Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 41 guests

Counter Missile

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Lord Skimper   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:00 am

Lord Skimper
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:49 am
Location: Calgary, Nova, Gryphon.

MaxxQ wrote:
Lord Skimper wrote:I mentioned previously using missiles as counter missile so I will skip that and Long Range CM which leads to the DDM CM and such but with the need to increase the number of CM tubes and the lack of space for the CM tubes and PD and Body tubes etc... Take the Nike for instance couldn't one just fire a CM through the normal Missile tubes? Smaller missile can be fired through larger tubes after all. One could carry a set of Counter missiles to fire through the larger tubes. In the case of the Nike increasing the CM tubes from 30 or so per broadside to 55+.

In addition, I should probably point out that you can't launch a missile *that* much smaller than the tube through it. Unless you put a *really* big collar on a CM, it can't be fired through a normal missile tube. All missiles only have a couple centimeters of clearance between the skin of the missile and the inner surface of the launch tube *at most*. IOW, if the missile is 1 meter in diameter, the inside diameter of the launch tube cannot - let me repeat *CANNOT* - be larger than 1 meter, 4 centimeters or so.

To expand on RFC's analogy, you can't fire 40mm rounds through the 16" barrels of an Iowa's main guns.


http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... gton/175/1

Can I tell you to read the pearls now?
________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Weird Harold   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:15 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Lord Skimper wrote:[http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/entry/Harrington/175/1

Can I tell you to read the pearls now?


That Pearl doesn't say they can fire any smaller missile, just that they can fire smaller missiles from MSM missile tubes.

The Mk16 is smaller than any capacitor fed MSM, but it cannot be fired from tubes intended for capacitor fed missiles. There are logical limits to what can be fired from which type of missile tubes.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by kzt   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:37 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

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

MaxxQ wrote:Otherwise, why have different-sized tubes at all? Why not just make them *all* the same size? Standardization/commonality/interchangeability of parts is certainly much cheaper and easier to work with after all.

Surface area limitations on honerverse ships says you only use a tube that is sized for the largest missile you intend to fire. Since CM tubes are only fed by CM magazines and feed systems there is no reason to set them up to fire SKMs. But if you think there is a serious possibility of needing to fire a larger missile later you'd be a fool to not at least consider making the needed modifications at construction time rather then having to send every ship into a shipyard to have the every single launcher ripped out and replaced.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Lord Skimper   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:56 am

Lord Skimper
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:49 am
Location: Calgary, Nova, Gryphon.

runsforcelery wrote:
Lord Skimper wrote:If you're using your main tubes to fire the CM you can use the telemetry for those tubes to link the ship to those CM.

Works much better for the smaller ships that lack many CM tubes. Like the Wolfhound or Avalon. Which are also the ships that would need to multiply their CM options.

On the other hand if you think that main telemetry can only be used with a specific missiles, for some reason, then the smaller ships that have so few CM tubes should have left over telemetry if the designers did their job.

Of course we could all just assume the designers didn't build any redundancy into the defensive telemetry, although I can't think of why. It isn't like these ship ever get damaged or anything.

As for pointing out that the only ship that has its telemetry maxed defensively also has so many more CM tubes than any other ship and has no main missile tubes anyway. That would be...one will just assume you didn't do that.



Look, the point they were trying --- unsuccessfully --- to make to you is that the telemetry links are dedicated and that the dedication is based on the type of missile they are designed to control. You can't suddenly start using the main battery fire control of an Iowa-class BB to control its 40 mm mounts, and you CAN'T use the telemetry links of the shipkiller tubes to manage counter missiles. Not "Wouldn't it be cool if," not "Well of course, they could, except that they're too stupid to figure out it would be a good idea," not "Of course no one else in the 2,000-year history of the Honorverse ever even considered this new and brilliant idea," but "can't because it's impossible."

Don't know how anyone could say it any clearer, but you are completely, totally, and categorically wasting your time beating this dead horse. Just as you are with the notion that somehow putting a PD laser into a counter missile would produce anything remotely like a useful weapon system, or that deploying mines to stop missiles would be remotely worth the effort (or even physically possible), or that you can somehow use missile or drone impeller wedges to cover a ship against incoming fire.

The fact that you repeatedly throw out these ideas and then totally ignore people who tell you they won't work --- including ignoring me when I tell you the idea is impossible under Honorverse tech constraints --- means that no one in his right mind is going to pay attention or notice when you actually come up with something that might actually work for a change.



I don't so much as ignore you as just don't see any reason in arguing with you. I do try to stick to the rules of extrapolating from what you have said in the various sources. I try not to add anything new as you have requested. I try not to point out any contradictions you make, and I borrow from the age old adage that if I don't have anything nice to say I don't say anything at all to the complainers. (Not you). No point in saying anything if you say no, I just move on.

I do ignore some people which is why I don't respond to them. I presume they ignore me yet for some reason have a need to respond to any / every one of my ideas. If only to say that they are ignoring me.

