Are Tincans and CL's obsolete to "modern" fleets?

Please define "obsolete"...

A 5 shot revolver is technically "obsolete" compared to more modern compact 9mm pistols which hold more ammo, have better sights and reload faster - but people still buy small revolvers for times when they don't foresee needing a lot of gun, but still may need one just the same.

I think destroyers and light cruisers fall into that same thinking.

Not every situation needs a pile driver or jackhammer. Sometimes a framing hammer will resolve the situation nicely and efficiently.

If not...the jackhammer can be called up in short order.

--whitespace snipped--

Mitchell, Esq. wrote:Please define "obsolete"...

A 5 shot revolver is technically "obsolete" compared to more modern compact 9mm pistols which hold more ammo, have better sights and reload faster - but people still buy small revolvers for times when they don't foresee needing a lot of gun, but still may need one just the same. I think destroyers and light cruisers fall into that same thinking. Not every situation needs a pile driver or jackhammer. Sometimes a framing hammer will resolve the situation nicely and efficiently. If not...the jackhammer can be called up in short order.

Well said. and a good analogy.

That said, by the time the relative stability suggested a couple of posts ago has kicked in, one of RFC's pearls (or a quote on the forum, haven't refound it yet) will likely be completely in fleet operation, the one that hinted that the next step in the puzzle will be FTL control of the Mark 16's. That means even a "post PD1922 RMN" DD operating solo would have a pretty good size sledgehammer when called for; a Roland-class DD would have crushed the PN ship that destroyed HMS Hawkwing (HoE) in short order before the battle cruiser could have even engaged.

That will still be true against any 3rd tier space navy, or less capable units below BC size in ANY space navy.

Somtaaw wrote:Been thinking about this for a while, and I can no longer see the point of continuing to build destroyers, and light cruisers, for modern (Manticoran-influenced) Navies.

Usually used in scouting, anti-piracy, and adding additional anti-missile defences to battlecruiser units and above.


In the role of missile defense, LAC's have taken over. Even before Oyster Bay, and Battle of Manticore, LACs were used in that role by both sides of the Havenite war. LACs provide very nearly as much MD as destroyers, in a vastly smaller (and faster) platform, and for far less crew needs.

The only downside, you need a LAC carrier to move them around (although modern navies seem to rely entirely on CLAC's and podnoughts now so this point may be moot)


In the role of anti-piracy, at least on the Manticoran side, they no longer have Marine contingents on anything below Battlecruisers, and even the BC's only get a squad compared to their old company-sized contingents. Additionally, while ship sizes were creeping up, Manticoran BC's by the time of BoMa were faster than light cruisers of before the First Havenite War.

And the last bit of scouting, was only really from picketing Havenite systems, before the outbreak of the war (Hancock Station relied on CL flotilla's to watch Seaford and such)


for a TL:DR

-Manticoran Battlecruisers are faster than most other navy, or pirate light cruisers.
-nothing smaller than a Manty Battlecruiser even has Marines anymore
-LACs provide far better missile defenses, while also being tougher to kill. And even when you lose a LAC, you lose way less crew than a tincan would.

Just a little on top of other’s comments

One of the most important missions for RMN light units has always been the “presence” mission. This is the “show the flag” and “ring the bell” type of mission needed for a Navy with a large footprint – they cannot be strong everywhere, but need to be everywhere. It’s the primary reason the RMN fielded so many Frigates prior to 1900. The RMN needed to be Everywhere – to see everything in their area of control. That presence mission has not, and will not go away, and the only solution for it is a sheer # of Hulls – (hence the repeated suggestions to bring back the Frigate.)

The Presence mission is not to fight the battles, but to let everyone know you are in their backyard, all the time, and can run and get the combatants necessary to ruin anybody’s day. This stance is why every Pirate in the series hesitates and verbally mentions a concern about taking on a Manticorian ship- it doesn’t matter if you can take on THIS ship – the RMN will come back with whatever it takes to take you out.

And this allows an economy of units - the FG/DD/CL can stand in for the BC for routine patrolling and showing presence because the mere threat of the BCs (and SDs) is enough to quell pirates and 4th teir navies.

And Battlecruisers are expensive – so expensive that most navies cannot afford them. Entire 4th tier navies can be bought for the cost of 1 BC – not to mention 6-12 same tech DD/CL – which can patrol many times the space.

Every RMN warship design (other than the Roland and Wolfhound DDs) have Marines. The newer designs are slanted more for warfighting than patrolling and have much smaller crews and marine contingents. The late interwar build (ERM/LERM) combatants had a moderate crew reduction, while the 2nd war designs (mk 16 and LERM) had a large reduction in crew sizes. Many discussions have taken place over whether the next gen designs of patrol ships will be a more multirole design or be split with a warfighter and a patroller in each category.

As others have mentioned, while the tactical scouting and fleet defense roles have been replaced, there is still the strategic scouting role, commerce protection role, policing/anti-piracy role (reduced in Silensia, but still needed) , and presence/show the flag roles for light combatants.

