[Warning text wall!
]A Shrike is 20,000 metric tons, 115 meters long, with a a maximum beam of 19.2 meters and a crew of 10. All weapons are forward mounted. These include the BC strength graser, 4x AS launchers, 4x CM tubes, and 6x point defence lasers. According to the Honorverse wiki they're 70 metres long rather than 115 so I'm not sure if they're affected by the great resizing. Maximum acceleration also seems to favour the destroyer classes - 635 G for a Shrike, and a Roland having maximum normal acceleration of 590 G, and a maximum military acceleration of 780 G. Since I'm under the impression that LACs are supposed to be capable of greater acceleration than heavier ships I'm not sure if there's an issue with the data I'm looking at.
The Nat Turner class has been described as a hyper-capable Shrike, and is loosely akin to what I'm thinking of, but frigates really aren't all that combat capable regardless of how advanced they may be. I'm guessing the Nat Turner is roughly 50,000 tonnes since a courier vessel is about 40,000 and that mounts engines, spartan crew quarters, message banks, and no weapons - I'm assuming the removal of the message bank mass would permit adequate quarters, but that the frigate's weapons require increased mass. In an infodump I stumbled over: http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/entry/Harrington/322/1 DW said that even traditional tonnage destroyers are no longer a survivable proposition, also that frigate wolfpacks are not a viable tactic.
The early 19th century Noblesse class of destroyer were 68,250 tons, 351 metres long with a beam of 41 metres and a height of 24 metres whilst the Culverin Class which was the last of the 19th century builds was 104,000 tons, 404 metres long, with a beam of 48 metres and a height of 27 metres. It's successor the Wolfhound class was slightly larger at 123,500 tonnes a length of 428 metres, a beam of 51 metres, and a height of 29 metres, but construction switched to the Roland class as soon as said class' superiority became evident. While the specifications of the Roland are still classified, it's mass - 188,560 tons, has been revealed, and it's length may be reasonably estimated as close to 500 metres.
The original LAC was "... the smallest possible hull wrapped around the [BC sized] energy weapon mounted." Additional tonnage was allocated for missiles, point defences, and of course crew. One hit and it's toast of course, but that's now true of anything smaller than cruisers! While destroyer crew complements have shrunk through automation the Roland still requires a crew of 62. Given the greater size of the Roland those crew may not be guaranteed kills if a missile hits, but one hit means a lot more casualties than would be the case if a Shrike were lost.
Assuming a "hyper-capable LAC" were designed around dreadnought rather than battlecruiser weaponry like the Shrike, though of course the focus is now on missile exchanges and pod laying, would it be feasible? I'm assuming a frigate would be far too small of hull, but would a Noblesse sized destroyer be capable of holding pods if stripped of all "non-essentials"? Equally important, could a destroyer be run by a crew of 20? Given it's fragility armour would likely be a waste of time - speed, electronics, shielding, and superior tactics being the key to success, or survival.
DW mentioned that the need to support a frigate deployment largely negates their flexibility over LACs, but a freighter would be slightly simpler and cheaper to run than a CLAC! Freighters have already been used as arsenal ships so a minor modification to allow external docking, and the provision of say a rec centre, shouldn't be hard.
Given DW's comments this probably isn't feasible so this'll all be shot down in a hurry, but I'm curious to hear the flaws.
