?

cthia wrote:Thanks for the textev. At first I thought you were simply being nice after I reread it, because it sounds as if it is a design limitation. But when I read it again I'm not so sure. In fact, it seems to hint at other possibilities of the tech ...

...course, there was only one of it in each torpedo, but R&D had decided the new weapon could sacrifice the laser head's multi-shot capability,

Could several of these godawful grasers be placed in a single torpedo?

Can this tech be used to achieve a longer duration of fire from its shipboard grasers? What is a GA graser's duration of fire? According to that textev sidewalls are pretty much toast against a gtorp. What does that promise from an LD's grasers. That fact upholds my notion that a battery of five LD graser's will lay waste to an SD. The GA better hope the MAlign don't break, or steal, their reactor secret.

Vince, firing a graser in a dust cloud will light it up like a lightbulb. Other than that, the beam shouldn't be detected by enemy ships until after the fact. Lest enemy ships are debris after the fact.

If you put several in a torpedo, then you would need a bigger supply of power and the first one to fire would destroy the others. The text is that this is not as powerful as the graser in the Shrike, although longer lasting (I do not remember the pulse length). You have asked whether parts of this tech could transfer to shipboard weapons before and the answer still is that we will nt know until (and unless) RFC gives us an answer.

cthia wrote:Thanks for the textev. At first I thought you were simply being nice after I reread it, because it sounds as if it is a design limitation. But when I read it again I'm not so sure. In fact, it seems to hint at other possibilities of the tech ...

...course, there was only one of it in each torpedo, but R&D had decided the new weapon could sacrifice the laser head's multi-shot capability,

Could several of these godawful grasers be placed in a single torpedo?

Can this tech be used to achieve a longer duration of fire from its shipboard grasers? What is a GA graser's duration of fire? According to that textev sidewalls are pretty much toast against a gtorp. What does that promise from an LD's grasers. That fact upholds my notion that a battery of five LD graser's will lay waste to an SD. The GA better hope the MAlign don't break, or steal, their reactor secret.

Vince, firing a graser in a dust cloud will light it up like a lightbulb. Other than that, the beam shouldn't be detected by enemy ships until after the fact. Lest enemy ships are debris after the fact.

ton wrote:If you put several in a torpedo, then you would need a bigger supply of power and the first one to fire would destroy the others. The text is that this is not as powerful as the graser in the Shrike, although longer lasting (I do not remember the pulse length). You have asked whether parts of this tech could transfer to shipboard weapons before and the answer still is that we will nt know until (and unless) RFC gives us an answer.

IOW, Tum te-tum tum tuuuuum. The names were not changed because there are no innocents.

Tlb, the text seems to suggest a multi-shot capability. Whether that is a full duration multi-shot or not seems to be the question, as I read it. At any rate, missile destruction from the presence of several grasers doesn't seem to be a problem. Albeit, available power very well might be a horse of a different color. Which is why I suggest a breakthrough in reactor technology will go a long way in leveling the playing field, and ships.

cthia wrote:Tlb, the text seems to suggest a multi-shot capability. Whether that is a full duration multi-shot or not seems to be the question, as I read it. At any rate, missile destruction from the presence of several grasers doesn't seem to be a problem. Albeit, available power very well might be a horse of a different color. Which is why I suggest a breakthrough in reactor technology will go a long way in leveling the playing field, and ships.

No: the text was saying that a laser head had a multi-shot capacity; because of the multiple laser rods and that could not be implemented, but the developers were okay with that because of offsetting advantages.

Are you saying that the destruction of the missile and everything in it (that is the other one-shot grasers) is not a problem? Because it seems to argue for one graser per torpedo missile to me.

Something just occurred to me. Yep, when I say that, I usually deliver a doozy. Occupational hazard from working much too closely with Sonja. No need to disappoint now. (Pillow fighting closeness.)

RMN missiles duplicate false images of itself. The multistage Cataphract separates spent stages. What if the fission secret is broken, and the MA design a missile that separates at the opportune time into two functioning missiles? Each with its own power supply. A lot of the electronics wouldn't need to be duplicated because it wouldn't be needed moments before firing.

tlb wrote:Are you saying that the destruction of the missile and everything in it (that is the other one-shot grasers) is not a problem? Because it seems to argue for one graser per torpedo missile to me.

You're probably right about that first part. But I'm under the impression destruction owes itself to the duration of fire.

cthia wrote:Something just occurred to me. Yep, when I say that, I usually deliver a doozy. Occupational hazard from working much too closely with Sonja. No need to disappoint now. (Pillow fighting closeness.)

RMN missiles duplicate false images of itself. The multistage Cataphract separates spent stages. What if the fission secret is broken, and the MA design a missile that separates at the opportune time into two functioning missiles? Each with its own power supply. A lot of the electronics wouldn't need to be duplicated because it wouldn't be needed moments before firing.

