Retrofitting the RMN: A Saganami Island Assignment

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

Theemile wrote:Wait. Duh... ACMs in a salvo share data and commands via a mesh network (mentioned in UH), so we know there already are ACM to ACM comms with the ability to update the swarm with instructions from the firing platform if some are cut off for some reason. The big question is what radios do the mesh network use and what are their range?

Communication between ACMs in the same salvo is easy, just use light-speed comms (electromagnetic waves, a.k.a. radio, microwave or laser links). By the time of the ACM deployment, radio communication will have been a solved problem for 22 centuries. If space in the missile is at a premium, use something that weighs very little instead of a bulky FTL transmitter which you don't need anyway.

We don't know if the FTL transceiver can operate in any direction, even if not omnidirectionally. Today, we can use phased antennae to direct a signal to a specific direction, without moving parts. Whether that's possible with FTL, we don't know.

What I think the biggest challenge for missile-to-missile communication will be the wedges. We know a ship can sense through its wedge roof and floors, but it takes computing power. Given that missiles must stay pointed at the target lest they lose the target lock, it's unlikely they can normally see through their own wedges. The ACM may be different, since it carries no warhead, but the FTL transmitter and a more powerful computer.

We also don't know if FTL transmissions can cross a wedge distortion. It's conceivable the wedge interferes since it is detectable at FTL speeds, so it necessarily affects the alpha wall.

Of course, this problem can be solved by having all the missiles (not just the ACMs) fly on roughly the same plane, no more than a few km above or below it.

Wait! You don't actually need all missiles to talk to all other missiles: a message may bounce through multiple ACMs until it reaches the destination. So as long as each ACM is in line-of-sight not obstructed by wedges to at least one other ACM, the entire salvo is in theory in meshed connectivity.

kzt wrote:You know, thinking about Hypathia, the SLN was close enough to Hypathia that there was no noticeable delay. Which means it, and by extension the entire TF, is within several thousand KM of the planet. Quite likely all around the planet.

So how come there wasn't any issues with the RMN using missiles at ships in close proximity to the planet?

kzt wrote:So how come there wasn't any issues with the RMN using missiles at ships in close proximity to the planet?

SharkHunter wrote:So you're a senior in the next graduating class post-Nemesis from Saganami Island's strategic analysis course. The assignment is to assess the RMN's post-Yawata strike but pre-Nemesis status, and suggest how to best retrofit and equip the existing non-DD, non-MDM portions of the RMN for whatever. It is also a given that part of these assignments is "fighting the battles of the last war better", as that teaches us how to fight the next battles. And the GA is still short on ships given the vast size of the crumbling Solarian League.

The assignment doesn't preclude having at least one Mk16 tube-firing ship available -- such as at Hypatia; the course rules preclude having a majority of the new classes of ships.

What do you recommend?

Brigade XO wrote:Using SEM's non existant building capasity pre Oyster Bay to convert freighters to Heavy Escort CLACS or Mobile LAC Bases would have merit except for the other part of the plan.
The problem with raiding places in the League and OFS holdings in the Verge is that you are playing into the hands of the Alignment and the Mandarins. They WANT Manticore to hit SL systems and fan up the flames of public opinion and revenge for the agressor Neobarbs.

You could still free up light warships but that would be for more along the line of stiffining the defences and denying the SLN more wormhole bridges so as to both further hurt the SL trade and logistics but force the SLN to have to use more hyperspace segments to get anywhere.

What you need is more missiles, more options like the Charles Wilson and more ways to make it expensive for the SLN to do anything.

Kizarvexis wrote:

Brigade XO wrote:Using SEM's non existant building capasity pre Oyster Bay to convert freighters to Heavy Escort CLACS or Mobile LAC Bases would have merit except for the other part of the plan.
The problem with raiding places in the League and OFS holdings in the Verge is that you are playing into the hands of the Alignment and the Mandarins. They WANT Manticore to hit SL systems and fan up the flames of public opinion and revenge for the agressor Neobarbs.

You could still free up light warships but that would be for more along the line of stiffining the defences and denying the SLN more wormhole bridges so as to both further hurt the SL trade and logistics but force the SLN to have to use more hyperspace segments to get anywhere.

What you need is more missiles, more options like the Charles Wilson and more ways to make it expensive for the SLN to do anything.

