Build a Fleet!

Sigs wrote:
Ok, so you have a point. And since like you mentioned the SLN looked down on the SDF's they would hardly spy on them and anyone who states a SDF has capabilities better than the SLN would be laughed out of the room.

This could make the upcoming SLN attack on Beowulf one more nasty surprise for the SLN even if only a fraction of those "if's" are right.

Nah, it is too soon to count points. I have always been surprised by where Weber took the plot, so while all my "IF"s are possible, he is just going to laugh. I've been wrong so much, I just don't trust it unless he gets explicit.

Rob

Sigs wrote:Ok, so you have a point. And since like you mentioned the SLN looked down on the SDF's they would hardly spy on them and anyone who states a SDF has capabilities better than the SLN would be laughed out of the room.

This could make the upcoming SLN attack on Beowulf one more nasty surprise for the SLN even if only a fraction of those "if's" are right.

It's been speculated a few times over the years around here that the BSDF may have been actually installing upgrades over the years, but installing software limiters so the hardware acted similar to what the SLN would expect after installation. Then all it would take is a press of an oddly titled, yet innocuous button on yet another inappropriately-named setup page on the reserve Astrogator's 2nd assistant's control panel to change everything.

Suddenly, "The Do not Exceed" accel is 625Gs, The outer intercept zone of the counter missile's radarscope reads 3.75MKM, and the ECM now has "Fry" "Bake" and "Incinerate" buttons.

If such a button exists, the BSDF should invite Shannon aboard to ceremoniously press the button, along with the trademark "oops".

Theemile wrote:Manitenance is usually far less than 15%.

However, being an SDF, it is possible that some older ships may be Navy Reserves/Guard - i.e. Manned mostly by Weekend Warriors, with small caretaker crews between training missions. However those ships would usually be a separate formation (unlike the text's first fleet being the only fleet).

Actually EoH says that the Manticoran target is 15% of their Fleet strength in the yards for refit at any given time (in the context of them being behind on their upgrades and having uneven capabilities within squadrons). I read that as being in addition to ships not on station due to routine maintenance, emergency repairs, working up, resupply, in transit to or from their station, crew rest and retraining, etc. (Then post-Trevor's Star Manticore had to up that to 25%, and wished they could get away with 30%, because White Haven had run the ships so far into the red and held them back from upgrades, to keep his strength up for that key system)


It's all that that cumulatively adds up to the rule of thumb that you need between 2 and 3 hulls to keep 1 constantly deployed.


Now some of that won't apply to Beowulf, the transit times from their yards to their SDF stations are measured in hours so no significant forces tied up in transit. And some of that stuff could easily be deferred or rushed with a heads up that a confrontation was imminent.

But it would still be amazing if 100% of their SDs were worked up and operational at the same time. Not impossible, but pretty amazing.

Sigs wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:That's kind of the point. Superdreadnoughts are the Battleships of the future. (BB starships are the ironclads of the future.) The Havenite wars were "the height of their powers."

So the GA is going to start building BC's and below because SD's are obsolete now?

The SLN has already made that decision and the GA may well downsize the expensive and manpower intensive SDs for BCL sized Battle Cruisers and smaller.

After all, How many battleships has anyone built since 1945? Carriers, Yes. Subs (of multiple types,) yes. Battleships, no.

Sigs wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:They are not going to completely disappear from the Honorverse immediately, but we have texev that smaller ships and system defense missiles can stand up to large forces of SDs (at least SLN SDs )

Yeah, massive numbers of stationary defences and light combatants can stand up against technologically equal but the cost will be prohibitive, you will need a LOT of stationary weapons and even more light combatants.

How many missiles can be built in thirty years? How many Spider-LACs? Note: I've made the point several times that the defenses are NOT all stationary. A significant portion are mobile, extremely stealthy, and grossly over-gunned.

I thought we were told that Beowulf was concerned about Haven attempting to take the Sigma Draconis terminus in the Haven-Manticore war and built up their SDF and the terminus defenses to guard against that. That was NOT just from a PRH fleet showing up to take the SD end, but included the possibility that the Peeps might 1st take Manticore and then seize the Beowulf end of the junction.

So, what do you need to protect the terminus? Well, one thing was the equivelent of forts or perminantly stationed warships. The forts are best bet to keep someone from comming through the wormhole. The forts do have substatinal capasity to fight off an attack from normal space if for nothing more than being able to use the equivelent of system-defence missiles (range is key) along with the then standard ship-killers. They also have somewhat better protection against missiles.

You also are going to need to protect you home system/planet and that is mostly by hyper-capable warships and a lot of mines/pods. Look at who you anticipate is likely to attack you and then build against that threat. At the present time (post Fillerta and post Oyster Bay) you are looking at a very strange mix. SLN is the largest force, the Allignment is going to be the hardest to actualy defend against until there is some what to counter what we know as the Spider Drive- both ships and things like the Graser Torps.

So, Beowulf needs both SD's and lots of flexible defence in the range of the sytem Manticore is helping them with plus LAC anti missile and anti ship defence. Then there are the DD through BC level ships to bolster the early warning systems, investigate sensor hits and generaly act at the escort/local defence mobile weapons platforms that they can be.

