Last use for SL SD captured

Lord Skimper wrote:There is always something. Fine do it without keyhole II. Use keyhole I instead. Use Mk16 pods or non Apollo mk 23 pods. Use missile tubes with control links if need be. The SD still make great mini Fortes.

Except a reasonably similar level of effort could probably make real forts. You're still talking fairly massive refits if you want them to be worth the effort.

Jonathan_S wrote:That's less shipboard support than Keyhole II takes, but SLN SDs don't even appear to carry as much redundant fire control as the pre-war RMN DNs. While they SLN units most likely do have a beams power emitters on the broadside that can power the Keyhole it's unclear if they have the data links to talk to one properly; and if they did it would only allow them to control maybe twice the pitiful number of missiles they could without it. (I'm assuming not even the SLN would put in a tactical section that couldn't control both broadsides simultaneously - so relays would at least let you utilize that against a single target.)

The only ships that used to carry enough control links to control two broadsides worth were destroyers and maybe light cruisers. Superdreadnought's couldn't roll fast enough to present their second broadsides on a single target.

It wasn't until the RMN perfected their off-bore launching that larger ships were able to start firing both broadsides at one target.

The SLN also hasn't fought a real war in centuries, and the last time they fought was probably when the beam was still king. So I wouldn't be at all surprised to discover SLN superdreadnoughts have an even smaller battle damage reserve of control links than RMN ships, which I believe carry a 60% reserve?

I also wouldn't be surprised if we find out that SLN destroyers and light cruisers carry more control links per ton than SLN superdreadnoughts do. Again because smaller ships can roll much faster and get second or even third salvo's in space faster than the Solly SD's can.

Somtaaw wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:That's less shipboard support than Keyhole II takes, but SLN SDs don't even appear to carry as much redundant fire control as the pre-war RMN DNs. While they SLN units most likely do have a beams power emitters on the broadside that can power the Keyhole it's unclear if they have the data links to talk to one properly; and if they did it would only allow them to control maybe twice the pitiful number of missiles they could without it. (I'm assuming not even the SLN would put in a tactical section that couldn't control both broadsides simultaneously - so relays would at least let you utilize that against a single target.)

The only ships that used to carry enough control links to control two broadsides worth were destroyers and maybe light cruisers. Superdreadnought's couldn't roll fast enough to present their second broadsides on a single target.

It wasn't until the RMN perfected their off-bore launching that larger ships were able to start firing both broadsides at one target.

The SLN also hasn't fought a real war in centuries, and the last time they fought was probably when the beam was still king. So I wouldn't be at all surprised to discover SLN superdreadnoughts have an even smaller battle damage reserve of control links than RMN ships, which I believe carry a 60% reserve?

I also wouldn't be surprised if we find out that SLN destroyers and light cruisers carry more control links per ton than SLN superdreadnoughts do. Again because smaller ships can roll much faster and get second or even third salvo's in space faster than the Solly SD's can.

DDs and CLs carry enough links on each broadside to control a double broadside's worth.

But I imagine that an SD designer would have to allow for the possibility of the ship being caught in an ambush between two forces and having to engage one force from each broadside simultaneously. Obviously each broadside has enough control links to control it's own missiles -- but you would need to ensure the tactical department's computer resources were sufficient to fight both broadsides simultaneously.

Assuming that, if you could somehow link to a relay off each broadside you could position so both relays could see your outbound missiles and double your normally available number of control links.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:The only ships that used to carry enough control links to control two broadsides worth were destroyers and maybe light cruisers. Superdreadnought's couldn't roll fast enough to present their second broadsides on a single target.

It wasn't until the RMN perfected their off-bore launching that larger ships were able to start firing both broadsides at one target.

The SLN also hasn't fought a real war in centuries, and the last time they fought was probably when the beam was still king. So I wouldn't be at all surprised to discover SLN superdreadnoughts have an even smaller battle damage reserve of control links than RMN ships, which I believe carry a 60% reserve?

I also wouldn't be surprised if we find out that SLN destroyers and light cruisers carry more control links per ton than SLN superdreadnoughts do. Again because smaller ships can roll much faster and get second or even third salvo's in space faster than the Solly SD's can.

DDs and CLs carry enough links on each broadside to control a double broadside's worth.

But I imagine that an SD designer would have to allow for the possibility of the ship being caught in an ambush between two forces and having to engage one force from each broadside simultaneously. Obviously each broadside has enough control links to control it's own missiles -- but you would need to ensure the tactical department's computer resources were sufficient to fight both broadsides simultaneously.

Assuming that, if you could somehow link to a relay off each broadside you could position so both relays could see your outbound missiles and double your normally available number of control links.

