Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 70 guests

Silesian Centaur BLAC

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri May 27, 2016 11:04 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Somtaaw wrote:So every merchy that's arriving has local LAC forces that know their estimated schedules, and could already be in space in the rough sphere to escort them in and out of the hyper limit. Which means the only time you need LACs to truly guard you, is either a bunch of pirates actually ganged up and tagged you in hyper (the Wayfarer sim where there were no less than 8 heavy cruisers and 2 "missile freighters") where a mere 2 or 3 squadrons isn't going to achieve much, or it's the commerce raid policy of the Mandarins (again entire squadrons of CAs and BCs).


Which is probably why RFC (as noted earlier in this thread) has said that the RMN and RHN weren't going to be building escort carriers and might be building "LAC-Bay-in-a box" to fit individual merchantmen with two or four LACs.

He didn't rule out smaller navies and SDFs building something like an escort carrier, just "mainstream navies" -- however he defines that term.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Somtaaw   » Fri May 27, 2016 11:14 am

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

Weird Harold wrote:
Somtaaw wrote:So every merchy that's arriving has local LAC forces that know their estimated schedules, and could already be in space in the rough sphere to escort them in and out of the hyper limit. Which means the only time you need LACs to truly guard you, is either a bunch of pirates actually ganged up and tagged you in hyper (the Wayfarer sim where there were no less than 8 heavy cruisers and 2 "missile freighters") where a mere 2 or 3 squadrons isn't going to achieve much, or it's the commerce raid policy of the Mandarins (again entire squadrons of CAs and BCs).


Which is probably why RFC (as noted earlier in this thread) has said that the RMN and RHN weren't going to be building escort carriers and might be building "LAC-Bay-in-a box" to fit individual merchantmen with two or four LACs.

He didn't rule out smaller navies and SDFs building something like an escort carrier, just "mainstream navies" -- however he defines that term.



Yeah, thats why I pointed those observations out. a Battleship is the smallest hull you could possibly make any form of "fast carrier" from, and still carry a meaningful load of LACs. Anything smaller, and you're either carrying almost no LACs, or you can't even fulfill the role of "escort" because the first thing that hits you probably also blows your fusion reactors.

Main stream, battle carriers would be SD's, because they carry ridiculously high numbers of LACs and haven't totally compromised their hull to do it either.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by darrell   » Fri May 27, 2016 12:54 pm

darrell
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:57 am

Somtaaw wrote:Most battlecruisers pre-Nikes were like the Reliant which as a maximum length of 713m and a maximum beam of 91m. Shrikes on the other hand are 71m long, and 20m beams. Simple math says the LACs would be forced into a sideways on docking bay, and even doing that you're not quite able to fit in 9 LACs nose to tail on the flank of the BC, even if you excluded the service bays. If you figure the service bays add a total of ~14m for an even 85m per LAC docked, you get about 6 or 7 LACs per broadside because the hammerhead requirements interfere. When you figure as well that the Reliant has an 81m draft but the Shrikes are 20m + service bays call it 25m height per Shrike. So you can pack at most, 14 Shrikes (or Ferrets, Katana's or Cimeterres) along each broadside of a Reliant, that works out to 3x 8 LAC squadrons plus 4 backups (the original Minnie carried 12 squadrons + 4 backups). Now we don't have the exact dimensions of the Nike Class, but it's 2.5 megatons which is almost three full times the size of the Reliants.


You can still fit them in end to end by letting the LAC go past the center of the ship and overlapping, like so:

|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|

But there is another constraint, and that is weapons volume. A standard DN has about 40%-45% of it's volume for offensive weapons, an 800 M ton BC about 30%-33%, which means that you will only be able to carry 10 LAC's. To get your two squads of LAC's you would need at least a 1.1M hull, 600K for a single squad of LAC's.
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Logic: an organized way to go wrong, with confidence.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Somtaaw   » Fri May 27, 2016 1:33 pm

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

darrell wrote:
Somtaaw wrote:Most battlecruisers pre-Nikes were like the Reliant which as a maximum length of 713m and a maximum beam of 91m. Shrikes on the other hand are 71m long, and 20m beams. Simple math says the LACs would be forced into a sideways on docking bay, and even doing that you're not quite able to fit in 9 LACs nose to tail on the flank of the BC, even if you excluded the service bays. If you figure the service bays add a total of ~14m for an even 85m per LAC docked, you get about 6 or 7 LACs per broadside because the hammerhead requirements interfere. When you figure as well that the Reliant has an 81m draft but the Shrikes are 20m + service bays call it 25m height per Shrike. So you can pack at most, 14 Shrikes (or Ferrets, Katana's or Cimeterres) along each broadside of a Reliant, that works out to 3x 8 LAC squadrons plus 4 backups (the original Minnie carried 12 squadrons + 4 backups). Now we don't have the exact dimensions of the Nike Class, but it's 2.5 megatons which is almost three full times the size of the Reliants.


