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

crewdude48 wrote:The thing is, you keep seeming to assume that the limiting factor will be the number of streak drives available.

The bottleneck will be yard space, or yard workers, not drive availability.

Why do the "Sds are versatile" advocates think a streak drive will change the way SDs are employed?

SDs are too slow to chase pirates, too big and expensive to be good scouts, too big and expensive to carry enough messages to enough places to fill the need for fast couriers. And they can't go deep raiding without screening elements that can keep up with them or scouts to tell them where to go raiding and what to expect when they get there.

Just what good are Fast-SDs without their normal complement of smaller ships supporting them?

Weird Harold wrote:

crewdude48 wrote:The thing is, you keep seeming to assume that the limiting factor will be the number of streak drives available.

The bottleneck will be yard space, or yard workers, not drive availability.

Except that an SD dock and a DD dock are not the same thing, and by the time they have streak drives ready to install, they will have a bunch of each and plenty of trained workers. Upgrading an SD will not ever displace a DD, or even a BCL.

Weird Harold wrote:Why do the "Sds are versatile" advocates think a streak drive will change the way SDs are employed?

We don't; that would be tactical, Streaks are strategic.

Weird Harold wrote:
SDs are too slow to chase pirates, too big and expensive to be good scouts, too big and expensive to carry enough messages to enough places to fill the need for fast couriers. And they can't go deep raiding without screening elements that can keep up with them or scouts to tell them where to go raiding and what to expect when they get there.

How many times have we seen any ship actually chase a pirate ship? Usually, it is a bated trap type situation. And even if they have to, yes they can run down a pirate ship. Current GA wallers have better accel curves than prewar DDs.

As for your other points, they are not to anything to do anything. We never said they would be the best at doing that job, just that they CAN do it. And they can. I ask you to name one single job that a single DD can do that a single SD can not do.

And, yes they can go raiding without screens. Screening ships are used to prevent enemy small fry from crossing your T while you concentrate on the enemy wall, and for increasing missile defense. The first is covered by bow and stern walls, and the second is covered by painfully out ranging the enemy. It is, admittedly a non-optimal choice, but not the end of the world. But if I can't have both, I would rather be ale to increase my strike targets by 40% than my scout targets by 40%.

Weird Harold wrote:
Just what good are Fast-SDs without their normal complement of smaller ships supporting them?

Nobody but you has ever said that we should ignore entire classes of ships.

crewdude48 wrote:Except that an SD dock and a DD dock are not the same thing, and by the time they have streak drives ready to install, they will have a bunch of each and plenty of trained workers. Upgrading an SD will not ever displace a DD, or even a BCL.

Actuallly, I don't believe there are any "DD Dock" At least they past practice seemed to be "put three DD or one SD in the available dock." Ot at least repair and refit three Destroyers or one battlecruiser in the docks we have specific textev for:

Mission of Honor
Chapter Twenty-nine
wrote:Had anyone been in a position to chart the damage, however, they would have known that the very first hit—first by almost an entire tenth of a second—struck compartment HF/1-17-1336-T-1219 of HMSS Hephaestus. HF/1-17-1336-T-1219 was the control section of module GM-HF/1-17-13, a general manufacturing module attached to the Royal Manticoran Navy's Shipyard HF/1-16 and Shipyard HF/1-17, which were currently assigned to BuShips' Refit and Repair Command (Hephaestus). HF/1-16 happened to be empty, awaiting the arrival of the brand new Nike-class battlecruiser HMS Truculent later that afternoon. HF/1-17, on the other hand, was occupied by the Roland-class destroyers HMS Barbarossa, HMS Saladin, and HMS Yamamoto Date, all three of which were completing their final fitting out, with almost their full complements embarked.

[/quote]

crewdude48 wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:Why do the "Sds are versatile" advocates think a streak drive will change the way SDs are employed?

We don't; that would be tactical, Streaks are strategic.

I was referring to strategic employments -- you know where to station them, how long they should be stationed there, that sort of thing.

crewdude48 wrote:As for your other points, they are not to anything to do anything. We never said they would be the best at doing that job, just that they CAN do it. And they can. I ask you to name one single job that a single DD can do that a single SD can not do.

What part of too big and too expensive are you having trouble with?

A destroyer can infiltrate a system to scout it without risking a billion dollars worth of starship and five to ten times as many crew-members. You know, the sort of thing Destroyers are designed to do?

crewdude48 wrote:Nobody but you has ever said that we should ignore entire classes of ships.

I haven't said any such thing.

I've said that smaller ships should have priority where getting a streak drive is the tie-breaker. Because, you know, you can like do three destroyers in the space you'd need for one battlecruiser and because you have to cut through less armor you can probably retrofit all three faster than you can cut through the armor and coffer-damming of one SD.

If you've got a Superdreadnaught sized dock open and you have a CLAC and and SD(P) that need repair/refit/building, do the CLAC first because it can do many things until there are Fast-SDs that need its LAC wings for anti-missile defenses.

Weird Harold wrote:SDs are too slow to chase pirates, too big and expensive to be good scouts, too big and expensive to carry enough messages to enough places to fill the need for fast couriers. And they can't go deep raiding without screening elements that can keep up with them or scouts to tell them where to go raiding and what to expect when they get there.

No,they are much more capable of catching pirates than a DD is. Outrunning an Apollo Mk23 is really, really hard.

kzt wrote:No,they are much more capable of catching pirates than a DD is. Outrunning an Apollo Mk23 is really, really hard.

As if anyone would waste an Apollo pod on a pirate; that's like swatting flies with a gold-plated sledgehammer.

kzt wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:SDs are too slow to chase pirates, too big and expensive to be good scouts, too big and expensive to carry enough messages to enough places to fill the need for fast couriers. And they can't go deep raiding without screening elements that can keep up with them or scouts to tell them where to go raiding and what to expect when they get there.

