Control Missile for shipboard launched missiles

We all know by now how much flexibility Apollo control missiles gives the RMN. We also know that the chances the GA is going to build pod-based Destroyers and Cruisers is nil or close to that. That means lighter units will only have this flexibility in the early stages of a battle when they still have a supply of Apollo pods.

What I am thinking about is this, is it possible to modify Dazzlers/Dragon's Teeth to act as a control missile for shipboard launched missiles to free up control links so Destroyers/Cruisers can control far more missiles than normal. If the capability cannot be shoehorned into the existing ECM missiles, having a dedicated control missile using up 1 control link while bossing 8-10 other missiles would be a huge increase in firepower for small combatants like DD, CLs and CAs. Even the Nike would benefit a lot from it. Imagine a Nike class BC launching 10 stacks of 50 missiles as the opening salvo using only 50 control links.

Rakhmamort wrote:We all know by now how much flexibility Apollo control missiles gives the RMN. We also know that the chances the GA is going to build pod-based Destroyers and Cruisers is nil or close to that. That means lighter units will only have this flexibility in the early stages of a battle when they still have a supply of Apollo pods.

What I am thinking about is this, is it possible to modify Dazzlers/Dragon's Teeth to act as a control missile for shipboard launched missiles to free up control links so Destroyers/Cruisers can control far more missiles than normal. If the capability cannot be shoehorned into the existing ECM missiles, having a dedicated control missile using up 1 control link while bossing 8-10 other missiles would be a huge increase in firepower for small combatants like DD, CLs and CAs. Even the Nike would benefit a lot from it. Imagine a Nike class BC launching 10 stacks of 50 missiles as the opening salvo using only 50 control links.

David has already indicated that the RMN is or will be working on extending Apollo-like FTL control to DDMs for cruisers. He has not given any hints on how this would be accomplished, but something like this is in the works.

It is not nearly as useful to get Apollo control on SDMs, so I doubt that will ever happen. In fact, the RMN is likely to move away from SDMs entirely.

Given that Apollo required an extra-large missile for control, I doubt that they will be able to fit it into existing ECM missiles. Remember that Dazzler and Dragon's Teeth is not a separate type of missile--it is merely a standard missile with the warhead replaced by an ECM module. The text indicates that ECM modules and warheads can be swapped in and out of missiles in the magazines. Pods, of course, don't have the equipment to swap missile heads around; the missile types in a pod are determined when the pod is filled.

SWM wrote:Given that Apollo required an extra-large missile for control, I doubt that they will be able to fit it into existing ECM missiles. Remember that Dazzler and Dragon's Teeth is not a separate type of missile--it is merely a standard missile with the warhead replaced by an ECM module. The text indicates that ECM modules and warheads can be swapped in and out of missiles in the magazines. Pods, of course, don't have the equipment to swap missile heads around; the missile types in a pod are determined when the pod is filled.

I know the Apollo is extra large due to the fact that it has to have a grav pulse generator in it. What I am suggesting is like adding a grav pulse receiver only, an AI module and improved transmitters so it can send the targeting/fire control commands from the ship to the other missiles. I'm hoping the Control module wont be a lot larger than the warhead/ECM module that it will need a dedicated missile tube to fire out of.

It won't be as versatile as an all up Apollo control missile since it cannot send back info to the ship via FTL. I'm kind of thinking the ship can use data from the FTL recon drones for that.

SWM wrote:

Rakhmamort wrote:We all know by now how much flexibility Apollo control missiles gives the RMN. We also know that the chances the GA is going to build pod-based Destroyers and Cruisers is nil or close to that. That means lighter units will only have this flexibility in the early stages of a battle when they still have a supply of Apollo pods.

What I am thinking about is this, is it possible to modify Dazzlers/Dragon's Teeth to act as a control missile for shipboard launched missiles to free up control links so Destroyers/Cruisers can control far more missiles than normal. If the capability cannot be shoehorned into the existing ECM missiles, having a dedicated control missile using up 1 control link while bossing 8-10 other missiles would be a huge increase in firepower for small combatants like DD, CLs and CAs. Even the Nike would benefit a lot from it. Imagine a Nike class BC launching 10 stacks of 50 missiles as the opening salvo using only 50 control links.

David has already indicated that the RMN is or will be working on extending Apollo-like FTL control to DDMs for cruisers. He has not given any hints on how this would be accomplished, but something like this is in the works.

It is not nearly as useful to get Apollo control on SDMs, so I doubt that will ever happen. In fact, the RMN is likely to move away from SDMs entirely.

Given that Apollo required an extra-large missile for control, I doubt that they will be able to fit it into existing ECM missiles. Remember that Dazzler and Dragon's Teeth is not a separate type of missile--it is merely a standard missile with the warhead replaced by an ECM module. The text indicates that ECM modules and warheads can be swapped in and out of missiles in the magazines. Pods, of course, don't have the equipment to swap missile heads around; the missile types in a pod are determined when the pod is filled.

I don't think he's talking about a FTL component to his control missile. Basically, replacing the Dazzler/Dragon payload with a tactical computer and communications repeater so it can control a cluster of missiles.

Thus allowing what the RMN's Sag-Cs did at Spindle to be replicated without wasting full-fat Apollo missiles on units not equipped with KH2.

munroburton wrote:I don't think he's talking about a FTL component to his control missile. Basically, replacing the Dazzler/Dragon payload with a tactical computer and communications repeater so it can control a cluster of missiles.

Thus allowing what the RMN's Sag-Cs did at Spindle to be replicated without wasting full-fat Apollo missiles on units not equipped with KH2.