I have a very sideways way of looking at things, and I refer to previous things I have said not so much to push a point, but more I simply don't forget too many things. If I deem something worth remembering I remember it. If I don't I don't. I remember conversations in classes I had at University in England. I don't have perfect recall, but I can pull up business law case histories from 25 years ago and silly physics exams from 30-35 years ago. I also carry on conversations from when I was a little kid but that makes little difference here. I do consider everything I've posted to be one conversation, within each forum. Sometimes linked often I try to separate the topics as others seem unable to recall what was said three months ago.

I realise that you are the only person for which any or perhaps all of this is real. It is your real work, for the rest of us we are just arguing semantics, what if's and notions of consistency. But none of this is real to any of us. Just really good what if stories. Yes you have set rules which we just guess at. We just hope to stay consistent within our guesses. Some of us try to rationalise what to us are made up things. You might have rules of these things but while we don't know what these are, how they work or even understand what your understandings of these things are.

Take gravity to you and I have no idea what it is to you, but I assume you think of gravity as a thing. I on the other hand do not, to me gravity is no more a thing than sadness is a thing. You assume gravity is a wave or perhaps a particle in a wave like movement. Kind of like how some think of the higgs boson as a particle while the higgs boson isn't a particle but the effect of whatever a higgs boson effect is caused by.

However I'm not trying to confuse you, not going to try to explain a notion nor am I ignoring what you have said. I think different than you. I remember a lot and I can piece together fragments no matter where; in the faulty notion of time everyone makes up.

As a philosopher I've been taught at the best schools by some of the best thinkers never to back down on what I hold to be. To argue my point and even though some can't grasp it, to maintain a consistency. Having people disagree is a good thing as there is never a true or false right or wrong in philosophy, just a convinence of the now. While I'm no scientist, nor am I a military man, in the traditional sense. I do know things and I think different and will never apologise for disagreeing with anyone, be they a great author, a world renowned Philosopher, a scientist who holds a theory to be a truth, or a military guy who just has been trained to accept and not question.
________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by The E   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:47 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2704
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Lord Skimper wrote:As a philosopher I've been taught at the best schools by some of the best thinkers never to back down on what I hold to be. To argue my point and even though some can't grasp it, to maintain a consistency. Having people disagree is a good thing as there is never a true or false right or wrong in philosophy, just a convinence of the now. While I'm no scientist, nor am I a military man, in the traditional sense. I do know things and I think different and will never apologise for disagreeing with anyone, be they a great author, a world renowned Philosopher, a scientist who holds a theory to be a truth, or a military guy who just has been trained to accept and not question.


This isn't philosophy, though. You are applying your notions of how philosophy works to questions of engineering, and engineering plays by somewhat different rules.
As engineers, we are not at liberty to make shit up. As engineers, we cannot ignore constraints set by the universe we inhabit.
Looking at your ideas with an engineer's frame of mind (I.e. asking questions like "How does this work?" or "What does this even look like?") quickly reveals that the overwhelming majority of them are just flights of fancy; elaborate constructs based on faulty premises (to wit, that the rules of the universe are different than what the only reference we have to infer those rules implies). Discussing them is only valuable in so far as they serve as an example of what not to do when trying to extrapolate the existant tech or tactics in the Honorverse; the fact that you refuse to engage with textual evidence that shows your ideas to be unworkable paints you as a (not very amusing and rather inept) troll, not as a being of higher intellect come down from the heavens of pure philosophy to sprinkle insights on us.

TL;DR: Your approach makes you seem out of touch with the mainstream of discussions in this forum; it would be a very good idea if you were to abandon your "philosophical" ramblings and apply a more rigid, engineering-oriented viewpoint to the tech and tactics discussions.

EDIT:

As a philosopher I've been taught at the best schools by some of the best thinkers never to back down on what I hold to be. To argue my point and even though some can't grasp it, to maintain a consistency. Having people disagree is a good thing as there is never a true or false right or wrong in philosophy, just a convinence of the now.


See, that's your problem in a nutshell. Where we see engineering constraints, you see philosophical constructs. What we take as hard rules, you take to be malleable; Where in philosophy it is perfectly valid to have several opposing, but equally valid interpretations of something, there is usually only one correct answer in engineering. There may be disagreements about specific implementations, but those disagreements can be resolved by looking at data, not by whoever is best at rhetoric.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by MaxxQ   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:01 am

MaxxQ
BuNine

Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Greer, South Carolina USA

kzt wrote:
MaxxQ wrote:Otherwise, why have different-sized tubes at all? Why not just make them *all* the same size? Standardization/commonality/interchangeability of parts is certainly much cheaper and easier to work with after all.

Surface area limitations on honerverse ships says you only use a tube that is sized for the largest missile you intend to fire. Since CM tubes are only fed by CM magazines and feed systems there is no reason to set them up to fire SKMs. But if you think there is a serious possibility of needing to fire a larger missile later you'd be a fool to not at least consider making the needed modifications at construction time rather then having to send every ship into a shipyard to have the every single launcher ripped out and replaced.


Your sarcasm detector needs calibrated.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Michael Everett   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:30 pm

Michael Everett
Admiral

Posts: 2619
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:54 am
Location: Bristol, England

...It occurs to me that Skimper seems to be trying to build his own sci-fi universe.