Yeah, stuffing LAC bays and support in freighter cargo hold would take some work by repair ships and those would be busy after Oyster Bay. Although every freighter converted to lug LACs around for defensive purposes, frees up a CLAC from that for other duties.

Oyster Bay to Operation Nemesis is some time apart, as I seem to remember Manticore getting some lines back up. So if LACs are one of them AND you can throw up a Grayson style yard around the freighters to convert, it might be doable.

I only brought up the offensive plans as I know that people will seize on that. I thought I got across the risky nature of trying something like that which you would only do if it was necessary. I think that using what would be an unarmed civilian CLAC with likely less LACs on board, would be very dangerous as everything would have to pretty much go right for it to work and how often does that happen.


This would be to further commit LACs to defense in other systems while preserving as many CLACs as possible for other duties. And also freeing up what light forces you can with the LACs replacing as much as you can.


With the reduced capacity for building ships, I doubt LAC bases could be built in other systems. But if they could, it would be great. We were not told how difficult it was to put together the tamales, so it might require repair ships and they would be busy. Then you keep the LAC freighters to be a central support and command base. I wonder if you could 'hot bunk' the LACs if some of them are on patrols for days. If so, you could increase the LAC presence in the system for each freighter you convert.

Theemile wrote:

Kizarvexis wrote:

Yeah, stuffing LAC bays and support in freighter cargo hold would take some work by repair ships and those would be busy after Oyster Bay. Although every freighter converted to lug LACs around for defensive purposes, frees up a CLAC from that for other duties.

Oyster Bay to Operation Nemesis is some time apart, as I seem to remember Manticore getting some lines back up. So if LACs are one of them AND you can throw up a Grayson style yard around the freighters to convert, it might be doable.

I only brought up the offensive plans as I know that people will seize on that. I thought I got across the risky nature of trying something like that which you would only do if it was necessary. I think that using what would be an unarmed civilian CLAC with likely less LACs on board, would be very dangerous as everything would have to pretty much go right for it to work and how often does that happen.


This would be to further commit LACs to defense in other systems while preserving as many CLACs as possible for other duties. And also freeing up what light forces you can with the LACs replacing as much as you can.


With the reduced capacity for building ships, I doubt LAC bases could be built in other systems. But if they could, it would be great. We were not told how difficult it was to put together the tamales, so it might require repair ships and they would be busy. Then you keep the LAC freighters to be a central support and command base. I wonder if you could 'hot bunk' the LACs if some of them are on patrols for days. If so, you could increase the LAC presence in the system for each freighter you convert.

The problem with using Grayson style yards at this point is two fold.
1) the whole idea of distributed yards was that you had an abundance of trained construction personal. You gathered the prefabricated parts at a point in space, and let the workers use muscle power to construct a ship from the parts
2) parts are prefabricated somewhere else. Be it a graser assembly or a drive node, the parts are made elsewhere and assembled at the point in space. Nothing is fabricated on site- it is welded together by gangs of workers

So, you still need factories to produce parts, and tons of trained workers for Grayson style construction to work... 2 items in short supply right now.

Kizarvexis wrote:Yes, Manticore kept manufacturing in orbit, but it is MUCH easier to build factories on the ground where people have experience constructing buildings, than to build factories in space when you are short on people who work in space. Everything you build on planet, is one less that has to be built in space. I'm sure throwing up factories on the ground is faster than building them in space. Once you get enough factories up and running in space, close down the groundside factories later.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

Kizarvexis wrote:Yes, Manticore kept manufacturing in orbit, but it is MUCH easier to build factories on the ground where people have experience constructing buildings, than to build factories in space when you are short on people who work in space. Everything you build on planet, is one less that has to be built in space. I'm sure throwing up factories on the ground is faster than building them in space. Once you get enough factories up and running in space, close down the groundside factories later.

That's not necessarily true. Building the factory itself might be easier in space, where the pieces can be assembled from 6 directions, instead of being constrained by gravity. The structural integrity won't need to withstand gravity either, so the design might be more lightweight.

More importantly, building stuff in space might be cheaper and easier too, especially if either raw materials are already in space or the consumers are. Or better yet, both. Which they are, if they are mining asteroids and building starships.

Orbital factories also have easier time dispersing heat and they don't pollute the atmosphere where people live.