Culverin speed bump?

This is for the BuNiners, unless someone asked the author at a con.

In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint? Maybe from a wartime Flight II with an improved compensator? Or was the improvement based on something else?

The Culverin's design predates the treaty with the Protectorate of Grayson, so it isn't based on the Grayson compensator. If it is based on something else, why wouldn't the Valiant also benefit?

Rob

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:This is for the BuNiners, unless someone asked the author at a con.

In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint? Maybe from a wartime Flight II with an improved compensator? Or was the improvement based on something else?

The Culverin's design predates the treaty with the Protectorate of Grayson, so it isn't based on the Grayson compensator. If it is based on something else, why wouldn't the Valiant also benefit?

Rob

I've never seen an official answer, but I do note that the earlier reference books (and the Culverin showed up in both Jayne's and in the SITS reference books) it had a much lower 518.9 G acceleration.
I did some playing with trying to recreate the compensator curve data and eventually got a nearly perfect fit for 70 "Pre-Grayson" ships excepts for the HoS Culverin. It is 5.5% high which puts it in line with a circa 1904, first or second gen post-Grayson compensator.

Although it's also not far (1.44 G) off my best shot at the pre-Grayson curve if someone slipped a digit and calculated it as massing only 10,400 tons, instead of 104,000. (And due to very few data points below 60,000 tons I don't trust that part of my curve all that much, so it might be dead on for all I know)


Basically what I'm saying is I'm quite convinced that its listed acceleration is an error (even if I can't be sure what caused the error)

Jonathan_S wrote:

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:This is for the BuNiners, unless someone asked the author at a con.

In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint? Maybe from a wartime Flight II with an improved compensator? Or was the improvement based on something else?

The Culverin's design predates the treaty with the Protectorate of Grayson, so it isn't based on the Grayson compensator. If it is based on something else, why wouldn't the Valiant also benefit?

Rob

I've never seen an official answer, but I do note that the earlier reference books (and the Culverin showed up in both Jayne's and in the SITS reference books) it had a much lower 518.9 G acceleration.
I did some playing with trying to recreate the compensator curve data and eventually got a nearly perfect fit for 70 "Pre-Grayson" ships excepts for the HoS Culverin. It is 5.5% high which puts it in line with a circa 1904, first or second gen post-Grayson compensator.

Although it's also not far (1.44 G) off my best shot at the pre-Grayson curve if someone slipped a digit and calculated it as massing only 10,400 tons, instead of 104,000. (And due to very few data points below 60,000 tons I don't trust that part of my curve all that much, so it might be dead on for all I know)


Basically what I'm saying is I'm quite convinced that its listed acceleration is an error (even if I can't be sure what caused the error)

That was my take, also, but I remembered the upgraded drive nodes giving the series 282 LACs a speed boost, even before the Grayson compensator. So I just wanted to clarify it. But if it was a change in wedge strength or nodes, it should have carried up to the Valiant. And the listed accel works well for the second gen performance the Wayfarers' LACs had, and which were supposed to filter through the fleet.

Rob

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:That was my take, also, but I remembered the upgraded drive nodes giving the series 282 LACs a speed boost, even before the Grayson compensator. So I just wanted to clarify it. But if it was a change in wedge strength or nodes, it should have carried up to the Valiant. And the listed accel works well for the second gen performance the Wayfarers' LACs had, and which were supposed to filter through the fleet.

Rob

The more powerful nodes helped, since prior to the Series 282-class no LAC came close to the pre-grasyon compensator limits.

For example, the Highlander-class LAC: House of Steel gives its mass as 11,250 tons and it's accel 409.3g (which is less than a 7.1 million ton King William-class SD; 417.7g )


My attempt to work out the accel curves say a ship that small should have had an accel more like 545g; even without an improved compensator. (Though I've so few data points for tiny ships that that could be off by a fair bit)


Honor Among Enemies does say that the LACs Wayfarer carried (Series 282-class) have an improved generation of Grayson compensators, even better than the ones Honor's HMS Nike had had 4 years prior. (Now that wouldn't have been the compensator the first 282s launched carried, since they launched in 1904, roughly when Honor's Nike was. So the accel numbers in HoS a probably for a 1st gen Grayson compensator. Which tracks, since HoS give their max accel as 573.2g, while HAE gives it as "over six hundred gravities of acceleration")

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint?

Yep, it's another error.

I haven't pulled the thread completely on this yet, but it looks like that spec block got caught in mid-retcon. The 1899 PD commissioning date is correct (Jaynes 1 had 1905, the source of the retson) but the acceleration shown is post-refit. Actual acceleration should be closer to 519 G.

I'll add this to the errata once I've had a chance to cross check a few things. Thanks for pointing it out.

tpope wrote:

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint?

Yep, it's another error.

I haven't pulled the thread completely on this yet, but it looks like that spec block got caught in mid-retcon. The 1899 PD commissioning date is correct (Jaynes 1 had 1905, the source of the retson) but the acceleration shown is post-refit. Actual acceleration should be closer to 519 G.

