Ideas for new ship classes an doctrines (Republican Tech)

I just had a few thoughts about if I was in Foraker's chair about a few things I might want to try. if for some reason David Webber decides to use anything from here for any purpose he is not liable to give me anything (though would be appreciated). I'm just doing this for fun

The Hawk class Frigate/Destroyer: simply put it is a manned keyhole platform. Armed only with point defense and a truly impressive fire control sweet for a ship this size it has 2 specialized roles. Firstly, it operates remotely similar to the Manticoran keyhole, assisting ships of the wall in missile control with interposed wedges. As anything this light is in a lot of danger, it has a boat bay with a pinnace so the crew can get out of the line of fire while the attached ship controls it remotely and uses its impressive computer support in a way similar to the AI in Apollo. Secondly, it operates in a forward targeting role for deployed missile pods. Meant to aim, launch and guide missile pods from previously placed clusters in a system defense role.

The Trebuchet Mobile Battle Station: A sprained system defense ship. 50% larger than a Republican SD this ship is designed to hold star systems against up to moderate attack. Standard doctrine is to drop off clusters of pods to be overseen by up to 2 Hawks. The Trebuchet is not supposed to engage directly. To aid in this the tops and bottoms of the ship have more LAC hangars than a standard Republican LAC carrier on the theory that LACs are not launched nor picked up when under fire anyway. The broadsides consist of a pure energy armament, and taking a page from the Grayson BC play book are vastly larger than one would expect given the size. If Grayson can put SD sized energy weapons on a BC, then imagine the range and power of weapons of something scaled up that much. This broadside is meant to primarily used if the Trebuchet is mousetrapped. A Trebuchet is not meant to stand in a wall of battle, but to free other ships to do so and beat off raids with only Hawk support. Of course the broadsides have enough fire control links and anti missile defenses for a modern ship of its size.

If anyone is interested in taking apart my ideas feel free to, but they sound neat to me.

The Hawk class Frigate/Destroyer: simply put it is a manned keyhole platform. Armed only with point defense and a truly impressive fire control sweet for a ship this size it has 2 specialized roles. Firstly, it operates remotely similar to the Manticoran keyhole, assisting ships of the wall in missile control with interposed wedges. As anything this light is in a lot of danger, it has a boat bay with a pinnace so the crew can get out of the line of fire while the attached ship controls it remotely and uses its impressive computer support in a way similar to the AI in Apollo. Secondly, it operates in a forward targeting role for deployed missile pods. Meant to aim, launch and guide missile pods from previously placed clusters in a system defense role.

I do not really see the benefit in this. If you are using them in the system defense role as you discussed below, then this would basically be a manned Moriarty or Mycroft node. It is additional cost for no useful additional gain.

The Trebuchet Mobile Battle Station: A sprained system defense ship. 50% larger than a Republican SD this ship is designed to hold star systems against up to moderate attack. Standard doctrine is to drop off clusters of pods to be overseen by up to 2 Hawks. The Trebuchet is not supposed to engage directly. To aid in this the tops and bottoms of the ship have more LAC hangars than a standard Republican LAC carrier on the theory that LACs are not launched nor picked up when under fire anyway. The broadsides consist of a pure energy armament, and taking a page from the Grayson BC play book are vastly larger than one would expect given the size. If Grayson can put SD sized energy weapons on a BC, then imagine the range and power of weapons of something scaled up that much. This broadside is meant to primarily used if the Trebuchet is mousetrapped. A Trebuchet is not meant to stand in a wall of battle, but to free other ships to do so and beat off raids with only Hawk support. Of course the broadsides have enough fire control links and anti missile defenses for a modern ship of its size.

This idea basically describes an Honorverse fortress. Fortresses are large, tough, and multimodal (in the sense that they can operate LACs, control pod launched missiles, etc).

That said, there are some substantial differences. While fortresses can mount impressive energy weapons, I do not see a reason to mount substantially larger and heavier weapons when missile combat has become the norm. runsforcelery goes over current fortress design here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2928&p=61949

Defender Class Superdreadnought!

The most starships in the Honorverse are construct for mutiple duties and have supplies for month´s! But, the Homefleet stay´s in the Home System with all ist supporting installions! So, what would you get, if you Limit the Supplies for a few weeks, remove the marienes, use only a small Hyperdrive and, and, and.....with other word´s:"you construct a Special System defense Superdreadnought!

Remote controlled LAC´s/LAC drohnes

I think it would be easy to modify a LAC, so it can be remote controlled! A Carrier should have some LAC simutators. Connect it with the Communication System, add some programms to the LAC´s and it should be possible to remote control it! On the other way, you can construct complete crewless LAC drohnes! Why remote control a LAC? If I remember correct, the LAC´s where used as missle defense at a battle! The losses were high, so, no Crew, no losses!

