"Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

63 posts • Page 3 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Theemile » Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:12 am
Theemile Fleet Admiral Posts: 5241 Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH	ldwechsler wrote: Creating a whole new class of ships is expensive. Since the Nike's are pretty close to the size of the BB's what is the point? It is likely that a lot of the smaller ships will get bigger as Apollo, etc. winds up able to function in smaller packages. Unless there is a specific reason to create the battleships, why bother doing it? Right, there needs to be a substantial, stated need for the class that the current classes do not fill, or do not fill economically. "To Kill A 2.5 Mton BC" is not a valid need when other vessels can do it. If there is nothing this vessel cannot do that an existing slightly smaller vessel or existing larger vessel cannot do, and do it more economically than either of those classes, there is no point. Most importantly, this design, being a tube heavy design with heavy armor, has design obsolesce built in. The RMN has developed nearly a dozen new missile designs in the last 25 years, only around 1/2 of which of which are backwards compatable with existing launchers; who is to say they are done? A podlayer can easily change out their primary armament, while a tube vessel would require a total rebuild. ****** RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Theemile » Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:12 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5241
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

ldwechsler wrote:
Creating a whole new class of ships is expensive. Since the Nike's are pretty close to the size of the BB's what is the point?

It is likely that a lot of the smaller ships will get bigger as Apollo, etc. winds up able to function in smaller packages. Unless there is a specific reason to create the battleships, why bother doing it?

Right, there needs to be a substantial, stated need for the class that the current classes do not fill, or do not fill economically. "To Kill A 2.5 Mton BC" is not a valid need when other vessels can do it.

If there is nothing this vessel cannot do that an existing slightly smaller vessel or existing larger vessel cannot do, and do it more economically than either of those classes, there is no point.

Most importantly, this design, being a tube heavy design with heavy armor, has design obsolesce built in. The RMN has developed nearly a dozen new missile designs in the last 25 years, only around 1/2 of which of which are backwards compatable with existing launchers; who is to say they are done? A podlayer can easily change out their primary armament, while a tube vessel would require a total rebuild.

******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Louis R » Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:48 pm
Louis R Rear Admiral Posts: 1298 Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:25 pm	This part of your argument is fundamentally incorrect [cf http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... ngton/70/1, and references therein]: battleships are _not_ a poor man's SD. In fact, they are probably more accurately described as a wealthy man's BC - structurally, they're much closer to BCs than to SDs, but, like SDs, when current were built only by the richest systems. A careful review of 2nd Hancock gives a pretty clear idea of their ability to absorb damage from modern weapons. Personally, I'd describe it as 'pitiful'. Somtaaw wrote: < snip > I don't think it's completely the same as saying this is like proposing 'modernizing' the Solarian SDs. As I've said, Triumphants aren't much more lightly armed than the Nike class BCs, and it carries nearly the same count on weapons. The main reason they're obsolete is not having DDM/MDMs, longer-range CMs, and heavier PDLCs. The question is whether the entire concept of a "rear security" battleship is completely dead or not. Battleships are essentially a "poor mans Superdreadnought", but modern SD's are now podnoughts. So there isn't a class devoted simply to being able to absorb tremendous punishment and remain in action anymore. We saw that the 2.5 Mton Nike's are capable of withstanding incredibly firepower (Battle of Chantilly), so a 4.5 Mton Triumphant armed with similar countermissiles/PDLCs would be even harder to kill, creating a very powerful, visible (and mobile) system defender.
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Louis R » Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:48 pm

Louis R
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1298
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:25 pm

This part of your argument is fundamentally incorrect [cf http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... ngton/70/1, and references therein]: battleships are _not_ a poor man's SD. In fact, they are probably more accurately described as a wealthy man's BC - structurally, they're much closer to BCs than to SDs, but, like SDs, when current were built only by the richest systems.

A careful review of 2nd Hancock gives a pretty clear idea of their ability to absorb damage from modern weapons. Personally, I'd describe it as 'pitiful'.

Somtaaw wrote:
< snip >

I don't think it's completely the same as saying this is like proposing 'modernizing' the Solarian SDs. As I've said, Triumphants aren't much more lightly armed than the Nike class BCs, and it carries nearly the same count on weapons. The main reason they're obsolete is not having DDM/MDMs, longer-range CMs, and heavier PDLCs.

The question is whether the entire concept of a "rear security" battleship is completely dead or not. Battleships are essentially a "poor mans Superdreadnought", but modern SD's are now podnoughts. So there isn't a class devoted simply to being able to absorb tremendous punishment and remain in action anymore. We saw that the 2.5 Mton Nike's are capable of withstanding incredibly firepower (Battle of Chantilly), so a 4.5 Mton Triumphant armed with similar countermissiles/PDLCs would be even harder to kill, creating a very powerful, visible (and mobile) system defender.

