Last use for SL SD captured

perhaps a better way to phrase it would be that the EXTERNAL armour is on hammerheads and broadsides, not top or bottom.

though that still leaves the internal armour that is included in any ship of the wall.

it would be easier then some people suggest, though still fairly time consuming

The E wrote:Yep, and we've seen what happens when that sort of skill level is applied in Honorverse combat...

And who said they were going into combat? the Idea is to get them somewhat manned/operational and use them as training ships. not through them strait into the front lines. If the FF-BCs decide to actually test there abilities - well that's what life-pods are made for. Once they get some experience and can putter around the systems without tripping over their own wedge, well then we can reassess that.
During the cold war the U.S. have a brigade of infantry stationed in west Berlin. It discouraged the Russians from invading and taking over the Western sections of the city. In r3eallity (as I understand it from a coworker who was in it) their standing orders for invasion were 'polish your rifle, march out and hand it to the 1st Russan officer you find' it was a force-in-being, could 1 light infanty brigade hold out, behind enemy lines against a concerted assault by Russian forces - of-course not - When I played the Pact side in 3rd WW (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3605/third-world-war) I didn't even bother attacking them with my Russian (or East German) forces, I religated that to my 1st Polish Army coming up from behind - but it did discourage any attempt to take the city by force.

MAD-4A wrote:And, again, why does Manticore have to do it, Haven and Andies certainly have available facilities, and retired space-farers who can serve as skeleton crews to get them there.

Why should nations with intact shipbuilding spend the time required to make these alterations when they could just as well spend the time and resources to build ships that are actually designed for the purpose?

MAD-4A wrote:Why, does everyone seem to have the same misconception that these ships are just a giant armored egg, with yard-thick armor ALL-AROUND the entire hull? the armor consists of a few slabs concentrated on the "sides" and ends of the hammer-heads - they have no armor on top or bottom (as specified numerous times) and even the sides and ends have section that are unarmored, such as the shuttle bay entrances and gun ports. It would just be idiotic to try to 'pull things out' through the section that has armor, it would be like trying to take a couch out of your house and saying "well I guess we'll just have to cut a hole in this brick wall" - you have a door. large stuff would be removed through the top/bottom and small stuff through the bays.

Because we've read the novels? The tops and bottoms of ships not being armored as heavily as the broadsides or hammerheads is one thing, but when you're talking about altering a ship's broadside, you're going to have to go through that broadside armor eventually.

MAD-4A wrote:Right, and the Solie SDs aren't in Arabic, they are in 'Common English' just like Manty SDs. As I've understood it, both sides use the 'common' language of English or a variant of it.

Which is why the concept of prize crews is possible at all, not flat out impractical.

MAD-4A wrote:And who said they were going into combat? the Idea is to get them somewhat manned/operational and use them as training ships. not through them strait into the front lines.

And what can these ships do in that role that old pre-pod RMN SDs can't do?

If the FF-BCs decide to actually test there abilities - well that's what life-pods are made for. Once they get some experience and can putter around the systems without tripping over their own wedge, well then we can reassess that.
During the cold war the U.S. have a brigade of infantry stationed in west Berlin. It discouraged the Russians from invading and taking over the Western sections of the city. In r3eallity (as I understand it from a coworker who was in it) their standing orders for invasion were 'polish your rifle, march out and hand it to the 1st Russan officer you find' it was a force-in-being, could 1 light infanty brigade hold out, behind enemy lines against a concerted assault by Russian forces - of-course not - When I played the Pact side in 3rd WW (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3605/third-world-war) I didn't even bother attacking them with my Russian (or East German) forces, I religated that to my 1st Polish Army coming up from behind - but it did discourage any attempt to take the city by force.

The whole point you're arguing is that these ships should be deployed in some operational capacity, and that doing so would increase the safety of the systems they're deployed in. What you seem incapable of realizing is that, if the above was to be the operational doctrine, they wouldn't accomplish any of that. The US forces in Berlin deterred an attack because an attack on them will be answered by forces outside of Berlin, which is something that would not be true in the case of a sovereign star nation that had taken possession of an ex-SLN SD.

Meanwhile, the real threat, which are Battlecruisers or smaller vessels on raiding missions, cannot be brought to battle by these SDs. On the whole, they would make any system they're in markedly more unsafe.


But do continue to tell us how we're all wrong without backing those statements up with examples from the novels.

MAD-4A wrote:

Theemile wrote:I've fixed PCs in Arabic, Korean, Russian, and Mandarin, - even though I don't speak any of those languages or read the alphabets, it just took a little longer than it would have taken me on an English Keyboard or a version I was familiar with...