Maldorian wrote:Defender Class Superdreadnought!

The most starships in the Honorverse are construct for mutiple duties and have supplies for month´s! But, the Homefleet stay´s in the Home System with all ist supporting installions! So, what would you get, if you Limit the Supplies for a few weeks, remove the marienes, use only a small Hyperdrive and, and, and.....with other word´s:"you construct a Special System defense Superdreadnought!

Remote controlled LAC´s/LAC drohnes

I think it would be easy to modify a LAC, so it can be remote controlled! A Carrier should have some LAC simutators. Connect it with the Communication System, add some programms to the LAC´s and it should be possible to remote control it! On the other way, you can construct complete crewless LAC drohnes! Why remote control a LAC? If I remember correct, the LAC´s where used as missle defense at a battle! The losses were high, so, no Crew, no losses!

1) There's no "small" hyperdrive, either you have the whole installation, or nothing.

2) Limiting the independent endurance of a vessel is one of the prime characteristics of a Fort, which can be easily supplied by local sources and can optimized as a warship.

3)David gave a firm NO to automated or teleoperated warships. ESPECIALLY LACS.

Thanks for the response, truly. I made this thread so I could toss out some ideas and have a fun little thought exercise.

The Hawk class Frigate/Destroyer: simply put it is a manned keyhole platform. Armed only with point defense and a truly impressive fire control sweet for a ship this size it has 2 specialized roles. Firstly, it operates remotely similar to the Manticoran keyhole, assisting ships of the wall in missile control with interposed wedges. As anything this light is in a lot of danger, it has a boat bay with a pinnace so the crew can get out of the line of fire while the attached ship controls it remotely and uses its impressive computer support in a way similar to the AI in Apollo. Secondly, it operates in a forward targeting role for deployed missile pods. Meant to aim, launch and guide missile pods from previously placed clusters in a system defense role.

I do not really see the benefit in this. If you are using them in the system defense role as you discussed below, then this would basically be a manned Moriarty or Mycroft node. It is additional cost for no useful additional gain.

Yes, it would be in the system defense role. It would be more flexible, but much the same in function. However as it can fire independently of the main platform it's not nearly as vulnerable to mistletoe. The main use would likely be however in the Keyhole substitute role. As the Republican Navy can't match the miniaturization of the Manticoran, it's a relatively small and disposable way to approximate the effectiveness. We see this in the scout LACs from Foraker. They couldn't put a gravpulse on a recon drone so they created a LAC that could and sent it with the drones. My point is there is a clear need for something like keyhole and this seems to be an efficient way to go about it and the extra benefits are a bonus.

The Trebuchet Mobile Battle Station: A sprained system defense ship. 50% larger than a Republican SD this ship is designed to hold star systems against up to moderate attack. Standard doctrine is to drop off clusters of pods to be overseen by up to 2 Hawks. The Trebuchet is not supposed to engage directly. To aid in this the tops and bottoms of the ship have more LAC hangars than a standard Republican LAC carrier on the theory that LACs are not launched nor picked up when under fire anyway. The broadsides consist of a pure energy armament, and taking a page from the Grayson BC play book are vastly larger than one would expect given the size. If Grayson can put SD sized energy weapons on a BC, then imagine the range and power of weapons of something scaled up that much. This broadside is meant to primarily used if the Trebuchet is mousetrapped. A Trebuchet is not meant to stand in a wall of battle, but to free other ships to do so and beat off raids with only Hawk support. Of course the broadsides have enough fire control links and anti missile defenses for a modern ship of its size.

This idea basically describes an Honorverse fortress. Fortresses are large, tough, and multimodal (in the sense that they can operate LACs, control pod launched missiles, etc).

That said, there are some substantial differences. While fortresses can mount impressive energy weapons, I do not see a reason to mount substantially larger and heavier weapons when missile combat has become the norm. runsforcelery goes over current fortress design here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2928&p=61949

In a sense it does, yes. It's supposed to secure secondary star systems and either defeat or inflict attritional losses as cost effectively as possible. It's meant to withdraw in the case of a serious attack, while wearing down any attacker with missiles. Not to mention move on when more permanent defenses can be emplaced. In its main role think of it as a missile barge with LAC support and a Moriarty control center in one. The energy weapons are primarily to keep from being close ranged mousetrapped with results similar to 4th Yeltsin or what happened to Rear Admiral Pierre in Talbot if someone gets too close. Besides, it can roll enough pods that it doesn't need broadside tubes. It could also function as a ship of the line if needed, but the cost would mean that it's not ideal.