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by kzt » Sat Nov 17, 2018 12:41 am
kzt Fleet Admiral Posts: 11360 Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm Location: Albuquerque, NM	Louis R wrote:A careful review of 2nd Hancock gives a pretty clear idea of their ability to absorb damage from modern weapons. Personally, I'd describe it as 'pitiful'. That’s a somewhat disingenuous argument. It’s basically arguing that ships of the line from 1800 are fragile when hit by 15” HE rounds. Well, yes. They are antiques. You can certainly get killed dead by a Brown Bess musket ball, but it’s probably not the ideal armament to issue to modern infantry either. A modern 4mt ship would be much tougher. Probably not as much as a modern 8mt RMN SD, but certainly at least as tough as a 6mt scientist. And likely significantly tougher.
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by kzt » Sat Nov 17, 2018 12:41 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Louis R wrote:A careful review of 2nd Hancock gives a pretty clear idea of their ability to absorb damage from modern weapons. Personally, I'd describe it as 'pitiful'.

That’s a somewhat disingenuous argument. It’s basically arguing that ships of the line from 1800 are fragile when hit by 15” HE rounds. Well, yes. They are antiques. You can certainly get killed dead by a Brown Bess musket ball, but it’s probably not the ideal armament to issue to modern infantry either.

A modern 4mt ship would be much tougher. Probably not as much as a modern 8mt RMN SD, but certainly at least as tough as a 6mt scientist. And likely significantly tougher.

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Maldorian » Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:47 am
Maldorian Captain (Junior Grade) Posts: 251 Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:54 am	First of all: It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct. Second: Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build? There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess.
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Maldorian » Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:47 am

Maldorian
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:54 am

First of all:
It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct.

Second:
Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build?

There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess.

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Castenea » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:20 am
Castenea Captain of the List Posts: 671 Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:21 pm Location: MD	Maldorian wrote:First of all: It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct. Second: Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build? There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess. I will endorse your arguments and add my own twist. I believe that any number of systems in the Honorverse will go as far as design studies of new BBs. I strongly suspect that few if any will be built for all of the reasons you have outlined. Cost to build and maintain BBs versus the cost of equivalent firepower in SDs is likely to be the real argument that kills them. If you need more total hulls it is unlikely you need the concentrated firepower undersized wallers represent, thus you build destroyers and cruisers.
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Castenea » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:20 am

Castenea
Captain of the List

Posts: 671
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:21 pm
Location: MD

Maldorian wrote:First of all:
It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct.

Second:
Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build?

There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess.

I will endorse your arguments and add my own twist. I believe that any number of systems in the Honorverse will go as far as design studies of new BBs. I strongly suspect that few if any will be built for all of the reasons you have outlined. Cost to build and maintain BBs versus the cost of equivalent firepower in SDs is likely to be the real argument that kills them. If you need more total hulls it is unlikely you need the concentrated firepower undersized wallers represent, thus you build destroyers and cruisers.

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by ldwechsler » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:14 am
ldwechsler Rear Admiral Posts: 1235 Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:15 pm	Castenea wrote: Maldorian wrote:First of all: It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct. Second: Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build? There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess. I will endorse your arguments and add my own twist. I believe that any number of systems in the Honorverse will go as far as design studies of new BBs. I strongly suspect that few if any will be built for all of the reasons you have outlined. Cost to build and maintain BBs versus the cost of equivalent firepower in SDs is likely to be the real argument that kills them. If you need more total hulls it is unlikely you need the concentrated firepower undersized wallers represent, thus you build destroyers and cruisers. What you folks are doing is assuming the "modern' experts are fools. If people are not building a type of ship there is almost certainly a good reason for it. All of the major players seem to have decided that BB's are not of major value. Haven kept them because they were of some small value dealing with controlled planets. And they got smashed once they faced a real battle. Older ships are mostly just targets. To build a new class, you start from scratch. The Nike class of BCs are the size of the old BB's but different in a lot of ways. Much tougher armor; they are close the SDs in that. Very high automation; probably less than half what would be found on a BB. If the top people in Manticore, Haven, the League,etc., all think that the BB's are of little use, who are we to disagree?
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by ldwechsler » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:14 am

ldwechsler
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1235
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:15 pm

Castenea wrote:
Maldorian wrote:First of all:
It is peace now, and in peace times the fleets will reduced. That count´s the most for wallers and what ships will you retire first? The oldest ones. And that are the Battleships in case of the Haven Fleet, if I am correct.

Second:
Is a modern Battleship economical? If a Superdreadnought has the firepower of two Battleships, but a lower building time and -cost, lower crew need, what ship´s will be build?

There is a reason, why no one build Battleships anymore, because Superdreadnought´s are cheaper to build, to run and have a greater ability to survuve in a battle. That´s my guess.