I'll add this to the errata once I've had a chance to cross check a few things. Thanks for pointing it out.

Tom,
Is the errata expected to be added to later printings, published/posted separately, or otherwise made available to the 1000 or so of us who really care deeply?

dreamrider

tpope wrote:

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:In HOS the 1899 Culverin destroyer got a big acceleration jump compared to its predecessor; but the Valiant light cruiser, which dates from a couple years later, did not. Is that because the Culverin's accel is a misprint?

Yep, it's another error.

I haven't pulled the thread completely on this yet, but it looks like that spec block got caught in mid-retcon. The 1899 PD commissioning date is correct (Jaynes 1 had 1905, the source of the retson) but the acceleration shown is post-refit. Actual acceleration should be closer to 519 G.

I'll add this to the errata once I've had a chance to cross check a few things. Thanks for pointing it out.

Not to pile on, but while we're at it I was wondering about another (less blatantly off) question on ship acceleration.

Do you know why House of Steel gives the 2 Mantie CLAC classes their (lower than expected) accelerations?
The Minotaur-class and Hydra-class come in at 428.2g and 428.5g respectively; which for 1912 and 1915 is surprisingly low. For example the Medusa-class SD(P) had a lead unit acceleration of 502.8g in 1914.


The CLACs seem to fall closest to the "pre-grayson" compensator curve. Not what you'd expect from a several generations improved compensator; which you'd assume new builds would be using near the end of the first war. Was that another errata?



Now as a test unit I could almost see HMS Minotaur herself initially getting an old stock compensator if there was a shortage - after all you don't need crazy accel just to play testbed for the concept. But that wouldn't explain the Hydra-class since by then they knew CLACs were moving with the fleet or even being dispatched with cruisers to raid systems along the flanks. You wouldn't want to give up any accel unnecessarily; that'd just make it harder to keep up with the formations.

Jonathan_S wrote:While we're at it I was wondering about another (less blatantly off) question on ship acceleration.

Do you know why House of Steel gives the 2 Mantie CLAC classes their (lower than expected) accelerations?
The Minotaur-class and Hydra-class come in at 428.2g and 428.5g respectively; which for 1912 and 1915 is surprisingly low. For example the Medusa-class SD(P) had a lead unit acceleration of 502.8g in 1914.


The CLACs seem to fall closest to the "pre-grayson" compensator curve. Not what you'd expect from a several generations improved compensator; which you'd assume new builds would be using near the end of the first war.

If it's not an error then I suspect it's because of a design feature that is not obvious in HoS. I have the same drawing as in HoS, as well as other views and once I build the CLAC (the Minotaur, at least, as that's the only one with line art in the book), you'll understand. Unfortunately, you'll have to wait a couple-three weeks or more to see it because I first have to build the LACs so that I have something to check placement and other such stuff needed to make everything fit.

Of course, as I said, that's only if it *isn't* an error. I doubt it *is* one though, as I can't see Tom making the same mistake for both ships.

MaxxQ wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:While we're at it I was wondering about another (less blatantly off) question on ship acceleration.

Do you know why House of Steel gives the 2 Mantie CLAC classes their (lower than expected) accelerations?
The Minotaur-class and Hydra-class come in at 428.2g and 428.5g respectively; which for 1912 and 1915 is surprisingly low. For example the Medusa-class SD(P) had a lead unit acceleration of 502.8g in 1914.


The CLACs seem to fall closest to the "pre-grayson" compensator curve. Not what you'd expect from a several generations improved compensator; which you'd assume new builds would be using near the end of the first war.

If it's not an error then I suspect it's because of a design feature that is not obvious in HoS. I have the same drawing as in HoS, as well as other views and once I build the CLAC (the Minotaur, at least, as that's the only one with line art in the book), you'll understand. Unfortunately, you'll have to wait a couple-three weeks or more to see it because I first have to build the LACs so that I have something to check placement and other such stuff needed to make everything fit.

Of course, as I said, that's only if it *isn't* an error. I doubt it *is* one though, as I can't see Tom making the same mistake for both ships.

Never underestimate Murphy!

dreamrider wrote:Is the errata expected to be added to later printings, published/posted separately, or otherwise made available to the 1000 or so of us who really care deeply?

Errata will always be available here: http://bunine.org/

Whether it makes it into later printings is a different question, and involves a number of folks at Baen. I've been waiting to even ask that question until I had a better handle on just how many errors there were (answer: way more than I'd like)

Jonathan_S wrote:Do you know why House of Steel gives the 2 Mantie CLAC classes their (lower than expected) accelerations? The Minotaur-class and Hydra-class come in at 428.2g and 428.5g respectively; which for 1912 and 1915 is surprisingly low. For example the Medusa-class SD(P) had a lead unit acceleration of 502.8g in 1914.

I'll have to look at that. I seem to recall there was a reason for those numbers, but that's not to say I didn't still get it wrong somehow. I know the dimensions are off on both ships (among other things they do not account for the LAC bays, which changed significantly post-resizing) but I didn't THINK the accelerations were wrong. When I have time to revisit that I'll confirm and post here one way or another.