This is logically, but we have many circumstances (particularly with RMN ships utilizing Keyhole) that each Keyhole platform is supposed to be capable of handling 100% of the ships control links, so with two Keyholes that's 200% of nominal fire control.

Saganami-C's have 20 tubes per broadside for a total of 40, and have the capacity for firing "quadruple" broadsides, or double-stacks from each, with a 60% reserve for a total of 128 links. Assuming Sag-C's could even mount Keyhole that'd actually mean they should have 256 links worth, but even in the Battle(massacre) of Spindle, they were only firing approximately 100-120 pods worth of Apollo/Mk23 pods.


And I again must respectfully disagree on Solarian capital ships ever being caught with enemies on both sides. They haven't fought a war in centuries, and their doctrine of go for the capital, means their "wall of battle" is going to be locked into formation going straight for beams. If you recall the early appendixes about missile combat in the early days of missiles, it took thousands of missiles and hours of combat to purely missile a capital ship to death. But they were useful tools for feeling out an opponents EW, so even if you weren't expecting to deal damage you threw a few missiles.

The Solarian Navy hasn't been in combat since that doctrine went extinct, so their wallers would only ever fight from one side. That allows an easy place to "skimp" on waller construction costs. As long as it has X meters of armor, and all the lights turn on, nobody would ever know you skimped on the superdreadnought fire control.

Now Solly lighter ships, it's considerably harder to hide that sort of skimping, especially since from the looks of it, Battle Fleet doesn't have anything smaller than battlecruisers. And the heaviest ships that nominally get sent out on OFS/Gendarmerie bombardment missions are heavy cruisers, you don't have a choice but to build smaller ships to spec.

Somtaaw wrote:This is logically, but we have many circumstances (particularly with RMN ships utilizing Keyhole) that each Keyhole platform is supposed to be capable of handling 100% of the ships control links, so with two Keyholes that's 200% of nominal fire control.

One minor problem: Keyhole relays control links, it does NOT create them.

With two or two hundred Keyhole platforms, you only have more options for routing 100% of your control links. You don't multiply however many control links you have without Keyhole.

In fact, without off-bore capability in your missiles, you can't even use the opposite broadside's control links. Unless your missiles can turn at least ninety degrees a Keyhole platform can't see missiles from both broadsides.

Weird Harold wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:This is logically, but we have many circumstances (particularly with RMN ships utilizing Keyhole) that each Keyhole platform is supposed to be capable of handling 100% of the ships control links, so with two Keyholes that's 200% of nominal fire control.

One minor problem: Keyhole relays control links, it does NOT create them.

With two or two hundred Keyhole platforms, you only have more options for routing 100% of your control links. You don't multiply however many control links you have without Keyhole.

In fact, without off-bore capability in your missiles, you can't even use the opposite broadside's control links. Unless your missiles can turn at least ninety degrees a Keyhole platform can't see missiles from both broadsides.

Nitpick - you could use the opposite broadside's control links - relayed - if you're firing towed pods because the pods can be oriented towards the enemy before launching.

And the Keyhole, as I understand it, normally uses a shorter ranged very high bandwidth data-link to the ship's tactical section. So the number of missiles it can control is only tangentially related to the number of broadside fire control links the ship mounts.

Each keyhole would be able to control the lower limit of:
a. Number of missiles the ship's tactical section computers can handle
b. The number of control links that can be multi-plexed onto the high bandwidth link to the Keyhole
c. The number of physical fire control links mounted on the keyhole itself. (Though b and c should be fairly close to each other)

Now obviously if you're controlling Apollo pods (whether by FTL of their legacy lightspeed control links) the Apollo control missile does give you a multiplier effect as the entire pod takes only a single missile's 'slot' in the tactical section systems.



Thinking about it, if your ship lacks that dedicated high bandwidth keyhole datalink I'm not sure if it can take advantage of keyhole at all - even if one happened to somehow be floating off it's broadside...

noblehunter wrote:

Lord Skimper wrote:There is always something. Fine do it without keyhole II. Use keyhole I instead. Use Mk16 pods or non Apollo mk 23 pods. Use missile tubes with control links if need be. The SD still make great mini Fortes.

Except a reasonably similar level of effort could probably make real forts. You're still talking fairly massive refits if you want them to be worth the effort.