You can still fit them in end to end by letting the LAC go past the center of the ship and overlapping, like so:

|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|

But there is another constraint, and that is weapons volume. A standard DN has about 40%-45% of it's volume for offensive weapons, an 800 M ton BC about 30%-33%, which means that you will only be able to carry 10 LAC's. To get your two squads of LAC's you would need at least a 1.1M hull, 600K for a single squad of LAC's.



You couldn't fit them that way, because like I figured, the LAC itself is a minimum 71m long, with the servicebay clamped around the nose for ammo loading and basic servicing it'll be around 85m from tip of the bay to the very stern of the LAC. A Reliant is only 81m from spine to belly, so you can only fit the LACs in like undersized Keyhole platforms.

Hammerhead|[X]LAC[X]LAC[X]LAC[X]LAC|Hammerhead

(there should be a total of 7 LACs, but I had to remove some to squeeze this onto one line)

And if you squeeze it really hard, you could fit a second row of LACs, on both broadsides. But you're gonna have zero broadside point defense laser clusters, zero broadside energy weapons, and if you manage to mount any CM tubes at all, it'll be "Roland style" and only in the hammerheads. And that would give you a maximum of 28 LACs, which is only 3 squadrons.

You could reduce that ever so slightly to 2 squadrons + spares, and pack a tiny destroyer-level broadside missile defense and energy weapons into a battlecruiser. That might let this notional 'escort' Carrier Battlecruiser somehow survive, because offensively it has the LACs, and in theory nothing most pirates have is going to survive to get a broadside off targetting the BC.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri May 27, 2016 9:17 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Somtaaw wrote:
darrell wrote:You can still fit them in end to end by letting the LAC go past the center of the ship and overlapping, like so:

|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
|X| LAC |
| LAC |X|
...



You couldn't fit them that way, because like I figured, the LAC itself is a minimum 71m long, with the servicebay clamped around the nose for ammo loading and basic servicing it'll be around 85m from tip of the bay to the very stern of the LAC. A Reliant is only 81m from spine to belly, so you can only fit the LACs in like undersized Keyhole platforms.

Hammerhead|[X]LAC[X]LAC[X]LAC[X]LAC|Hammerhead

...


You're missing the "let the LAC go past the centerline part of Darrell's suggestion.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Somtaaw   » Fri May 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

If you let it go beyond the centreline, your bays would be extending past the belly and spine, which means you're going into blocking your own ships sensors and communications.

Block enough of them, and the first warning this carrier has of hostiles, is the incoming fire triggering proximity alarms, or because a merchy had to hail you to inform you of the incoming unknowns. Assuming of course, that you haven't blocked enough of your antenna that you can even receive communications at all, that is.

No, I think the only way to do it, would be running the LAC bays like undersized keyhole platforms, following the general line of the ship, and even that's not really ideal.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri May 27, 2016 10:29 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Somtaaw wrote:If you let it go beyond the centreline, your bays would be extending past the belly and spine, which means you're going into blocking your own ships sensors and communications.
...


:? :? :? :? :?
What communications arrays are in the center of a ship?

LAC bays that extend through the center of a ship are as far from the sensors and arrays on the skin of the ship as it possible to put them.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Somtaaw   » Sat May 28, 2016 8:58 am

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

Weird Harold wrote:
Somtaaw wrote:If you let it go beyond the centreline, your bays would be extending past the belly and spine, which means you're going into blocking your own ships sensors and communications.
...


:? :? :? :? :?
What communications arrays are in the center of a ship?

LAC bays that extend through the center of a ship are as far from the sensors and arrays on the skin of the ship as it possible to put them.


Communications and extra sensors (like fire control links) are placed on the flat top and bottom of the ship, where there isn't any armor.

So you want to put the LAC bays directly through the middle, vertically? Sort of like poking a stick through a hotdog? That sounds even worse, because you'd have to totally drop not just your sidewalls to launch any LACs, you'd have to drop your whole wedge so the vertically mounted LACs can clear from the ship.


That's why, again, I pointed out if any bastardized BC is turned into a CLAC, they have to mount the same way the ship flows. It won't be as quick as launching from a proper DN/SD CLAC, but you only have to drop sidewalls and they'd thrust clear EXACTLY like Honor did in Honor Among Enemies, with the shuttle containing Warnecke from his repair ship.