I will endorse your arguments and add my own twist. I believe that any number of systems in the Honorverse will go as far as design studies of new BBs. I strongly suspect that few if any will be built for all of the reasons you have outlined. Cost to build and maintain BBs versus the cost of equivalent firepower in SDs is likely to be the real argument that kills them. If you need more total hulls it is unlikely you need the concentrated firepower undersized wallers represent, thus you build destroyers and cruisers.

What you folks are doing is assuming the "modern' experts are fools. If people are not building a type of ship there is almost certainly a good reason for it.

All of the major players seem to have decided that BB's are not of major value. Haven kept them because they were of some small value dealing with controlled planets. And they got smashed once they faced a real battle.

Older ships are mostly just targets. To build a new class, you start from scratch. The Nike class of BCs are the size of the old BB's but different in a lot of ways. Much tougher armor; they are close the SDs in that. Very high automation; probably less than half what would be found on a BB.

If the top people in Manticore, Haven, the League,etc., all think that the BB's are of little use, who are we to disagree?

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Yellow Springs » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:32 am
Yellow Springs Midshipman Posts: 2 Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:54 am	Several books gave reference to a weakness in the Manticore's newer designs. They were able to minimize manpower need to run the ship. This led to an issue when manpower was needed. Boarding pirates. Marine deployment. Or just assisting a ship following an incident where additional manpower was needed. Granted that there are troop carriers, though they have not been a major player in Honorverse stories. Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments? It is not "just" about space battles. (Have the right players at the right spot at the right time.)
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Yellow Springs » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:32 am

Yellow Springs
Midshipman

Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:54 am

Several books gave reference to a weakness in the Manticore's newer designs. They were able to minimize manpower need to run the ship.

This led to an issue when manpower was needed. Boarding pirates. Marine deployment. Or just assisting a ship following an incident where additional manpower was needed.

Granted that there are troop carriers, though they have not been a major player in Honorverse stories. Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments?

It is not "just" about space battles. (Have the right players at the right spot at the right time.)

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Weird Harold » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:39 am
Weird Harold Fleet Admiral Posts: 4478 Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm Location: "Lost Wages", NV	Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments? The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details. . . . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Weird Harold » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:39 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

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

Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments?

The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details.

.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Jonathan_S » Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:08 pm
Jonathan_S Fleet Admiral Posts: 8793 Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm Location: Virginia, USA	Weird Harold wrote: Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments? The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details. That's fine if you're grabbing a system and need temporary landing / occupation forces. It doesn't help if you need to detach several ships to perform different tasks that each can require away parties. (Also I don't think Manticore has all that many Kammerlings) I'm pretty sure that as the need for the maximum number of ships possible diminishes the next generation of DD - BC designs will add back in some of that crew capacity so they can perform the classic detached missions. This time they'll likely make it flexible so they can run fine with reduced crew when operating with a fleet or deployed to a SEM inhabited system but able to attach addition crew or Marine forces when operating on detached duty.
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Jonathan_S » Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:08 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8793
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Weird Harold wrote:
Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments?

The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details.

That's fine if you're grabbing a system and need temporary landing / occupation forces. It doesn't help if you need to detach several ships to perform different tasks that each can require away parties. (Also I don't think Manticore has all that many Kammerlings)

I'm pretty sure that as the need for the maximum number of ships possible diminishes the next generation of DD - BC designs will add back in some of that crew capacity so they can perform the classic detached missions. This time they'll likely make it flexible so they can run fine with reduced crew when operating with a fleet or deployed to a SEM inhabited system but able to attach addition crew or Marine forces when operating on detached duty.

Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?
by Weird Harold » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:59 pm
Weird Harold Fleet Admiral Posts: 4478 Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm Location: "Lost Wages", NV	Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments? Weird Harold wrote:The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details. Jonathan_S wrote:That's fine if you're grabbing a system and need temporary landing / occupation forces. It doesn't help if you need to detach several ships to perform different tasks that each can require away parties. (Also I don't think Manticore has all that many Kammerlings) I agree that the Kammerlings aren't a solution to the manpower shortage and you're correct that there aren't that many. I was merely responding to Yellow Spring's assertion that such a ship could/should be developed; one already has been developed. . . . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top

Re: "Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?

by Weird Harold » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:59 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

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

Yellow Springs wrote:Is there a need for a subclass of ship that carries additional personnel - most likely marines - that might have the speed to keep up with the rest of the fleet, fully functional but perhaps carry fewer armaments?

Weird Harold wrote:The Kammerling "System Control Cruisers" fill that niche. see House of Steel for details.

Jonathan_S wrote:That's fine if you're grabbing a system and need temporary landing / occupation forces. It doesn't help if you need to detach several ships to perform different tasks that each can require away parties. (Also I don't think Manticore has all that many Kammerlings)

I agree that the Kammerlings aren't a solution to the manpower shortage and you're correct that there aren't that many. I was merely responding to Yellow Spring's assertion that such a ship could/should be developed; one already has been developed.

.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)

Top

63 posts • Page 3 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Return to Honorverse

Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

"Modern" era Battleships - are they still obsolete?