As such, I say to Skimper, you might want to use this site to write about this universe you are making.

I look forwards to reading your first story.
~~~~~~

I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber
But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork.

(Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC!
ACNH Dreams at DA-6594-0940-7995
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by runsforcelery   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:23 pm

runsforcelery
First Space Lord

Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 11:39 am
Location: South Carolina

Michael Everett wrote:...It occurs to me that Skimper seems to be trying to build his own sci-fi universe.

As such, I say to Skimper, you might want to use this site to write about this universe you are making.

I look forwards to reading your first story.



I'm not a great believer in the relativism of truth.

Philosophically, there are always gray areas, areas in which disagreements over things not susceptible to physical proofs can be debated on the basis of reason, insight, and --- yes --- instinct and personal prejudice. A high percentage of such debates' output is, in my personal opinion, high grade crap suitable primarily for fertilizing the fields of mental and moral masturbation, which has had a less than completely positive impact on us --- specifically Western Civilization --- as a whole, but your mileage may vary and I do not say that all of it is crap or that philosophy isn't a thoroughly respectable discipline.

Now, having said that, there are no gray areas in what Skimper persists in posting about the Honorverse. Having an idea, or a question, or a suggestion, or a request for further information not already available in textev are all perfectly legitimate and reasonable subjects for posts. Sharing them with other readers and inviting debate is likely to elicit more complete information, either from those other readers or from the author, and I generally enjoy the debates even if I choose not to take part in them personally. For that matter, some of those discussions and debates have caused me to more fully consider aspects of the Honorverse which hadn't previously been vital to where I was taking the story --- or where I'd simply been making assumptions without thoroughly thinking them through, myself --- which have been both thoroughly enjoyable and highly useful to me as a writer. By the same token, and for the same reasons, making suggestions which are based on an imperfect or incomplete understanding of the underlying tech assumptions is also perfectly legitimate, even though those suggestions may be completely and utterly unworkable in the end. And sometimes there are suggestions for things, which are at least technically feasible under the Honorverse tech assumptions, that I simply don't believe any of the polities in the Honorverse would invest in. In those cases, readers may certainly legitimately disagree with whether or not the in-universe decision-makers (which would, of course, be me, in the end) are making the best decisions possible. That is totally their right as readers, and I would be astonished if there is any serious reader of science fiction who hasn't had one of those "there's a better way to do this" moments about most of his or her favorite authors. It comes with the territory, and any of you who have spoken with me at cons know that I am general --- not always; I have my off days --- thoroughly prepared to discuss those suggestions, those decisions, and why the people in the book make the choices they did.

What is not legitimate, or a profitable use of other people's times, or a reasonable reason to expend photons, or anything remotely approaching courteous to the author who created the universe is to persist in pushing forward some supposedly brilliant, unworkable, illogical, and poorly thought out proposal which generally ignores the established tactical environment in the interest of finding a solution in search of a problem and which he has told you will not work. Skimper may say he isn't ignoring me, that he simply sees no reason to argue me about the constraints of my own literary universe, as if that somehow made it a more courteous --- or at least more acceptable --- attitude, but I have to say that doesn't do a single thing to make his rudeness any less rude. In fact, it strikes me as even ruder than arguing with me would be, in many ways, because of the dismissive arrogance inherent in it.

It also strikes me as something he should damned well be doing somewhere else, since this literary universe obviously isn't being run to his taste, or he wouldn't need to "ignore" the fellow writing it in the first place.

If I sound ticked, it's because I am. I think there have been two other people over the last 20-odd years to whom I have suggested that if they dislike things I am doing in the books sufficiently to lecture me on where else I should be going with them, or if they are so determined to argue with me about how things should work (if only I were not so frigging stupid as to fail to see it myself), then they should go find someone else to read. I never like to say that to anyone who's done me the courtesy of reading my books in the past, but I have done it twice because, frankly, the irritation quotient, the arrogance, and the rudeness canceled out the courtesy and simply weren't worth enduring. I am now saying it to a third person. If Skimper can't accept that it's remotely possible that I know how the Honorverse works better than he does, and if he can't do me the elementary courtesy of taking my word for it and accept it when I explain why it can't --- and won't --- be done his way, then he is wasting his time reading the books, he is wasting your guys' time here on the forum, and he is seriously pissing off the author who writes the books in question.

I don't normally hold conversations like this in public posts.

This time, I'm willing to make an exception.


"Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as Piglet came back from the dead.
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Michael Everett   » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:42 pm

Michael Everett
Admiral

Posts: 2619
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:54 am
Location: Bristol, England

...ouch.

RFC sounds irritated.
I know, time for something cute!

(/)_(/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Have a random bunny!
(Runs for cover while everyone's distracted)
~~~~~~

I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber
But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork.

(Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC!
ACNH Dreams at DA-6594-0940-7995
Top
Re: Counter Missile
Post by Chyort   » Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:26 am

Chyort
Lieutenant Commander

Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:32 pm

Michael Everett wrote:I know, time for something cute!

(/)_(/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")


Have a random bunny!
(Runs for cover while everyone's distracted)


:lol:
Random indeed. :P
Top

Return to Honorverse