Pod Deployment Rate

thinkstoomuch wrote:Specifically states Intictus without Keyhole is 200-300 control channels. One would assume a Medusa was around 200.

I have in the past tried to pin this number down and failed.

It's contradictory and David is really not interested in those details and certainly not interested in giving us more information on areas of the books where things tend to get sloppy. It's important to the plot, but I don't think he wants to deal with more detailed questions about why someone didn't do something in a way that would work better.

Is it possible that the next gen of SD(P)s out of Bolthole will feature some sort of advanced mechanism of deploying pods in the spirit of the offbore missile launching capability?

I guess that would make the nomenclature design the SD(PO). Which would be an appropriate design offering from Bolthole -- pods that can bolt from the belly of the ship at enormous rates of deployment.

shrugs

cthia wrote:Is it possible that the next gen of SD(P)s out of Bolthole will feature some sort of advanced mechanism of deploying pods in the spirit of the offbore missile launching capability?

I've seen some discussion of pods being deployed from around the hammerhead instead of through it. The idea seems more to put some separation between the pod bay doors rather than increasing rate of fire. (Increasing rate of fire when shooting yourself dry is already a problem doesn't seem likely.)

What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

Weird Harold wrote:What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

I'd argue that's not really a next generation of SD(P), when it's the same design, with a few minor tweaks (Keyhole II and such)

Next generation has to include clear-cut advantages and design differences, for example the differences between the Saganami-A/B models and the Saganami-C's. Even the books say those should have been a clear nomenclature change, but it was slipped through the Janacek Admiralty as a modification rather than a clear change.

Haven designs might be faster off to making their second-generation SD(P)'s, but they could only really design their new SD(P) to be pretty close to what Invictii are. Both sides had to digest the new realities of podnought combat, and Manticore is ahead of the game. Manticore is already fielding gen-two in the form of the Invictii, and already into designing the gen-three podnoughts. These new designs could possibly a data survivor from the Vulcan fire drill & survival?


Although, taking my own devil's advocate, Haven ships with Manticoran fire control, and Beowulf-built (but Manticoran designed) missiles. One could probably argue that's the very definition of new generation design, regardless of the pre-existing conditions of each independent component.


shrugs, I lean towards combination ships as not being next-generation, but it makes for a great debate either way.

Weird Harold wrote:

cthia wrote:Is it possible that the next gen of SD(P)s out of Bolthole will feature some sort of advanced mechanism of deploying pods in the spirit of the offbore missile launching capability?

I've seen some discussion of pods being deployed from around the hammerhead instead of through it. The idea seems more to put some separation between the pod bay doors rather than increasing rate of fire. (Increasing rate of fire when shooting yourself dry is already a problem doesn't seem likely.)

What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

Shooting yourself dry may be your least concern in the current threat environment's missile throw weight. Sometimes you may actually want to shoot yourself dry if you're the lead element facing an overwhelming force. Like D'Orville's Home Fleet. What would be significantly different is the ability to shoot yourself dry extremely quickly where overwhelming an enemy's defenses may be possible. And where consideration of an enemies shorter range and lower accel is a tactical offensive.

However, my main consideration at the time was to eliminate a need, like Honor's, to predeploy pods... like she did before entering the Battle of Manticore.

Somtaaw wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

I'd argue that's not really a next generation of SD(P), when it's the same design, with a few minor tweaks (Keyhole II and such)

Next generation has to include clear-cut advantages and design differences, for example the differences between the Saganami-A/B models and the Saganami-C's. Even the books say those should have been a clear nomenclature change, but it was slipped through the Janacek Admiralty as a modification rather than a clear change.

Haven designs might be faster off to making their second-generation SD(P)'s, but they could only really design their new SD(P) to be pretty close to what Invictii are. Both sides had to digest the new realities of podnought combat, and Manticore is ahead of the game. Manticore is already fielding gen-two in the form of the Invictii, and already into designing the gen-three podnoughts. These new designs could possibly a data survivor from the Vulcan fire drill & survival?


Although, taking my own devil's advocate, Haven ships with Manticoran fire control, and Beowulf-built (but Manticoran designed) missiles. One could probably argue that's the very definition of new generation design, regardless of the pre-existing conditions of each independent component.


shrugs, I lean towards combination ships as not being next-generation, but it makes for a great debate either way.

Or at least a new generation of collaboration.

Weird Harold wrote:

cthia wrote:Is it possible that the next gen of SD(P)s out of Bolthole will feature some sort of advanced mechanism of deploying pods in the spirit of the offbore missile launching capability?

