Hypothetical 2.5M ton BC(P)

darrell wrote:in addition the nike has 7,000 missiles in storage, not 6000, and it has """oodles""" more armor than the argamemnon has, so a higher percentage of the hull is armor and with that a lower percentage is weapons.

In AAC it is stated as almost 40 minutes of fire at maximum rate.
"whereas Nike carried sufficient ammunition for almost forty minutes"

40x60s = 2400s/18s = 133 salvos. 133x50 = 6650missiles. If we take AAC at its word. Then we have later books... Since round numbers are generally preferred, I would bet on 130 salvos, 39 minutes fire, and 6500 missiles.

Will look for the quotes in SFTS and MoH I believe...

EDIT: AAC also says BCP has only 14 minutes of fire which would equate to 280 Pods. HoS says 360 Pods. AAC also states GSN BCP is smaller than RMN BCP. In HoS they are effectively identical. SFTS, has 18min fire(360) pods which is newer book than AAC.

Kytheros wrote:

Relax wrote:BCL 6000 missiles
BCP 360x14 = 5040 missiles...

Effectively there is no difference between the two in terms of missile endurance. Only main difference is the BCP can flush them 33% quicker.

Capacity, not endurance. Capacity is indeed very similar.

But at max rate, the BC(L) will still be shooting when the BC(P) is dry.

Well, you see, we as humans are generally allowed to use our brains. Anyone who wishes to use their minds can quickly grasp the simple concept that just because you CAN fire faster does not mean you HAVE TO.

Therefore capacity, IS endurance.

Might have noticed, but very rarely in the books do ships fire at their maximum rate other than in the giant furballs.

Kytheros wrote:You could design and build a BC(P) the same size as a Nike BC(L). It would be tougher than an Agamemnon BC(P). It would still not be as tough as a Nike BC(L). It would still not have the ammo capacity to hang with SD(P)s.

Who cares? Literally, who?

What would it take for a squadron of these nominal BCPs to shoot themselves dry firing Apollo? What would the opponents need to be? What would the incoming firepower be for those opponents? How many of the nominal BCPs would still be intact to go Winchester?

kzt wrote:

Kytheros wrote:You could design and build a BC(P) the same size as a Nike BC(L). It would be tougher than an Agamemnon BC(P). It would still not be as tough as a Nike BC(L). It would still not have the ammo capacity to hang with SD(P)s.

Who cares? Literally, who?

What would it take for a squadron of these nominal BCPs to shoot themselves dry firing Apollo? What would the opponents need to be? What would the incoming firepower be for those opponents? How many of the nominal BCPs would still be intact to go Winchester?

Assuming they have Keyhole-2, then for them to shoot themselves dry would require one of two things, a helluva lot of inferior tech ships, or a near-enough to peer force. Or a near-enough to peer quality force of greater strength.

The big difference is in applied battlecruiser doctrine. BC(P)s can, for a short period of time, support the wall against another wall or rip up an opposing wall's screen. BC(L)s are a more classical design, and they would do quite well on extended cruises without immediate resupply.

The BC(P) is a high intensity specialist, the BC(L) is a more moderate intensity generalist.


Admittedly, the BC(P) is more flexible when it comes to deploying major new advances in missile technology than the BC(L).

I think that the RMN is unlikely to build BC(P)s, but the League and League successor states will be building lots of BC(P)s. Or, it might be more accurate to call what most of them will be building, BB(P)s or DN(P)s.

Relax wrote:

darrell wrote:in addition the nike has 7,000 missiles in storage, not 6000, and it has """oodles""" more armor than the argamemnon has, so a higher percentage of the hull is armor and with that a lower percentage is weapons.

In AAC it is stated as almost 40 minutes of fire at maximum rate.
"whereas Nike carried sufficient ammunition for almost forty minutes"

40x60s = 2400s/18s = 133 salvos. 133x50 = 6650missiles. If we take AAC at its word. Then we have later books... Since round numbers are generally preferred, I would bet on 130 salvos, 39 minutes fire, and 6500 missiles.

Will look for the quotes in SFTS and MoH I believe...

EDIT: AAC also says BCP has only 14 minutes of fire which would equate to 280 Pods. HoS says 360 Pods. AAC also states GSN BCP is smaller than RMN BCP. In HoS they are effectively identical. SFTS, has 18min fire(360) pods which is newer book than AAC.

Quote "House Of Steel":
Carrying fifty broadside launchers capable of off-bore firing the Mk16 DDM, the Nike can launch a salvo of fifty missiles into any aspect, and her magazines allow for over forty minutes of maximum rate fire.

HoS says OVER 40 minutes. that means at least 6,700 missiles in storage.

Quote "House Of Steel":
A Nike’s grasers and point defense laser clusters are all superdreadnought grade.

Quote "House Of Steel":
Finally, much of the Nike’s impressive mass is devoted to passive defense. Screening and sidewall generators have near-capital-ship levels of redundancy. The external armor system, internal mount compartmentalization, outer hull framing, and core hull construction are all designed to at least prewar superdreadnought standards. Nikes, finally, carry full flagship facilities and incorporate much greater Marine carrying and support capacity.

Quote "House Of Steel":
Above all other design elements, the addition of the Mark 20 Keyhole platform to the Nike class allows it a greater level of tactical flexibility than any other warship currently in service.