Honor scooped Nimitz up, feeling the 'cat's fierce exultation as she set him on her shoulder, and stepped over the bodies of the men she'd killed into the flight deck. The controls were standard, but she set the 'cat in the copilot's seat and took two full minutes to familiarize herself with them before she slipped the pilot's headset on and flipped up the plastic shield over the belly tractor power switch. Separating from a vessel underway under impeller drive was tricky, but at least the repair ship had no sidewalls, and she lit the acceleration warning in the passenger cabin and keyed the intercom.
--snipping of irrelevant conversation--
She waited, watching the chrono tick down, then killed the tractors holding the shuttle to the repair ship's hull and drove the belly and main thruster levers clear to the stop.

They were conventional thrusters, but they were also powerful, and just over one hundred gravities of acceleration hurled the shuttle away from the ship. The small craft's artificial gravity did its best, but its inertial compensator had no impeller wedge to work with. Twenty gravities got through, and Honor grunted as a giant's fist slammed down. But the shuttle blasted straight for the perimeter of the repair ship's wedge at an acceleration of one kilometer per second squared. It was more than enough to clear the wedge before its narrowing after aspect could destroy the tiny craft, and she gasped with relief as she hurtled free and killed the belly thrusters. She burned the main thrusters for another thirty seconds, using her attitude thrusters to slew away from the repair ship at a more tolerable fifty gravities, then brought the shuttle's transmitter on-line.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by darrell   » Sat May 28, 2016 9:48 am

darrell
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:57 am

Somtaaw wrote:
Weird Harold wrote: :? :? :? :? :?
What communications arrays are in the center of a ship?

LAC bays that extend through the center of a ship are as far from the sensors and arrays on the skin of the ship as it possible to put them.


Communications and extra sensors (like fire control links) are placed on the flat top and bottom of the ship, where there isn't any armor.

So you want to put the LAC bays directly through the middle, vertically? Sort of like poking a stick through a hotdog? That sounds even worse, because you'd have to totally drop not just your sidewalls to launch any LACs, you'd have to drop your whole wedge so the vertically mounted LACs can clear from the ship.


That's why, again, I pointed out if any bastardized BC is turned into a CLAC, they have to mount the same way the ship flows. It won't be as quick as launching from a proper DN/SD CLAC, but you only have to drop sidewalls and they'd thrust clear EXACTLY like Honor did in Honor Among Enemies, with the shuttle containing Warnecke from his repair ship.


no they do not. a top view of the weapons deck in the middle of a standard warship:

|weapon missile weapon|
|weapon storage weapon|
|weapon missile weapon|
|weapon storage weapon|
|weapon missile weapon|
|weapon storage weapon|
|weapon missile weapon|
|weapon storage weapon|

compared to a DN CLAC
| . . LAC . . servi . . LAC . . |
| . . Bay . . cebay . . Bay . . |
| . . LAC . . servi . . LAC . . |
| . . Bay . . cebay . . Bay . . |
| . . LAC . . servi . . LAC . . |
| . . Bay . . cebay . . Bay . . |
In a CLAC the service bay in in the center of the ship where the missile storage is on a conventional warship.

compared to a BLAC

| . . LAC . . servi|
| . . bay . . cebay|
|servi . . LAC . . |
|cebay . . bay . . |
| . . LAC . . servi|
| . . bay . . cebay|
|servi . . LAC . . |
|cebay . . bay . . |
The service bay is on the opposite side of the hull.

On a starboard side LAC the LAC goes past the center into what would be the missile storage area of a standard ship, with the servie bay on the port side and vice versa.

This enables you to put 4 LAC's (2 port nose in, 2 starboard nose in) instead of two like your configuration has. and in fact putting them front to back you would need more than 80M linearly.

|servi servi|
|cebay cebay|
| L ????? L |
| A ????? A |
| C ????? C |
| b ????? b |
| a ????? a |
| y ????? y |
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Logic: an organized way to go wrong, with confidence.
Top
Re: Silesian Centaur BLAC
Post by Somtaaw   » Sat May 28, 2016 10:08 am

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

If they're still sticking vertically outside the hull with bays, they still block communications, and some sensors. I don't have which reference tech piece, but I know I've seen it that warships tend to put communications and extra sensors on the spine and belly of warships.

And if you're blocking those sensors, which are also usually some of the most sensitive a ship equips, you're also sacrificing any chance to detect anything using EW.


A Reliant just does not have the hull depth to mount vertically, which means there's really no choice but to either go SD style off-set horizontal, or "in line" like the decoys, Keyhole's and the majority of other existing 'tethered' equipment. Of the two options, it'd be easier to go "in line" because ship designers already think that way for all the tether deploy items. And with how sidewalls work, and the speed of decoy deployment (bare seconds to get kicked out the ports, plus clear the sidewall in OBS), you could design a similar system for LACs and launch even faster than the capital CLAC's can.
Top

Return to Honorverse