I've seen some discussion of pods being deployed from around the hammerhead instead of through it. The idea seems more to put some separation between the pod bay doors rather than increasing rate of fire. (Increasing rate of fire when shooting yourself dry is already a problem doesn't seem likely.)

What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

cthia wrote:Shooting yourself dry may be your least concern in the current threat environment's missile throw weight. Sometimes you may actually want to shoot yourself dry if you're the lead element facing an overwhelming force. Like D'Orville's Home Fleet. What would be significantly different is the ability to shoot yourself dry extremely quickly where overwhelming an enemy's defenses may be possible. And where consideration of an enemies shorter range and lower accel is a tactical offensive.

cthia wrote:However, my main consideration at the time was to eliminate a need, like Honor's, to predeploy pods... like she did before entering the Battle of Manticore.

Akin to opting for the more frugal -- yet just as effective -- semi-automatic, rather than fully automatic setting on an assault rifle, when less is more but when less delivered even more quickly... is just as effective - if not more.

Weird Harold wrote:What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

Somtaaw wrote:I'd argue that's not really a next generation of SD(P), when it's the same design, with a few minor tweaks (Keyhole II and such)

Next generation has to include clear-cut advantages and design differences, for example the differences between the Saganami-A/B models and the Saganami-C's. Even the books say those should have been a clear nomenclature change, but it was slipped through the Janacek Admiralty as a modification rather than a clear change.

Haven designs might be faster off to making their second-generation SD(P)'s, but they could only really design their new SD(P) to be pretty close to what Invictii are. Both sides had to digest the new realities of podnought combat, and Manticore is ahead of the game. Manticore is already fielding gen-two in the form of the Invictii, and already into designing the gen-three podnoughts. These new designs could possibly a data survivor from the Vulcan fire drill & survival?


Although, taking my own devil's advocate, Haven ships with Manticoran fire control, and Beowulf-built (but Manticoran designed) missiles. One could probably argue that's the very definition of new generation design, regardless of the pre-existing conditions of each independent component.


shrugs, I lean towards combination ships as not being next-generation, but it makes for a great debate either way.

cthia wrote:Or at least a new generation of collaboration.

I would still call it a 2nd Generation design - The Invictus design went from no Keyholes, to KH1 with light speed control links to KH2 with FTL control links. All that happened inside the 2nd generation ships, so the overall design would still be a Gen 2 design. The Gen 3 would be a totally new design which took advantage of knowledge and lessons from the 2nd generation designs and applied them.

This is similar to modern fighter designs -the Late 70s, 80s and early 90s fighters were considered 4th generation jet fighters, while pretty much starting with the F-22 Raptor and fighters designed to counter it are considered Gen 5. Some recently introduced fighters are now considered gen 4.5 - usually these are Gen 4 designs which have been redesigned to give many of the features expected in a Gen 5 design or were designed at the tail end of gen 4 (Like the Eurofighter and Super Hornet) and have many of the features considered necessary for a gen 5, but not all.

I would expect a key part of Gen 3 would be another leap in Pod core density and automation, as we saw in the Medusa B spring style design, with small increases to defenses. This comes from the lessons of first war and early 2nd war where fleets would run down the other's ammo to destroy them.

Generation 4 will probably be a move away from the centralized Pod doors and an large increase in defenses and survivability - this is in light of lessons learned from latter 2nd war battles where the central core was breached, and KH2 fire proved so devastating.

Hi TheEmile,

The Medusa B that RFC described more than 11 years ago [in the pearls] is the 3rd generation design that was under construction when OB destroyed all of them.

This may enable RFC to go to a '4th generation' design for the Bolthole's since he's had those 11+ years to think of improvements, or a 2.5-3.5 generation capability until the collaborative effort can produce a true 4th generation SDP.

From the pearl, the Medusa B would have carried 2000+ pods, which as RFC states is enough to ruin a SLN admiral's day even if he thought he had an unusual and overwhelming advantage [100-150 to 1 etc]; since the Medusa B could throw 400 missiles per minute for 90 minutes apparently [ie 2700 pods plus 40 broadside tubes for 36000 missiles] but as others have pointed out RFC has been less specific over many details as the years have gone by.

Since then RFC has emphasized the importance of improving defenses, so I think the 4th generation SDP will probably still have only 2 Keyholes [60,000 tons @] though I've previously suggested 4, but would include considerably more counter missiles [further extended ranges is probably limited until FTL guidance becomes available] or better/stronger sidewalls besides the Lorelei ECM platforms etc.