Mitchell, Esq. wrote:Please define "obsolete"...

A 5 shot revolver is technically "obsolete" compared to more modern compact 9mm pistols which hold more ammo, have better sights and reload faster - but people still buy small revolvers for times when they don't foresee needing a lot of gun, but still may need one just the same.

I think destroyers and light cruisers fall into that same thinking.

Not every situation needs a pile driver or jackhammer. Sometimes a framing hammer will resolve the situation nicely and efficiently.

If not...the jackhammer can be called up in short order.

This is exactly why I suggested that we limit our discussion. Among other things, I tried to define "obsolete". I suggested that we limit discussion to whether the small classes are viable in a major military force in the future environment. I should probably have been more specific--I was thinking of a navy which includes wallers.

I propose that a navy with ships of the wall cannot afford to build ships just for anti-piracy which cannot serve in a significant naval conflict (i.e., facing an enemy stronger than mere pirates). Any comments on that proposition?

SWM wrote:I propose that a navy with ships of the wall cannot afford to build ships just for anti-piracy which cannot serve in a significant naval conflict (i.e., facing an enemy stronger than mere pirates). Any comments on that proposition?

Any navy that has to deal with pirates will have a use for a lot of ships a bit larger and tougher than pirates. That will mean many such units, rather than a smaller number of far more powerful ones.

If the other party has those, you've got to have a response to them - a way to deal with them when they come after your commerce, a way to handle their defense of their commerce, a way to handle their threats to your marginal systems and fleet screen in hyper.

That response is typically going to be the same sort of ship, because you'll need them in similar or better numbers and of similar or better capability.

If you don't have to deal with pirates, you have to deal with enemies that act much as pirates in case of war. (Blowing up or turning around commerce, perhaps, instead of seizing it, but the effects are close enough.) So again, the need for the light, numerous hypercapable combatant comes back.

They really, really don't need to have a role in the major fleet combat, other than perhaps being the screen and scout force in hyper, FTL messengers, and system recon duty. Navies do a whole lot else. For that, there will be the small, humble workhorse. How small or how humble will vary. If the new floor turns out to be something very like the current Saganami-C - in other words, what was once a battlecruiser - so be it.

It's certainly not a purely anti-piracy role. But that does establish a kind of basement: navies need ships in great numbers capable of handling on roughly equal terms what other navies will use to confidently blow away pirates in the most efficient overall available fashion.

SharkHunter wrote:That said, by the time the relative stability suggested a couple of posts ago has kicked in, one of RFC's pearls (or a quote on the forum, haven't refound it yet) will likely be completely in fleet operation, the one that hinted that the next step in the puzzle will be FTL control of the Mark 16's. That means even a "post PD1922 RMN" DD operating solo would have a pretty good size sledgehammer when called for; a Roland-class DD would have crushed the PN ship that destroyed HMS Hawkwing (HoE) in short order before the battle cruiser could have even engaged.

Well, maybe.
Certainly in straight out fight a Roland could run rings around an old BC like that and shred it. But Hawkwing and Artemis were totally surprised. They didn't see the BC until it launched missiles!

From within the SDM range of a BC even a Roland is going to have a tough time. Yes, she'd have far better active missile defense than an old Falcon-class DD like Hawkwing. But only a single unlucky hit can knock out half her missile tubes, and even with Mk16Gs it's going to take a fair number of hits to kill a BC. Plus at shorter range you don't have time to build the screaming fast terminal velocity that make DDMs (and to a greater extent) MDMs so difficult to intercept.

Although, maybe it's not quite as bad as I'm thinking. We know Artemis managed to stop all but 5 of the initial ~18 laserheads the Sultan-class launched. And a Roland looks to have about the same active defense as a Homer-class BC (which the Atlas's defenses seem based on) plus the Roland can use both broadsides worth of CMs - so effectively double the Homer's CM throw weight. (Roland-class broadside: 10 CM; 9 PDLC. Homer-class broadside 9 CM; 9 PDLC)



Sure, if I had to pick a DD to fight an older BC from at SDM range I'd go with a Roland. But that's still a, shall we say, suboptimal way to fight one

SharkHunter wrote:That said, by the time the relative stability suggested a couple of posts ago has kicked in, one of RFC's pearls (or a quote on the forum, haven't refound it yet) will likely be completely in fleet operation, the one that hinted that the next step in the puzzle will be FTL control of the Mark 16's. That means even a "post PD1922 RMN" DD operating solo would have a pretty good size sledgehammer when called for; a Roland-class DD would have crushed the PN ship that destroyed HMS Hawkwing (HoE) in short order before the battle cruiser could have even engaged.

That will still be true against any 3rd tier space navy, or less capable units below BC size in ANY space navy.

Yes, David did say something about possibly having FTL control of Mark-16s sometime in the future. But IIRC, it would only be available on heavy cruisers; a mini version of Keyhole. I think it would still be too big for DDs and CLs.