Firstly, thank you for the link. The purpose of this thread is to have fun thinking about new systems, ships and doctrines that the Republican fleet might come up with between the first battle of Manticore and perhaps up to when Bolthole can be upgraded. While I don't think that the Republicans should have laid down and died, things should be tempered. You need White Havens as much as Hemphills. So thank you truly for your input.

Yes, it would be in the system defense role. It would be more flexible, but much the same in function. However as it can fire independently of the main platform it's not nearly as vulnerable to mistletoe. The main use would likely be however in the Keyhole substitute role. As the Republican Navy can't match the miniaturization of the Manticoran, it's a relatively small and disposable way to approximate the effectiveness. We see this in the scout LACs from Foraker. They couldn't put a gravpulse on a recon drone so they created a LAC that could and sent it with the drones. My point is there is a clear need for something like keyhole and this seems to be an efficient way to go about it and the extra benefits are a bonus.

Keyhole is fundamentally a relay - it is still dependent on the mothership's fire control. Same with Moriarty - it uses remote platforms to route fire control to the missiles. But in both cases, it is a bigger platform who is controlling the fire. Your proposed Hawks are too small to control a substantial number of missiles. Note, for example, the Mayan/Erewhonese Marksman class. Even though they are the size of a heavy cruiser, and outfitted with missile control plugs in two of their missile launcher slots, they still could only control 60 missiles apiece. A platform the size of a frigate would not be able to control enough missile pods to engage capital ships.

In a sense it does, yes. It's supposed to secure secondary star systems and either defeat or inflict attritional losses as cost effectively as possible. It's meant to withdraw in the case of a serious attack, while wearing down any attacker with missiles. Not to mention move on when more permanent defenses can be emplaced. In its main role think of it as a missile barge with LAC support and a Moriarty control center in one. The energy weapons are primarily to keep from being close ranged mousetrapped with results similar to 4th Yeltsin or what happened to Rear Admiral Pierre in Talbot if someone gets too close. Besides, it can roll enough pods that it doesn't need broadside tubes. It could also function as a ship of the line if needed, but the cost would mean that it's not ideal.

Firstly, thank you for the link. The purpose of this thread is to have fun thinking about new systems, ships and doctrines that the Republican fleet might come up with between the first battle of Manticore and perhaps up to when Bolthole can be upgraded. While I don't think that the Republicans should have laid down and died, things should be tempered. You need White Havens as much as Hemphills. So thank you truly for your input.

A platform the size you are describing would have the acceleration of a snail. Even with improved compensators, effectiveness falls off after about 9 million tons, so a platform twice the mass of an existing SD would be effectively as immobile as a fortress. It would have no ability to flee the system as anything could out accelerate it. That being the case, you either guard the system with forces that could flee the system (existing capital ships), or ensure that you have so much firepower that it makes taking the system very difficult (fortresses).

Keyhole is fundamentally a relay - it is still dependent on the mothership's fire control. Same with Moriarty - it uses remote platforms to route fire control to the missiles. But in both cases, it is a bigger platform who is controlling the fire. Your proposed Hawks are too small to control a substantial number of missiles. Note, for example, the Mayan/Erewhonese Marksman class. Even though they are the size of a heavy cruiser, and outfitted with missile control plugs in two of their missile launcher slots, they still could only control 60 missiles apiece. A platform the size of a frigate would not be able to control enough missile pods to engage capital ships.

In a standard way, I agree. Then again you're missing several techniques that the Republican navy already implements that would help to off set it, such as slaving more pods to a single one. I give you Admiral Theiesman's trick at Barnet. It didn't work because Admiral White Haven had MDMs and Barnet didn't, but the fundamental theory is sound, and it follows normal Republican ideas on using more to compensate for their lower efficiency. You are also forgetting something else. It has no armament that could harm anything bigger than a destroyer, and I did say that it might be destroyer sized. It's purely a fire control and antimissile platform. Also, when manned it COULD operate independently. It's not a drone, hence my redundancy argument. Even if the main platform is destroyed it could take over its localized pods.

A platform the size you are describing would have the acceleration of a snail. Even with improved compensators, effectiveness falls off after about 9 million tons, so a platform twice the mass of an existing SD would be effectively as immobile as a fortress. It would have no ability to flee the system as anything could out accelerate it. That being the case, you either guard the system with forces that could flee the system (existing capital ships), or ensure that you have so much firepower that it makes taking the system very difficult (fortresses).