Faster pod launch rates might be done through including lateral as well as secondary dorsal and ventral ports that eject the pods perpendicularly to the ship's axis not just behind, because the ship's tractors are then able to handle the higher launch rate.

RFC's past criticism of lunching missiles from the warship's top or bottom had more to due with the limits of the curved missile launch tubes.

This probably wouldn't be a problem for pods when the missile pod magazine extends almost to the bow.

L

Theemile wrote:

Weird Harold wrote:What little I've seen about the next generation of SD(P)s out of bolthole is that they're goind to be pretty much current Havenite designs with provision for Keyhole II built and installed by Beowulf. Any changes in pod deployments is probable not the next generation, but one or two generations further in the future.

Somtaaw wrote:I'd argue that's not really a next generation of SD(P), when it's the same design, with a few minor tweaks (Keyhole II and such)

Next generation has to include clear-cut advantages and design differences, for example the differences between the Saganami-A/B models and the Saganami-C's. Even the books say those should have been a clear nomenclature change, but it was slipped through the Janacek Admiralty as a modification rather than a clear change.

Haven designs might be faster off to making their second-generation SD(P)'s, but they could only really design their new SD(P) to be pretty close to what Invictii are. Both sides had to digest the new realities of podnought combat, and Manticore is ahead of the game. Manticore is already fielding gen-two in the form of the Invictii, and already into designing the gen-three podnoughts. These new designs could possibly a data survivor from the Vulcan fire drill & survival?


Although, taking my own devil's advocate, Haven ships with Manticoran fire control, and Beowulf-built (but Manticoran designed) missiles. One could probably argue that's the very definition of new generation design, regardless of the pre-existing conditions of each independent component.


shrugs, I lean towards combination ships as not being next-generation, but it makes for a great debate either way.

cthia wrote:Or at least a new generation of collaboration.

I would still call it a 2nd Generation design - The Invictus design went from no Keyholes, to KH1 with light speed control links to KH2 with FTL control links. All that happened inside the 2nd generation ships, so the overall design would still be a Gen 2 design. The Gen 3 would be a totally new design which took advantage of knowledge and lessons from the 2nd generation designs and applied them.

This is similar to modern fighter designs -the Late 70s, 80s and early 90s fighters were considered 4th generation jet fighters, while pretty much starting with the F-22 Raptor and fighters designed to counter it are considered Gen 5. Some recently introduced fighters are now considered gen 4.5 - usually these are Gen 4 designs which have been redesigned to give many of the features expected in a Gen 5 design or were designed at the tail end of gen 4 (Like the Eurofighter and Super Hornet) and have many of the features considered necessary for a gen 5, but not all.

I would expect a key part of Gen 3 would be another leap in Pod core density and automation, as we saw in the Medusa B spring style design, with small increases to defenses. This comes from the lessons of first war and early 2nd war where fleets would run down the other's ammo to destroy them.

Generation 4 will probably be a move away from the centralized Pod doors and an large increase in defenses and survivability - this is in light of lessons learned from latter 2nd war battles where the central core was breached, and KH2 fire proved so devastating.

I still think it would be a worthwhile design implementation to increase pod throw weight. The ability to quickly eject pods would greatly broaden tactical missile engagement options. Increasing pod throw weight (deployment rate) would erase the need to roll pods or predeploy like Honor had to do before entering BoMa.

IMO, SD(P)s without the ability to quickly deploy its inventory fail to fully exploit the attritive design. It's like increasing the magazine capacity of assault rifles, yet still shooting them one at a time. (No automatic setting.) You die with a full mag. Sure, a larger mag would last longer, if the enemy will allow it to matter. I think the design would be the next best thing in missile throw weight. The SD(PO).

I have a feeling the GA are going to need every advantage against the MAlign.

I brought this up before and dammit the WDB outta heed my preachings. Missile colliers outta be the most feared platforms around. If they were made to be emergency tactical platforms with offensive capabilities and equipped with this new generation technology of pod deployment, they could be turned into formidable weapon platforms -- emergency relief. Overnight, missile colliers could become more like cavalries. With the ability to flood the battlefield with missiles.

AND. If there's an accompanying new capability to "hand off" missiles in-flight along with this "offbore" pod ejection? Well, enter the newer math... an even newer age threat multiplier.

Again, you are not shooting yourself dry. You're just eliminating the need to waste precious tactical time, rolling. Engagement possibilities increase. However, should the need arise to shoot dry it's there. Why die with a belly full of missiles?

You have the same consideration of towed pods -- use 'em or lose 'em. What's the difference if you lose them in the belly of the ship while facing overwhelming odds?