Something like that. It is highly unlikely that Keyhole II would be deployed on vessels smaller than BCs at this point in time so it would not be logical to develop an all up Apollo control missile for cruisers and destroyers. As I mentioned, they can use the FTL recon drones to get data updates for fire control.

I do not know how much bandwidth recon drones have and how effective they can be as fire control relays but if they are capable of sending real-time video, it might be possible to use them as fire control relays too.

Rakhmamort wrote:We all know by now how much flexibility Apollo control missiles gives the RMN. We also know that the chances the GA is going to build pod-based Destroyers and Cruisers is nil or close to that. That means lighter units will only have this flexibility in the early stages of a battle when they still have a supply of Apollo pods.

What I am thinking about is this, is it possible to modify Dazzlers/Dragon's Teeth to act as a control missile for shipboard launched missiles to free up control links so Destroyers/Cruisers can control far more missiles than normal. If the capability cannot be shoehorned into the existing ECM missiles, having a dedicated control missile using up 1 control link while bossing 8-10 other missiles would be a huge increase in firepower for small combatants like DD, CLs and CAs. Even the Nike would benefit a lot from it. Imagine a Nike class BC launching 10 stacks of 50 missiles as the opening salvo using only 50 control links.

Why can't Ghostrider or Hermes platforms talk to missiles? They can't match the acceleration of course, but if a series were prepositioned downrange along the missiles' path....

Rakhmamort wrote:

munroburton wrote:I don't think he's talking about a FTL component to his control missile. Basically, replacing the Dazzler/Dragon payload with a tactical computer and communications repeater so it can control a cluster of missiles.

Thus allowing what the RMN's Sag-Cs did at Spindle to be replicated without wasting full-fat Apollo missiles on units not equipped with KH2.

Something like that. It is highly unlikely that Keyhole II would be deployed on vessels smaller than BCs at this point in time so it would not be logical to develop an all up Apollo control missile for cruisers and destroyers. As I mentioned, they can use the FTL recon drones to get data updates for fire control.

I do not know how much bandwidth recon drones have and how effective they can be as fire control relays but if they are capable of sending real-time video, it might be possible to use them as fire control relays too.

But David has already suggested that there will be some form of Keyhole-lite developed for cruisers, to go along with FTL control of DDMs.

Without FTL control, there is not much point in giving cruiser missiles anything like Apollo. Cruisers can already control all the missiles they fire. They don't need to be clustered with control missiles. The only point in giving something like Apollo to DDMs is to increase their control at extreme range, which requires FTL.

SWM wrote:But David has already suggested that there will be some form of Keyhole-lite developed for cruisers, to go along with FTL control of DDMs.

That one I didn't know about. But I would have to guess, that would mean the ships themselves have to be re-tooled and given multiple grav generators for control links. The control missile option won't need any ship modifications.

Without FTL control, there is not much point in giving cruiser missiles anything like Apollo. Cruisers can already control all the missiles they fire. They don't need to be clustered with control missiles. The only point in giving something like Apollo to DDMs is to increase their control at extreme range, which requires FTL.

Actually, there is. It's like the rotating control links the RHN used to increase their missile salvo size. This is a more elegant modification of the same tactic. Since I am expecting RMN ships to be pounced upon by numerically superior SLN ships, it would help a lot to have the capability of throwing salvos whose size is the same as if they are launching from apollo missile pods. There is a need to swamp the enemy's defenses and if the light combatants are out of pods, the chances of being able to do that is very much lower.

Besides, imagine the reaction of the enemy commander who incorporated into his plan that the first salvo will take out a lot of his ships but the follow on salvo would only be a fraction of the initial 'ouchie' they're going receive. He'll be thinking, I'll lose a third of my ships the first salvo but the remaining 2/3 will be enough to survive and get into energy range. But once he sees a second salvo the same size as the first, his plan is toast.

Of course, once the Keyhole-lite upgrade is deployed, the control missile upgrade won't be needed anymore.

Bill Woods wrote:Why can't Ghostrider or Hermes platforms talk to missiles? They can't match the acceleration of course, but if a series were prepositioned downrange along the missiles' path....

These are for light combatants. They are supposed to be the screening elements/scouts. It's a given that they have drones out.

Rakhmamort wrote:Actually, there is. It's like the rotating control links the RHN used to increase their missile salvo size. This is a more elegant modification of the same tactic. Since I am expecting RMN ships to be pounced upon by numerically superior SLN ships, it would help a lot to have the capability of throwing salvos whose size is the same as if they are launching from apollo missile pods. There is a need to swamp the enemy's defenses and if the light combatants are out of pods, the chances of being able to do that is very much lower.

Besides, imagine the reaction of the enemy commander who incorporated into his plan that the first salvo will take out a lot of his ships but the follow on salvo would only be a fraction of the initial 'ouchie' they're going receive. He'll be thinking, I'll lose a third of my ships the first salvo but the remaining 2/3 will be enough to survive and get into energy range. But once he sees a second salvo the same size as the first, his plan is toast.

Of course, once the Keyhole-lite upgrade is deployed, the control missile upgrade won't be needed anymore.

You mean, like Vice Admiral Dubroskaya at Saltash? Four 900,000-ton battlecruisers destroyed at extreme range by five 180,000-ton destroyers using nothing more than their internal magazines, launchers and current control links. With one salvo each, to boot.

Or New Tuscany, where 6 BCs and 8 CAs could've wiped out 17 Solarian BCs but settled for a flagship kill?

The thing is, RMN ships already have the control links they need for several salvos from all tubes, plus a healthy amount of redundancy in case they have pods along or battle damage knocks a few out, without also taking launchers out.

A control missile might have been more useful in the early Havenite war, used in pods. In fact, I vaguely recall something about Thomas Theisman allocating one control link to each missile pod controlled by his forts in Barnett.