No,they are much more capable of catching pirates than a DD is. Outrunning an Apollo Mk23 is really, really hard.

Assuming the GA is willing to assign Apollo or Mk23s to ships on anti pirate duty. I think that will take time though. And Rolands or whatever the Havenite counter part will be can handle that job much more cheaply with Mk 16s.

Weird Harold wrote:
Actuallly, I don't believe there are any "DD Dock" At least they past practice seemed to be "put three DD or one SD in the available dock." Ot at least repair and refit three Destroyers or one battlecruiser in the docks we have specific textev for:

Mission of Honor
Chapter Twenty-nine
wrote:Had anyone been in a position to chart the damage, however, they would have known that the very first hit—first by almost an entire tenth of a second—struck compartment HF/1-17-1336-T-1219 of HMSS Hephaestus. HF/1-17-1336-T-1219 was the control section of module GM-HF/1-17-13, a general manufacturing module attached to the Royal Manticoran Navy's Shipyard HF/1-16 and Shipyard HF/1-17, which were currently assigned to BuShips' Refit and Repair Command (Hephaestus). HF/1-16 happened to be empty, awaiting the arrival of the brand new Nike-class battlecruiser HMS Truculent later that afternoon. HF/1-17, on the other hand, was occupied by the Roland-class destroyers HMS Barbarossa, HMS Saladin, and HMS Yamamoto Date, all three of which were completing their final fitting out, with almost their full complements embarked.

All that that quote said is that shipyard HF/1-16 has a BC dock in it and that shipyard HF/1-17 has three DD docks in it. There is nothing that said the relative size of the compartments. The fact that the space station is described as being built on an as needed basis...well, there is no telling what is next to what.

Weird Harold wrote:What part of too big and too expensive are you having trouble with?

A destroyer can infiltrate a system to scout it without risking a billion dollars worth of starship and five to ten times as many crew-members. You know, the sort of thing Destroyers are designed to do?

An SD can scout. It is more expensive to do it, but it can do the job. There is litteraly nothing that a DD can do that an SD is incapable of doing.

Furthermore, I still say that it will be impossible to upgrade a DD to make it Streak driven. So any streak drive small ships will have to be new build.

First off you are all talking apples and oranges.

1) No one has concretely stated emphatically defined WHEN chronologically these raids are taking place

2) Since the chronology has not been agreed upon, the numbers of available ships and types are not defined, let alone what is inside their hyperdrive compartment.

Leading to:

3) Streak Drive development, unknowns and when implemented. Yes, there were pages of posts basically saying, we don't know squat, but I surmise "x".

What we do know:

4) Streak Drive boats are externally Indistinguishable from a NORMAL DB. Therefore MALIGN streak DB's are NOT physically larger than "normal" DB's. Either A) hyperdrives are fairly small, still enormous on an SD, or B) hydrogen fuel storage on streak DB's was severely shrunk as all the other systems remained the same as the physical hull did not increase in volume or tonnage. Otherwise folks would be wondering why so-and-so is running around with large inefficient(expensive) DB's.

5) Definition shaving. Sheesh. Yes, the GA needs bucket loads of information, what commander does not? Yes, streak drive ships will help, but GA also have the wormhole network, which the solies nor MALIGN do not have. The GA also have a Huge number of war fighting ships and complete knowledge of who has what for defense as the SL has been at peace.(For the most part) In short, the GA really does not need to scout strategically at ALL! Now combine this knowledge with overwhelming tactical advantages in FTL RD/MDM technology effectively eliminating GA need for a streak drive capable scout for many years. Eventually? Sure. Next several years? No. Will take others several years to create a credible threat to even GA CA's/BC's.

In the near term, their need is for their limited number of SD'P's, BCL + JMAC ammo carriers to be in umpteen places at the same time, getting marines, army to quell uprisings, retain stability, and enforce the rule of law. Remember why OB was launched when it was. MALIGN were worried that Manticore would vastly increase the size of their wall due to territorial expansion acquisition combined with Apollo. Attacking orbitals is nice, but the number of SL worlds needing a thorough teeth cleaning of their orbitals is a mere handful.

3c, poof. If you want a 4th cent, forget about it, got a roof to replace. Holy ants and rot, and Damn is it hot...

PS. Bringing "pirates" into the equation is a mighty stretch that even a fat guys sweat pants cannot accommodate after a severe regimen of diet and exercise. that DD Streak dog just does not walk.

crewdude48 wrote:
Furthermore, I still say that it will be impossible to upgrade a DD to make it Streak driven. So any streak drive small ships will have to be new build.

Possible, maybe even probable but your case depends on the answer to questions we have no answers for.

A: How much of a Destroyers mass is the HD?

B: How much space for upgrades is included in the Destroyer design, and how convient will it be to use it for a Streak Drive?

C: How much bigger then a standard Hyperdrive will a Streak Drive be after Mantie Miniaturization Mages get through with it?

Relax wrote:4) Streak Drive boats are externally Indistinguishable from a NORMAL DB. Therefore MALIGN streak DB's are NOT physically larger than "normal" DB's. Either A) hyperdrives are fairly small, still enormous on an SD, or B) hydrogen fuel storage on streak DB's was severely shrunk as all the other systems remained the same as the physical hull did not increase in volume or tonnage. Otherwise folks would be wondering why so-and-so is running around with large inefficient(expensive) DB's.

I don't have my books with me right now, but I remember one of the MAlign higher ups had a streak dispatch boat that was noticeably larger than a military DB. It was, however, about the same size as a civilian ulta luxury DB.Therefore, it went more or less unremarked.