Kytheros wrote:You could design and build a BC(P) the same size as a Nike BC(L). It would be tougher than an Agamemnon BC(P). It would still not be as tough as a Nike BC(L). It would still not have the ammo capacity to hang with SD(P)s.

Why would a BC need the ammo to hang with the SD's?

Kytheros wrote:BC(P)s don't have the ammo capacity for extended or multiple engagements without reloading.

Adding the extra 750k tons would add quite a lot to the ammunition supply. At 2.5 mil the ammunition difference would not be as big as it is when it is 1.75 mil vs 2.5 mil.

The ammunition difference/toughness seems like a moot point if one of the ships can overwhelm the other quite handily.


If there are 330 pods in a BC(P) and each pod had 14 missiles which means that the BC(P) has somewhere around 4600 missiles whereas the BC(P) has 6,000. Increasing the size of the ship increases the ammunition supply and so what if they can go through that ammunition in a matter of minutes since they can ration the ammunition and make it last but at the same time they can launch a devastating attack that the BC(P) may not be able to a. stop or b. reply to.

I've thought about this one quite a bit (fanfic that won't be completed or released, but a fun adventure)...

And the answer I came up with was.... Not Going to Happen.

Not ammo ships and 12 Sag C's decimated 23 SLN in one salvo -- it would have taken three more salvos to finish the job. Of course it's likely a "two tigers fighting proposition", aka one tiger dead, one mortally wounded but...

Under the "battle theory of equivalent weight of metal, you get one new 2.5MM Kton BC(p) [but still a DDM ship, non Apollo, though that would not make sense for a new build]. I get five Sag-Cs with tractored pods. You launch as many missiles as your ship can control, my Sag-C's do the same thing. Who wins?

Oh, and by the way, the RMN can build those Sag-C's at least twice as fast as a bigger ship in smaller yards, send a mil-spec ammo ship with a two ship squadron and still pretty much kick the arse of any other space navy in the non-GA honorverse.

Thoughts?

BCPs only carry Mk16s because David wants them to fail.

SharkHunter wrote:I've thought about this one quite a bit (fanfic that won't be completed or released, but a fun adventure)...

And the answer I came up with was.... Not Going to Happen.

Not ammo ships and 12 Sag C's decimated 23 SLN in one salvo -- it would have taken three more salvos to finish the job. Of course it's likely a "two tigers fighting proposition", aka one tiger dead, one mortally wounded but...

Under the "battle theory of equivalent weight of metal, you get one new 2.5MM Kton BC(p) [but still a DDM ship, non Apollo, though that would not make sense for a new build]. I get five Sag-Cs with tractored pods. You launch as many missiles as your ship can control, my Sag-C's do the same thing. Who wins?

Oh, and by the way, the RMN can build those Sag-C's at least twice as fast as a bigger ship in smaller yards, send a mil-spec ammo ship with a two ship squadron and still pretty much kick the arse of any other space navy in the non-GA honorverse.

Thoughts?

5 rolands with 12 tubes each put 120 missiles on target and completely destroyed one SL BC per salvo in saltash. using 40% of their ammo they destroyed 4 SL BC's.

Each Sag-C's with 40 tubes each should be able to put 80 missiles onto a SL BC, which would be enough to mission kill it most of the time. 4 sag-C's, each targeting a different BC with each salvo, will mission kill most of the 23 BC's. One more salvo will kill any lucky BC's that managed to survive, so a division of Sag-C's should be able to kill 3 squadrons of SL BC's and no use even half their ammo.

--snipping--

darrell wrote:

SharkHunter wrote:Why it's Not Going to Happen....
Under the "battle theory of equivalent weight of metal, you get one new 2.5MM Kton BC(p) [but still a DDM ship, non Apollo, though that would not make sense for a new build]. I get five Sag-Cs with tractored pods. You launch as many missiles as your ship can control, my Sag-C's do the same thing. Who wins?

5 rolands with 12 tubes each put 120 missiles on target and completely destroyed one SL BC per salvo in saltash. using 40% of their ammo they destroyed 4 SL BC's.

...yes but in my tiger analogy, I am referring to RMN tech vs. RMN level tech. 5 on 1. Likely no ship would survive that mutual kill fest simply because by the end of the first couple salvo there's still thousands of 1st Flight tech arriving on time on target and under ACM control [based on 23-E controlled towed pod launches].

But in DDM and MDM years, why would the RMN risk a single ship vs. the five in terms of build rates? The bigger ship likely takes at least double the time of a Sag-, so go figure 10 ships that can be placed in multiple systems as heavy cruiser combos vs. one ship which is pretty much limited to fleet actions?

Keep in mind that ONE Sag-C plus a freighter part full of pods part full of Marines likely wins any Verge or Shell engagement up to Mannerheim size, takes the planetary orbitals and that would be that. Two Sag-C's plus one freighter wins at Meyers and no FF ships escape. And yes, I'm including Rozak's early build ships in that (the DDM has 3-4 times the range and a much higher kill rate than occurred at Torch). Rozak is not an enemy, however so that's not a concern.

Meanwhile and simultaneously, the other three take a smaller freighter each go stomp on three Saltash's, Mobius, Monica's, etc. Then... the single 2.5mm kton ship commissions... and joins a fleet.

That's why I say "not going to happen".