So you can build fortes but you can't build ships because all your yards were destroyed? Where are you going to build the fortes? This is why you are using the SL SD in the first place and only reason you are using them. The 'mini' fortes are kept in close to the junctions, energy range, and use the Keyhole I's further out to control the missile pods. 12 Solly SD can control with each broadside 32-34 missiles. That means 384-408 missiles per broadside. The Keyhole I & II are self powered. They also have a PD multiplier because they carry PD. And improved sensors over what the ship otherwise has, the relay is just information links, yes there will be bandwidth limitations but again these mini fortes are not going to encounter enough opposition to matter. And should 500+ SD show up, they can retreat through the junction if need be all at once and destabilise it for hours. I still think the Keyhole II will work the range to the Keyhole 2 is short and the Keyhole 2 sends the FTL controls to the Apollo missiles. You won't have massive numbers of missiles to control but you will have the massive range. The SD are parked wedge up side wall up and Keyhole wedge up. Missile pods up and ready and placed between ships the Keyhole can control the missiles using one broadside from each ship because the ships won't overwhelm the keyhole with control links. Unlike Manty Rolands and CL/CA These 12 ships have huge massive Lasers and Grasers and the heaviest of armour. Not Forte heavy but you can't built any Fortes. In Energy range a Solly SD will kill any number of Manty DD/CL/CA transitioning through a junction. Even 36 Solly or Manty SD without wedges or sidewalls would face destruction facing 12 with wedges and sidewalls. And remember, you can't build anything.

Skimper, you're arguing from an assumption that the RMN not only intends to take every wormhole they can reach, but also hold them indefinitely. Which, ahem, isn't the plan as far as we know.

Lord Skimper wrote:So you can build fortes but you can't build ships because all your yards were destroyed? Where are you going to build the fortes? This is why you are using the SL SD in the first place and only reason you are using them. The 'mini' fortes are kept in close to the junctions, energy range, and use the Keyhole I's further out to control the missile pods. 12 Solly SD can control with each broadside 32-34 missiles. That means 384-408 missiles per broadside. The Keyhole I & II are self powered. They also have a PD multiplier because they carry PD. And improved sensors over what the ship otherwise has, the relay is just information links, yes there will be bandwidth limitations but again these mini fortes are not going to encounter enough opposition to matter. And should 500+ SD show up, they can retreat through the junction if need be all at once and destabilise it for hours. I still think the Keyhole II will work the range to the Keyhole 2 is short and the Keyhole 2 sends the FTL controls to the Apollo missiles. You won't have massive numbers of missiles to control but you will have the massive range. The SD are parked wedge up side wall up and Keyhole wedge up. Missile pods up and ready and placed between ships the Keyhole can control the missiles using one broadside from each ship because the ships won't overwhelm the keyhole with control links. Unlike Manty Rolands and CL/CA These 12 ships have huge massive Lasers and Grasers and the heaviest of armour. Not Forte heavy but you can't built any Fortes. In Energy range a Solly SD will kill any number of Manty DD/CL/CA transitioning through a junction. Even 36 Solly or Manty SD without wedges or sidewalls would face destruction facing 12 with wedges and sidewalls. And remember, you can't build anything.

If you can't build forts, you can't do the refit work on the Solly SDs.

noblehunter wrote:

Lord Skimper wrote:So you can build fortes but you can't build ships because all your yards were destroyed? Where are you going to build the fortes? This is why you are using the SL SD in the first place and only reason you are using them. The 'mini' fortes are kept in close to the junctions, energy range, and use the Keyhole I's further out to control the missile pods. 12 Solly SD can control with each broadside 32-34 missiles. That means 384-408 missiles per broadside. The Keyhole I & II are self powered. They also have a PD multiplier because they carry PD. And improved sensors over what the ship otherwise has, the relay is just information links, yes there will be bandwidth limitations but again these mini fortes are not going to encounter enough opposition to matter. And should 500+ SD show up, they can retreat through the junction if need be all at once and destabilise it for hours. I still think the Keyhole II will work the range to the Keyhole 2 is short and the Keyhole 2 sends the FTL controls to the Apollo missiles. You won't have massive numbers of missiles to control but you will have the massive range. The SD are parked wedge up side wall up and Keyhole wedge up. Missile pods up and ready and placed between ships the Keyhole can control the missiles using one broadside from each ship because the ships won't overwhelm the keyhole with control links. Unlike Manty Rolands and CL/CA These 12 ships have huge massive Lasers and Grasers and the heaviest of armour. Not Forte heavy but you can't built any Fortes. In Energy range a Solly SD will kill any number of Manty DD/CL/CA transitioning through a junction. Even 36 Solly or Manty SD without wedges or sidewalls would face destruction facing 12 with wedges and sidewalls. And remember, you can't build anything.

If you can't build forts, you can't do the refit work on the Solly SDs.

What refits?