Right, and the Solie SDs aren't in Arabic, they are in 'Common English' just like Manty SDs. As I've understood it, both sides use the 'common' language of English or a variant of it.

As I stated, there also is the issue of different software versions. The point is, an expert with advanced degrees and much experience may be able to find it, but it is not easy or quick - as you need it to be in a combat situation.

According to Forbes, US companies spent 72 BILLION dollars last year of software training for employees. I have sat in IT meetings in several Fortune 500 corporations where changing Microsoft Office or Windows on a corporate level was debated, and held back - on the grounds of the cost, both in dollars and productivity, of end user training and use. Changing versions of even a word processor or mail program is a major decision at most large companies, and causes a major disruption in the entire workforce.

Software changes are not something to be taken lightly by any organization. Why train people on the wrong software when you will just need to train them again when they move to the real hardware? Especially, when it is available for them

MAD-4A wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:... you first must get through the superdreadnought armor...

Why, does everyone seem to have the same misconception that these ships are just a giant armored egg, with yard-thick armor ALL-AROUND the entire hull? the armor consists of a few slabs concentrated on the "sides" and ends of the hammer-heads - they have no armor on top or bottom (as specified numerous times) and even the sides and ends have section that are unarmored, such as the shuttle bay entrances and gun ports. It would just be idiotic to try to 'pull things out' through the section that has armor, it would be like trying to take a couch out of your house and saying "well I guess we'll just have to cut a hole in this brick wall" - you have a door. large stuff would be removed through the top/bottom and small stuff through the bays.

People believe that because that's what RFC describes in the books and infodumps. Yes the boat boy openings are unarmored (are are enternal sensors, antenna, nodes, etc) - but not much else is.

The SD's have thinner armor on their dorsal and ventral faces - but not no armor. The infodumps says even their internal bulkheads are armored (unlike even a BBs). And of course there's the entire armored core hull area well behind the outer skin armored belts.

They are piles of armor which makes it a bigger pain in the ass to get deeply burried components out than it was on the Reliant-class BC HMS Nike pre-war at Hancock Station.


Not impossible, but a slow annoying process. (Of course anything small enough to fit down a passageway is no big deal to remove but the big unitary items like reactors is a PITA to extract or replace)

After catching up on all the written opinions posted over the last few days I think I need to state again what I consider to be the best use to put all those captured Sollie wallers to -

- Scrap.

Treat them as a fairly easily accessible source of highly refined metal suitable for processing into some of the gigatons of materials Manticore NEEDS in order to rebuild its space infrastructure after Oyster Bay.

The SLN just made rebuilding a little bit faster since many of those materials don't have to wait to be mined, refined, transported, smelted and processed before they are used to make structural members and plating and computer widgets.

But, that's just my 2 cents worth.
.

MAD-4A wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:... you first must get through the superdreadnought armor...

Why, does everyone seem to have the same misconception that these ships are just a giant armored egg, with yard-thick armor ALL-AROUND the entire hull?

According to RFC, any modification of a SD requires a shipyard capable of building an SD.

That is largely because of the size, but also because of the armor, including the internal cofferdam armor that limits the spread of damage if the outer layer of armor is penetrated.

An SD, like any well-built warship, is a honeycomb of armor; not a "giant armored egg" but multiple layers of interlocking armored spaces.

Weird Harold wrote:According to RFC, any modification of a SD requires a shipyard capable of building an SD.

That is largely because of the size, but also because of the armor, including the internal cofferdam armor that limits the spread of damage if the outer layer of armor is penetrated.

An SD, like any well-built warship, is a honeycomb of armor; not a "giant armored egg" but multiple layers of interlocking armored spaces.

I don't really know if it's necessary that the yard be capable of BUILDING an SD to service one, but it needs to be capable of properly SERVICING it.

In real life we often take our warships to yards capable of doing the needed work and that often requires the specialized services of a drydock or shiplift capable of getting that bloody big boat (100k ton CVN) out of the water so you can open the hull without flooding and sinking her and also have the heavy lift cranes needed to lift on and off major (hundred or thousand ton) bits and pieces.

I've taken a couple of ships into the Norfolk Naval Shipyard for just that kind of work. The yard itself no longer builds ships (hasn't since just after WWII when they built and launched the hull for BB-66 Kentucky.) But it certainly is capable of seeing to the damages of time and enemy action to any class of warship up through and including nuclear powered carriers and submarines.

Lighter work is often farmed out to smaller and less capable civilian and Navy yards.

BUILDING them is done by yards specializing in that function, Litton in Pascagoula builds destroyers and amphibious assault ships, Newport News Shipbuilding and General Dynamics Electric Boat build submarines and the NNSB of course builds CVNs.