[edit]Here is the text (I got it partially wrong--David was implying that 300,000 tons was the smallest that this mini-keyhole could fit on):

runsforcelery wrote:The 300,000-ton notional ship they're looking at acquires a very large percentage of its total tonnage from additional defensive elements, including a scaled down version of the Keyhole One platform. As you guys will see in A Rising Thunder, Manticore is already investing considerable effort in defensive doctrine and tactics to deal with the threat of MDMs and even Apollo, despite the fact that no one else has that combination of capabilities. The same thing is true where the Mark 16 is concerned, and the architects and the defensive system designers are considering the new threat parameters in the designs they are proposing.

. . .

The Manties are perfectly prepared to continue using transitional types — and types which will become highly vulnerable once the other side has MDMs — very aggressively and offensively as long as their range advantage allows them to do so without prohibitive casualties, but they are already looking towards the next generation of warships and warship design. Hence the internal studies which are suggesting a 300,000-ton platform as the minimum to perform the light cruiser/destroyer role. In fact, what is probably going to happen is that the destroyer as a type will effectively disappear, with its independently deployable role reverting to the cruiser and its fleet screening role going to the LAC groups.

Hm. Looking at that quote again, I am reminded that this mini-keyhole would be based on Keyhole I, which doesn't have FTL comm. I'll look further to see if there is anything about FTL comm with Mark-16.

Jonathan_S wrote:

SharkHunter wrote:That said, by the time the relative stability suggested a couple of posts ago has kicked in, one of RFC's pearls (or a quote on the forum, haven't refound it yet) will likely be completely in fleet operation, the one that hinted that the next step in the puzzle will be FTL control of the Mark 16's. That means even a "post PD1922 RMN" DD operating solo would have a pretty good size sledgehammer when called for; a Roland-class DD would have crushed the PN ship that destroyed HMS Hawkwing (HoE) in short order before the battle cruiser could have even engaged.

Well, maybe.
Certainly in straight out fight a Roland could run rings around an old BC like that and shred it. But Hawkwing and Artemis were totally surprised. They didn't see the BC until it launched missiles!

From within the SDM range of a BC even a Roland is going to have a tough time. Yes, she'd have far better active missile defense than an old Falcon-class DD like Hawkwing. But only a single unlucky hit can knock out half her missile tubes, and even with Mk16Gs it's going to take a fair number of hits to kill a BC. Plus at shorter range you don't have time to build the screaming fast terminal velocity that make DDMs (and to a greater extent) MDMs so difficult to intercept.

Although, maybe it's not quite as bad as I'm thinking. We know Artemis managed to stop all but 5 of the initial ~18 laserheads the Sultan-class launched. And a Roland looks to have about the same active defense as a Homer-class BC (which the Atlas's defenses seem based on) plus the Roland can use both broadsides worth of CMs - so effectively double the Homer's CM throw weight. (Roland-class broadside: 10 CM; 9 PDLC. Homer-class broadside 9 CM; 9 PDLC)

Sure, if I had to pick a DD to fight an older BC from at SDM range I'd go with a Roland. But that's still a, shall we say, suboptimal way to fight one

I'm not saying that the BC could't hit the Roland and win in a sustained engagement, mind you but as you noticed, Hawkwing wasn't targeted by the "first surprise salvo", which meant that the Manticoran DD would have time to reply. Keep in mind the Dazzler and Dragon's Teeth which woul have been part of the initial stacked salvo would pretty much make sure that 20 or so Mark 16-G missiles would be on target, even at SDM range, followed by the Roland dropping limpeted pods for another salvo, followed by maybe another stacked salvo of 24 bird less ECM before the RHN missiles can even arrive. Then you have the Vipers interecepting any PN missiles from the battlecruiser at 3x the range, using all cm tubes in faster salvos, before the PDLC's even aim for the stragglers.

I seriously doubt that the PNS Kerebin would have survived those three salvo sets without an inertial compensator, bridge area, or fusion room going ker-blooey before the PN ship could get enough hits on the DD to put it out of action.

Lots of points I hadn't fully thought out. And the pearls look to be gold, I'll have to look at those more closely. Perhaps tincans might be near totally obsolete against any navy that relies on podnought and clac's. Although to address one point, for those defending the Sag-C's, those are heavy cruisers and weren't a ship I was thinking was useless.


Light cruisers may look to have a future, although perhaps more in the "show the flag" mission, and perhaps (merchy) escort roles than anything else.


Another reason I thought DD's and CL's to be obsolete. If most Manticoran ships are following the Grayson inspired (upsized energy weapons), the tincans and CL's are now using old-style Heavy Cruiser Grasers (and few to zero lasers, I think). Heavy Cruisers are now armed with Battlecruiser Grasers, and Battlecruisers are armed with SD Grasers.

Missiles weren't quite as upsized as the energy weapons, but there's also a notable increase in performance after you get to Heavy Cruisers and the Saganami-C Mk.16 MDM's, compared to the Mk.14 Single-Drive firing Saganami-B and smaller ships.