I'm not sure where the math for that is, if you show me I'll be happy to look into it, but my understanding is that forts have weak drives, almost civilian level drives to fit in more firepower. As far as flee the system, perhaps anything could out accelerate it, but then attackers would have to go through all of its defenses. It could literally retreat, dropping clusters of pods set to launch as enemies followed. A Trebuchet would also have 2 major advantages over a fort. It doesn't need months of assembly after the system is taken, and if the front moves away, so can it. In a universe of raids and blitzing which MDMs have brought those are not small considerations

Finale wrote:I'm not sure where the math for that is, if you show me I'll be happy to look into it, but my understanding is that forts have weak drives, almost civilian level drives to fit in more firepower. As far as flee the system, perhaps anything could out accelerate it, but then attackers would have to go through all of its defenses. It could literally retreat, dropping clusters of pods set to launch as enemies followed. A Trebuchet would also have 2 major advantages over a fort. It doesn't need months of assembly after the system is taken, and if the front moves away, so can it. In a universe of raids and blitzing which MDMs have brought those are not small considerations

This has a table of accelerations. Look at how accel falls off the closer you get to SD levels.
In addition, if everything went so badly as to require a fort (or Trebuchet, they sound very similar) to retreat then there would be too much fire to be deflected by defenses.

19chickens wrote:

Finale wrote:I'm not sure where the math for that is, if you show me I'll be happy to look into it, but my understanding is that forts have weak drives, almost civilian level drives to fit in more firepower. As far as flee the system, perhaps anything could out accelerate it, but then attackers would have to go through all of its defenses. It could literally retreat, dropping clusters of pods set to launch as enemies followed. A Trebuchet would also have 2 major advantages over a fort. It doesn't need months of assembly after the system is taken, and if the front moves away, so can it. In a universe of raids and blitzing which MDMs have brought those are not small considerations

This has a table of accelerations. Look at how accel falls off the closer you get to SD levels.
In addition, if everything went so badly as to require a fort (or Trebuchet, they sound very similar) to retreat then there would be too much fire to be deflected by defenses.

On the one hand that's the pre-Grayson accelerations; so multiply by about 1.45 to get 1922 PD RMN accel. On the other hand it doesn't show the cliff like drop off in compensator efficiency past about 8 mtons (now maybe 10 mtons).
I don't have that reference handy but IIRC it was something like one G less accel for every 2,500 tons over 8,000,000. If I'm remembering that right you'd calculate a 16 mton ship as 420g - (8000000/2500) = 420g - -3200g = stationary object.
That's actually not true in real life because you just don't use a compensator and instead use grav plates which don't care about size; but limit you to less than 100g and haven't gotten any better with compensator improvements. (And that, rather than the power of their drives, is why forts can only pull < 100g accel).

So his Tribuchet design would be the sI've and accel of a fort. Is ability to retreat through hyper seems pretty theoretical to me. Either it has the firepower to win, or it doesn't, but either was it'll be brought to combat range and the battle over long before it could retreat across the hyper limit since anything with the firepower to engage it would have 5x or more accel than it.

Having a Home Fleet doesn't mean that you should strip out large quantities of supplies (like food, water, spare parts, and people (such as Marines, and espeicaly training cadre running classes for new personal and people being trained in new areas) from the ships assigned to it.

What you need is competent units that can perform the job and the primary role of a "Home Fleet" or much of a System Defense Force is to defend the system. Manticore has some unusual needs and they approched them (by the time of Honor Harrington) in a multi-layered manner.

What Manticore has done is create the fortresses as one layer of defense for the system and the Junction. They need to protect the Junction both from an attack through any of the wormholes leading to it and attacks through hyperspace which transistion down and hit the Junction (and the other ends of the several wormholes) in normal space. You both don't need to have those termini and the Junction primarily defended by hyper-capable ships but you do need massive firepower and defense in depth with some ability to maneuver. You really really don't want to have the forts drawn off station to deal with something else. Forts are also deployed within the system to cover specific and some general assets. They have some ability to maneuver but in general they are supposed to stick with their assigned mission/location and deal with stratigic & tactical situations they were deployed against.

The actual ships of the Home Fleet serve as a fast and manuverable reaction force against attack. One of the reason you need hyper-capable ships for the Manicore fleet is the nature of the binary system and the potential/probable need to shift vessels from one to the other star via hyperspace. The ships give you the ability to move and manuver quickly within the systems as well as outside the hyperlimit.

You also want to maintain the ability to adjust the composition of the Fleet by shifting vessels (or squadrons) to or from it as you perceive the tactical or strategic situation. Rotating ships (and crews) is an important method of keeping up the skills and training.

You need to keep the Home Fleet ships equiped to do their mission. That means keeping them ready to do all of the mission including being deployed to other places with minimal modification. So you keep them staffed and you keep them supplied and you keep them busy with training.