We don't actually know what the 36 SD's of the BSDF that are /have been shown being deployed around and near Beowulf are capable of. It is just possible that they are both the latest Beowulf/Manticore hybrid designs with even Manticore Lite systems and weapons and retro-fitted late model BSDF SDs with Manticore or Manticore Lite tech added. Or they could include a fair number of full-up Manticore level SDs. We were shown that The SEM fleet providing cover against the SLN attempt to transit the SD terminus by force stayed cloaked until it was both obvious the the SLN fleet was going to force the issue and that they would not have revealed themselves if the SLN had backed down. Sure, the SLN admiral decided that she couldn't fight the combined weight of BSDF SDs and the SEM SDs (they did have some expectation that the SEM ships were probably going to be able to at least brutalize her own force and it would be a mission-kill because at that point the Manticore Junction forts were going to have been ready for the any of the SLN ships that did make it to forcing the entry to the terminus.
But what if the BSDF SDs were capable of killing a large percentage of the SLN ships on their own? The while idea of having the SEM ships uncloak was to convince that SLN admiral that she COULD NOT WIN AND WOULD TAKE MASSIVE LOSSES AND CASULATIES if she engaged at all, what about the usefulness of preserving the stratigic value of the actual capabilites of the BSDF force along with not having open warfare between Beowulf and SLN start at this point. That would let Beowulf continue to build up the system's defenses while letting Manticore keep it's warships (that were not cloaked) out of system in the direction of the terminus and so maintain the fig leaf that they were not applying pressure on Beowulf to leave the SL.
It is possible that the "BSDF"'s actual capabilities could alread have been capable of handling the SLN force that was sent to support of Fillerta and is just getting stronger.

There is also the question of just how many hyper-capable warships of all classes below the Wall Beowulf has and what their capabilites are in relation to SLN and Manticore. Beowulf appears to have a substantial merchant marine in it's own right and -since the SLN/BF isn't particularly well know as an anti-piracy force and Beowulf seems to understand it's own need to do shipping protection- they may have a relative lot of below-the-wall ships that would be a surprise to BF should it come back.

Just wondering

What Haven really needed, as they slowly lost the war to Manticoran alliance, was to provoke the SL into going to war with Haven. What could possibly go wrong?

Weird Harold wrote:

Sigs wrote:So the GA is going to start building BC's and below because SD's are obsolete now?

The SLN has already made that decision and the GA may well downsize the expensive and manpower intensive SDs for BCL sized Battle Cruisers and smaller.

After all, How many battleships has anyone built since 1945? Carriers, Yes. Subs (of multiple types,) yes. Battleships, no.

People stopped building battleships because for most things carriers were more flexible, longer ranged, and could counter battleships. (IOW a carrier has a good chance of crippling or sinking a battleship of the same tech level, while a battleship would need extraordinary circumstances or luck to get into range to attempt the same to a carrier)

The same isn't true for SD(P)s. For the same tech level a BC(P) is not more flexible, has the same or lesser weapons range, has
far less capable fire control (too small to mount Keyhole IIs for Apollo-FTL fire control), has far less survivability in the face of heavy missile fire. Being a bit cheaper to build and operated, and having marginally better acceleration, are about the extent of its advantages.

I don't think anybody is arguing to hang onto legacy pre-MDM SDs; but building BC(P)s or BC(L)s as your heaviest combatants just because of a (likely temporary) tech advantage is a false economy. If they run into equal tonnage of tech equivalent SD(P)s they're going to get their clocks cleaned, but even against the kind of system defenses that you're arguing for BC(P)s are significantly less survivable that SD(P)s.
If just seems a false economy to build them.

And it doesn't make sense to any build new ships for theo goal of countering the SLN's obsolete SDs. Ships already in service are more than enough to destroy all the legacy SDs the SLN has left -- likely with just the missiles already in their magazines. Build new ships for longer term threats; like whatever new SD/SD(P) design comes out of the League or its successor states.



Going back to your BB vs Carrier arguments, there also a reason the USN isn't building smaller, cheaper, carriers. Its because in makes them less flexible, less capable, and less survivable. A 20% smaller ship can carry less than 80% the planes and has less than 80% the combat endurance while still costing more than 80% as much as the current CVNs. Sometime big and expensive is a better bargain that smaller and a bit cheaper.

Weird Harold wrote:The SLN has already made that decision and the GA may well downsize the expensive and manpower intensive SDs for BCL sized Battle Cruisers and smaller.

After all, How many battleships has anyone built since 1945? Carriers, Yes. Subs (of multiple types,) yes. Battleships, no.

Well, that depends on how you define "battleship" i guess.
And of course, the French Jean Bart wasn´t completed until 1952 despite being started in 1936. It wasn´t scrapped though, but rather completed post WWII.

The British similarly finished the Vanguard 1946 instead of scrapping it.

The USSR started building the Stalingrad class in 1951, cancelled after their primary supporter Stalin died in 1953 with 2 hulls started. Sometimes called battlecruisers, they´re too big to be legal as battleships under the pre-WWII London treaty, where 35kt was the set limit for battleship size.


