Upcoming designs: regarding the Apollo ACM...

SharkHunter wrote:--snipping--

Weird Harold wrote:Your surmise is wrong. The ACM, among other things, is necessary to combine eight attack missiles into one fire-control link. Without the ACM, one fire-control link is required for each missile, unless the reduced control of rotating control links is acceptable....

I think I'm just in an argumentative mode on this one. If that were true, then an SD(P) could only control as many missiles as an SD, which makes the battle of Elric [where two Medusa(s) were handling the launch and fire control enough to account for missiles the something like 8 SD(s)] impossible, unless you're saying that the SD(p)s have many multiples more in terms of control links.

The reason I think every missile in one pod synchs to the same signal is that we've never read about a pod being aimed at more than one target, which would be possible if the missiles were individually controlled. Contrast that with the simplicity of:

"Every missile in a pod is programmed to receive "your target downrange is "ship x".... Latest ECM pattern is y", Pen-Aid timing Z", you don't need multiple signals for the missiles themselves to know what to do. Each individua missile itself will follow whatever programming bit applies to it's payload.

What you get with the ACM is an AI that is multipliers more capable and powerful even independently of ship control than that in the Mark 23's, and a 64x faster link, so you can provide up to the last second updates for target, ECM, and penetration profiles. It also lets them stay clumped to make the ECM/Penaid and warhead hit likelihood much higher than eight missiles each trying to acquire the same target blindly.

How is that less sensical than individual control?

Jonathan_S wrote:Your logic makes sense for smarter missiles.

...(Actually a the exception that proves the rule, Theisman basically pulled your trick in Ashes of Victory. He had the forts in Barnett copy the data from one pod's missiles to 6 other pods, to multiply his offensive fire control; but it says at a reduction of accuracy. That implies that normally they do hand-hold each launch, and don't just copy data broadly)
...
Note that even when using towed pods the pre-pod designs were limited in the number of missiles they could control (and the limit was way less than 10x the number of broadside tubes; as you might expect under your idea). That seems further evidence that pods don't multiply fire-control. (Even when, as you say, you seem to point multiple entire pods at single targets -- not split fire from one pod against multiple targets)

SharkHunter wrote:Still arguing. Then how did 8 battlecruisers launch and control that many missiles in Short Victorious War, or 5 converted SD's plus other Grayson ships fire and control fourteen hundred missiles in Flag in Exile. HMMC Wayfarer nailed the Kerebin with something like 250 attack missiles from pods in a stacked salvo in HoE, and it's a converted merchie with a pre-SD bridge/deck. By your logic, those ships should have only been able to control maybe 1/5 of what were launched by those various RMN ships, yes or no?

SharkHunter wrote:Bolding mine, yep, I'm still arguing. The PN was copying pod to pod, not missile to missile.

How did 8 battlecruisers plus screen launch and control that many missiles (700 ish?) in the first launch Short Victorious War, or 5 converted haven SD's plus other Grayson ships fire and control fourteen hundred -ish missiles in Flag in Exile. HMMC Wayfarer nailed the Kerebin with something like 250 attack missiles from pods in a stacked salvo in HoE, and that's a converted merchie with a pre-SD bridge/deck. By your logic, those ships should have only been able to control maybe 1/5 to 1/3 of what were launched by those various RMN related ships, yes or no?

thinkstoomuch wrote:

SharkHunter wrote:Still arguing. Then how did 8 battlecruisers launch and control that many missiles in Short Victorious War, or 5 converted SD's plus other Grayson ships fire and control fourteen hundred missiles in Flag in Exile. HMMC Wayfarer nailed the Kerebin with something like 250 attack missiles from pods in a stacked salvo in HoE, and it's a converted merchie with a pre-SD bridge/deck. By your logic, those ships should have only been able to control maybe 1/5 of what were launched by those various RMN ships, yes or no?

They didn't guide them. Notice anything special about the 2 instances you are citing.

Oh yeah they had no defenses up and running. Second related point the launching ships had been tracking the targets for oh ... hours.

Both factors makes it a different kettle of fish.

Though I will disagree to a certain extent for RMN designs. The SDs at the BoMa were controlling 100 missiles each. So in 1921 Manticore was guiding more like 2.5+ times their broadside launchers.

Now if you wanted to provide better examples there would be Nightgale. Or for a really good explanation of the RFCs fire control thing read ToF Chapter 58.



Have fun,
T2M

SFTS:Ch12 wrote:"Once we'd taken up ways to deal with that particular objection," Halstead went on, "it became evident that our only choices were to either strip the drive stage out of the birds, as we'd originally planned, or else to add a dedicated missile. One whose sole function would be to provide the FTL link between the firing ship and the attack birds. There were some potential drawbacks to that, but it allowed us not only to retain the full range of the MDM, but actually required very few modifications to the existing Mark 23. And, somewhat to the surprise of several members of our team, using a dedicated control missile actually increased tactical flexibility enormously. It let us put in a significantly more capable—and longer-ranged—transciever, and we were also able to fit in a much more capable data processing and AI node. The Mark 23s are slaved to the control bird—the real 'Apollo' missile—using their standard light-speed systems, reconfigured for maximum bandwidth rather than maximum sensitivity, and the Apollo's internal AI manages its slaved attack birds while simultaneously collecting and analyzing the data from all of their on-board sensors. It transmits the consolidated output from all of its slaved missiles to the firing vessel, which gives the ship's tactical department a real-time, close-up and personal view of the tactical environment.

"It works the same way on the command side, as well. The firing vessel tells the Apollo what to do, based on the sensor data coming in from it, and the on-board AI decides how to tell its Mark 23s how to do it. That's the real reason our effective bandwidth's gone up so significantly; we're not trying to individually micromanage hundreds or even thousands of missiles. Instead, we're relying on a dispersed network of control nodes, each of which is far more capable of thinking for itself than any previous missile has been. In fact, if we lose the FTL link for any reason, the Apollo drops into autonomous mode, based on the prelaunch attack profiles loaded to it and the most recent commands it's received. It's actually capable of generating entirely new targeting and penetration commands on its own. They're not going to be as good as the ones a waller's tac department could generate for it if the link were still up, but we're estimating something like a forty-two percent increase in terminal performance at extreme range as compared to any previous missile or, for that matter, our own Mark 23s with purely sub-light telemetry links, even if the Apollo bird is operating entirely on its own."

Storm from the Shadows wrote:...That's the real reason our effective bandwidth's gone up so significantly; we're not trying to individually micromanage hundreds or even thousands of missiles. Instead, we're relying on a dispersed network of control nodes, each of which is far more capable of thinking for itself.

StealthSeeker wrote:I would point out a couple of things. The Mk16 can't keep up in speed or distance with the Mk23-e control missile. Second, the Mk23 missiles that are launched as part of a "pod group" have had their control links modified to work with just the control missile, high bandwidth vs sensitivity. (so says the snip-et)

So standard ship launched Mk16's and standard ship launched Mk23's won't link to the Mk23-e anyway. Vice versa,... pod launched Mk23's that link to Mk23-e control missiles can't communicate with standard ship control links.

Now Mycroft may have both FTL and light speed control links and it could therefore control missiles it launched of either variety.