streak drives First implies there are not enough to go around. Working under that assumption however, where SDs and Cruisers or Dispatch Boats are effectively judged on the merits of if they should get a drive on a ship by ship basis, Not if a hundred or thousand Cruisers vrs a single SD or Squad of SDs should get drives. A SD is and will always be more versatile. Because it can do the same jobs a cruiser or dispatch boat can do If the mission requires it. And it can also do a whole lot more.

That is not to say a SD will ALLWAYS be more versatile Outside that hypothetical argument.

If you are not limited however on how many streak drives you have. Then you should attack it from the top and bottom. Equip SDs and Carriers and enough Dispatch boats/Destroyers to support them on active operations and deep raids that feature extended transit times. While you leave traditional ships to more traditional roles.

I freely admit this is My Opinion however, and we can debate it until the heat death of the universe or RFC squashes us, either here or in the books.

Unlike the previous comparison of one ship, vrs one ship comparison above, which you can not win.


Personally i feel the middle classes are currently in a state of flux with the introduction of Apollo and its FTL control loop. When it comes to pushing offensive operations.

We already know classes can go obsolete because of technological advancements. For example frigates and battleships and even dreadnoughts for the most part. I am of the opinion that the FTL aspect of Apollo makes them, if not obsolete, then far less versatile for pursuing a war, as they currently exist. That can and will change i am sure. Where it will eventually end up i don't even pretend to know. And they still have uses in the rear areas, or less critical areas.

I could try and argue that frigates and battleships still deserve a place in the universe because in their day and age they had a place. Which is what you seem to be doing with FF and BF in the SLN. But it would be a pointlessly flawed argument with no real objective but causing a flame war. The history of a class matters less than its current day function. This is once again, My Opinion. And if you wish to debate it we can.

But you cant tell me with a straight face that you would pick 1 Heavy Cruiser, or 1 battlecruiser, instead of 1 SD If you were for some unknown hypothetical reason unable to equip anything else.

Now, as far as your 2nd chunk goes, Thanks for giving me more details to work with instead of leaving it so open ended... However i am going to leave it alone so you will hopefully read and understand what i have said above. So that we can end this miniature flame war and move on.

Chyort wrote:

Hutch wrote:Small Ships vs Large Ships. We know from textev that Streak Drives can go into dispatch boats and ships as large as a BC (Asimonova's 'yatch', IIRC). And on economies of scale, it will probably be easier to refit 10 dispatch boats or DD's with versions of the Streak than one BC or SD--not so much armor in the way, and if you have to build new to accomodate, smaller ships can come of the line a lot faster and in larger numbers than the bigger ships. So refit or new build, smaller ships are more likely to be in action with the streak drive than SD's.

The tops and bottoms are effectively unarmored. They were using this fact way back on the original nike. So armor is something of a wash i would assume.

That's true up through about classic BCs. But by the time you get up to SDs there's still nontrivial armor on the top and bottom, and then there's more on the internal armor belt around the core hull (and I expect the hyper generator is somewhere in that core hull area).

It still less armor than going through the meters of side armor, but it's still tough as hell to cut through.

Chyort wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:That said since they've already determined that it's not worth it to upgrade pre-Keyhole podlayers to Keyhole (or Keyhole II) that put the original Medusa/Harringtons quite low on any streak drive upgrade list, only slightly ahead of legacy SDs. So I don't expect to ever see any of those upgrades, but I'm not so sure about eventual upgrades to the newer Apollo capable units.

I seem to recall before the battle of manticore(a long time ago, true) about how they were talking about why home fleet hadnt been upgraded to keyhole 2 yet. Something along the lines of, they wanted to, but couldn't afford to have the ships put into dock while outnumbered so badly.
I dont recall however, them officially writing off the older ships for upgrades at a later date... If you are right however i would agree, any SD that doesn't have/will never have apollo, shouldnt get a streak drive.

I think it was an RFC post, rather than something from the book. But I can't seem to find it quickly.

I expect, eventually, all the Keyhole SD(P)s will be upgraded to Keyhole II status. That's a significant overhaul but not too horrible. They weren't all done prior to the Battle of Manticore; but they would all have been expected to as soon as they could be freed to cycle through the yards.

It's the pre-keyhole SD(P)s that I believe aren't going to be upgraded. Modding the armor to create the keyhole bays, rerouting, installing all the shipboard support hardware to run the keyhole, adding dedicated beamed power emitters and (I assume ultra-high speed) keyhole com links is way, way more work to the Keyhole to Keyhole II upgrade. Enough so that my recollection is that RFC said it just wasn't going to happen. (But my memory could be wrong, or the situation could have changed that. But more likely they'd be relegated to secondary duties until enough 4th gen SD(P)s are available to allow the 1st gen (pre-Keyhole) designs to be retired.

Let's face it gang, we really don't know enough about streak drives at this point to know how practical they will be for retrofitting ships in the current GA inventory. It could be that they will require a dramaticly different design than a standard hyperdrive warship. What is it about a streak drive that allows a ship to survive in the iota and kappa bands? We really don't know.

I'm with Harold on the immediate need for the lighter classes of warships. As long as the League is the primary opponent, SDPs are overkill for anything currently in the League's inventory. Nikes and Sag-Cs will do fine.

But that is only near term. The GA has to gear up for the Alignment which means that they will need the most modern ships they can build including Apollo capable SDPs, and if it turns out practical for these ships to have streak drives, or it turns out that R&D comes up with a new design for SDPs to make using the streak drive possible, then by all means go for it.

Don

Chyort wrote:...

What ship classes log the most light-years of Hyper travel?

Shouldn't the classes of ships that are in hyper more than others get Streak Drive first?

Weird Harold wrote:

Chyort wrote:...

What ship classes log the most light-years of Hyper travel?

Shouldn't the classes of ships that are in hyper more than others get Streak Drive first?

To some extent. So yes, for a variety of reasons build new dispatch boats with Streak drives first.

But after that you'd probably focus on creating a balanced fast raiding force.. Rather than, say, upgrading (or replacing) all your modern destroyers first it would make sense, to me at least, to designate design a task group (similar to Honor's 8th fleet during Cutworm/Sanscript), then build up that desired mix of ships with either Streak retrofits, or new built Streak equipped classes.

Then as additional Streak ships, or retrofits, become available you can start spreading them around as pickets or building up fast nodal reaction forces.


So again initially I think you get the best bang for the buck concentrating the first Streak warships into raiding groups. That means they're going to be spending significant amounts of time in hyper (compared to many other uses of those ship classes) -- you're not "wasting" your improved hyper generator ships assigned as screen to a defensive fleet, or securing a wormhole bridge.

But raiding groups are rarely uniform classes - they're a mix of everything from DDs (for pre-scouting) to CA(L)s, BC(L)s, BC(P)s, SD(P)s, CLACs, and even ammo and supply ships. And the raiding force as a whole can't really take full advantage of the Streak drive until all its units, even their logistic support, can keep up.