However, the most relevant design is probably the Soviet Kirov-class. As it is often considered the "next generation" for battleships.
A bit light for a BB at 28kt, and very little armour it is commonly listed as a battlecruiser, but some disagree as it is "too big" to be a cruiser of any sorts.
Similar to how the Alaska class was often considered "battleship light" about as much as "cruiser superlarge" or similar, and the Alaska´s are slightly heavier but also slightly smaller(because they have more armour).

I wont say the Kirov IS a BB, but i will say there´s some decent and valid argument for saying that it is.
Also, UK, France, USA and USSR(and Chile) maintained BBs after WWII. Though the French and Soviet ones were primarily used as school ships.

There was also the Sovetsku Soyuz class, started before WWII, put on indefinite hiatus and finally scrapped after WWII, some sources claim they were close to being resumed instead, and with tonnage greater than all previous BBs except the Japanese Yamato class(but guns like on a US Iowa class), well they were definitely and without any doubt BBs.

So, the world isn´t quite as clearcut as sometimes said.
Most importantly perhaps is that it is not that BBs are considered useless in a modern war, it is that they are considered not useful enough compared to their costs.
At least as long as you do not say that BBs are strictly big guns and superheavy armour.

Weird Harold wrote:

The SLN has already made that decision and the GA may well downsize the expensive and manpower intensive SDs for BCL sized Battle Cruisers and smaller. [/quote]

You make it sound like the SLN actually had a choice... if they wanted to continue operating they had to switch to something that has at least a minuscule chance of survival in combat and that is the BC because it is their unit that has the most chance to score a hit and run away. As for the GA, what gives you the impression that they are switching to BC(P) or BC(L)’s? They are Moving SD(P) production to Bolthole so they wont likely be abandoning or even slowing down construction even though with the Manticore, Grayson and Haven fleet they have somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000+ SD(P)’s in commission, awaiting commission or finishing construction, they want more to ensure they have the forces to meet any threat.

Weird Harold wrote:After all, How many battleships has anyone built since 1945? Carriers, Yes. Subs (of multiple types,) yes. Battleships, no.

Because Carriers replaced Battleships thereby rendering Battleships to secondary roles that could very well be done by smaller units with less crew and cheaper to maintain. BC(P)’s will not be facing off with SD(P)’s unless they (1) Have overwhelming numerical advantage (2) they have overwhelming firepower advantage through pods or (3) they have no option. So the League vs Manticore war and the GA vs MA war will be fought with SD’s amongst other ships. You might have your invisible LAC’s but the GA is already working on finding out how the MA propulsion systems work and how to find them in space, so your LAC’s might not be invisible for long but more than that, even if you achieve surprise you better knock out the enemy fleet in one shot otherwise your LAC’s will take a massive beating and the enemy will not go in blindly again.

Weird Harold wrote:
How many missiles can be built in thirty years? How many Spider-LACs? Note: I've made the point several times that the defenses are NOT all stationary. A significant portion are mobile, extremely stealthy, and grossly over-gunned.

Your point about the LAC’s is that they are stealthy and mobile, but they are essentially a one shot weapon once you shoot I will destroy them, I may lose alot of ship and be forced to retreat but next time, I will arrive in system with my entire force of CLAC’s and Katana’s backing up my SD’s, I will easily swat aside your LAC’s, destroy any and all waves of missiles because I will bring 380 CLAC’s full of Katana’s or Katana’s 2.0 and in the next system I will know what to expect and what to look for.


BTW, you can build alot of missiles and Spider-LAC’s in 30 years, but at the end of the day would you spend more fortifying each system with weapons that may not be able to reinforce any other threatened system than just building a bunch of SD’s that can be deployed where needed?

Having even 10,000 Spider-LAC’s in each system is ineffective weapon because you might get surprise in the first system, but the second and third your enemy will expect them and workout strategies to counter them. Sort of like what Haven did when Manticore came out with the LAC’s and CLAC’s, they had only rumors but they still worked out strategies to counter the threat. What do you think happens when I take my losses, go back to my home system and reassess the situation knowing full well you can do nothing more than harass my shipping because 90%+ of your firepower cannot leave your systems?

Sigs wrote:What do you think happens when I take my losses, go back to my home system and reassess the situation knowing full well you can do nothing more than harass my shipping because 90%+ of your firepower cannot leave your systems?

1) I'm not arming up with BC(p)s, I'm arming up with BCL(p)s -- what some forumites have suggested will be the follow-on to the RMN's 1920s vintage Agamemnon class. Big enough to be fully Apollo analog capable -- maybe big enough to be BB(p)s or DN(p)s by weight.

2) If one system makes you retreat, the other 19 systems follow you home before you can rest and refit to try again. Along with whatever mutual defense partners I may have.

3) If you attack another system -- mine or anyone else's -- I would suggest you look over your shoulder for that Grand Alliance that is so worried about revanchists and conquistadors. The may or may not be there, but as of 1922 or so they're grand strategy is to prevent any threats from growing out of the former SL.