I think it safer to say that a shipyard capable of BUILDING an SD can service them but it doesn't necessarily require the capability of building one to service it, including opening the hull for major work.

Building a major ship is a more specialized function than the sometimes more complex Jack-of-all-trades function of fixing them. A building yard is a factory, a repair yard is a major collision repair shop.

Just saying from experience.

But we're discussing the universe developed by Himself, his universe, his rules.

robert132 wrote:I think it safer to say that a shipyard capable of BUILDING an SD can service them but it doesn't necessarily require the capability of building one to service it, including opening the hull for major work.

True, but the sort of work we're talking about here is, in terms of complexity, comparable to a full RCOH cycle on a nuclear carrier, which I think is something Norfolk doesn't do (Please correct me if I'm wrong)

The E wrote:Because we've read the novels? The tops and bottoms of ships not being armored as heavily as the broadsides or hammerheads is one thing, but when you're talking about altering a ship's broadside, you're going to have to go through that broadside armor eventually...

And so have I, duh...I also know about ship design and construction,

"Ships were also protected by many layers of armor that alternated between ablative composites that absorbed energy from energy weapons and solid anti-kinetic layers."

That means the armor itself is layered, like on an M-1 - not separate sections of armor further in.

"Since the impeller wedge was impenetrable, the armor of a ship on the sides and hammerheads was considerably thicker than the back and belly armor,"

That does not mean that the ENTIRE hull is covered in armor - armor is mounted in belts, the ship has a belt of armor along each side and (apparently - according to wiki) along the top and bottom - which would be a useless waste of mass since the weight of this armor could be moved to the sides and add more protection where incoming fire is likely to impact instead of protecting a non-target area, anyway, there would still be sections of the hull between the belts that would be unarmored - not a burrito-wrap of armor all the way around - talk about a complete waste of mass.

"Inside, there were more armored bulkheads."

Bulkheads traverse the ship side-to-side not fore-&-aft to protect against end-on fire. these would be located primarily in the hammerheads and at the ends of the magazines - not just anywhere,


"Superdreadnoughts, dreadnoughts, and (to a much lesser extent) battleships also used their own internal structure to limit damage."

NOT-Armor - regular structural material

No ship can be built that is COMPLETELY covered in armor - not even the Yamato - she had an armored belt along each side covering the main magazines and engine rooms only, which didn't extend all the way to the keel, only a patch along the waterline, curving in at the ends (forming bulkheads) to encompass the fore & aft barbettes, an armored deck covering the magazines and engines, armored barbettes protecting the ammunition hoises, armor on the turrets (face maxed, sides thinner and thin roof, very thin rear - many ships didn't even have armor on the rear of the turrets - why bother? It's suppose to face away from the enemy) an armored box above the rudders (protecting the steering gears) and an armored conning tower (not the entire main mast just a tube and box positioned just above the forward turrets with the ships helm). Only the main belt, turret faces and CT were at max thickness, the rest was at lesser thicknesses (due to weight/mass restrictions) anything else would be a waist of weight/mass providing limited protection to non-critical items. To add armor internally would detract from the protection available where it's actually needed, even the "roof/belly" armor is ridiculous, why armor something that isn't targetable in normal combat? As I recall reading the "roof" and "belly" were "unarmored" which would make more sense. old Pre-Dreadnought Battleships had thin armor covering more of the she, such as the bow and stern hull and deck. This was done away with because it had no real benefit at long range and 2 major drawbacks 1) as stated, it detracted from adding more armor where it is actually needed (protecting sections of the ship actually needed to fight with - weapons engines etc...) which could have thicker armor if the weight of the thin armor were eliminated and 2) it could actually increase the damage received at long range - by setting off fuses of large caliber shells meant to penetrate thick armor and causing the shell to explode inside the ship rather than pass all the way through without exploding (as can happen if it hits an unarmored section - though not relevant with HH weapons).

finally the ships weapons have to be able to fire OUT of the armor, the hull, though armored over much of the area CANNOT be armored where weapons or sensors (or nodes etc...) are mounted those section of the ship are unarmored and can be used to remove the same equipment that is suppose to extend through it anyway. the Burrito-wrap ship you suggest would be an inefficient combat vessel with limited armor where its actually needed, superfluous protection where it can do no good in a normal engagement and be impossible to repair after an engagement, since all of your equipment is so block off by armor that you can't remove damage (or even worn-out) equipment after a battle or even during refits or mid-life upgrades. all ships are designed to be able to be refit and upgraded with limited underfinance from the ships own structure. How did they get the equipment in-place in the first place?