The nodes still burn out in 60/180 seconds. Even if they have more power, the nodes are still burned. That is the only reason there are multiple stages/ drive rings.

Theemile wrote:The nodes still burn out in 60/180 seconds. Even if they have more power, the nodes are still burned. That is the only reason there are multiple stages/ drive rings.

Well or 75/225 for ERMs (or at least most - there were hints in War of Honor that the ERMs being slung back and forth between Jessica Epps and Hellbard may have improved even than increased endurance.

But still, you can't shutdown and restart missile drives. And the 2nd stage would need to get 20+ km clear of the booster stage before activating its "sprint" drive - else both stages die from wedge fratricide. Kind of tricky to do that when the 2nd stage is perched ahead of the booster and the booster's wedge is still active. To do this you need the booster have a true multi-drive capability so it could shut down the first drive, achieve sufficient separation while both stages are in a ballistic phase, and then have both bring up a drive.

However -
a) if you have a true multi-drive capability why bother keeping the 2-stage kludge of a Cataphract with its excessive size and reduced warhead (for a given launch tube size)

b) this DDM+2nd stage further kludge still won't help much with saturating the defenses because the booster would be restricted to the same accel it had before which is less than half what the 2nd state "sprint" puts out - so it rapidly falls behind and fails act as a decoy for the actual 2nd stage. But to power that 2nd stage the booster would have to get larger to shove even more capacitors into.

c) And if you even could still squeeze it into an existing missile tube at all you might easily end up giving up yet another step in warhead size to fit in this not very helpful ability - say SDs now throwing missile with DD instead of BC sized warheads and BCs losing the ability to fire them entirely

I don't see this working out as a viable weapon even if/when the MAlign gets the tech necessary to make it technically feasible.


Though if you wanted to build a missile so large nothing could fire it you could, I suppose, build a missile with a single booster that carried a pair of sprint stages stuck onto the nose. You'd still have issues separating them to the point they can safely bring up their wedges - but it might be smaller than simply an entire additional Cataphract. And except for the delay in achieving separation there wouldn't seem to be any technical issues with the drives in making that technically feasible.

cthia wrote:Can this tech be used to achieve a longer duration of fire from its shipboard grasers? What is a GA graser's duration of fire? According to that textev sidewalls are pretty much toast against a gtorp. What does that promise from an LD's grasers. That fact upholds my notion that a battery of five LD graser's will lay waste to an SD. The GA better hope the MAlign don't break, or steal, their reactor secret.

That would depend on how close the LD was willing/able to sneak before firing.

Even though physics as we know it says the effectiveness of lasers or grasers of that size shouldn't fall off very quickly, the Honorverse has a very strong damage falloff with range (probably carried over from the conceptual model of an age of sail ship of the line where even the thickest hulls afloat, a 1st rate ship of the line, could have its hull pierced by a lowly 6th rate frigate if the frigate was able to get close enough)

The laser of a laser head is far weaker than even the broadside mounts of an old destroyer - yet at 30,000 - 50,000 km those will pierce the sidewall of even an SD - while the DD's mounts wouldn't be able to at the same 500,000 km range they they could pierce the sidewall of another DD.

So the graser-torp is said to produce the power of a light-cruiser's graser. That's not normally a significant concern for an BC or larger at energy range. But firing from 30,000 km or so and it will apparently pierce a capital sidewall with ease and still do significant damage.

Any waller already carriers grasers several times more powerful that than of the torp. But they rarely get the change to close to the ranges where RFC allows the weapon's damage to magnify. An LD might, in theory at least, be willing and able to sneak that close. But they better hope nobody is around to figure out where they are before every target is dead - because at those ranges even a CM could kill the LD (wedge impact) and one would hit before the LD could react.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Theemile wrote:The nodes still burn out in 60/180 seconds. Even if they have more power, the nodes are still burned. That is the only reason there are multiple stages/ drive rings.

Well or 75/225 for ERMs (or at least most - there were hints in War of Honor that the ERMs being slung back and forth between Jessica Epps and Hellbard may have improved even than increased endurance.

But still, you can shutdown and restart missile drives. And the 2nd stage would need to get 20+ km clear of the booster stage before activating its "sprint" drive - else both stages die from wedge fratricide. Kind of tricky to do that when the 2nd stage is perched ahead of the booster and the booster's wedge is still active. To do this you need the booster have a true multi-drive capability so it could shut down the first drive, achieve sufficient separation while both stages are in a ballistic phase, and then have both bring up a drive.

However -
a) if you have a true multi-drive capability why bother keeping the 2-stage kludge of a Cataphract with its excessive size and reduced warhead (for a given launch tube size)

b) this DDM+2nd stage further kludge still won't help much with saturating the defenses because the booster would be restricted to the same accel it had before which is less than half what the 2nd state "sprint" puts out - so it rapidly falls behind and fails act as a decoy for the actual 2nd stage. But to power that 2nd stage the booster would have to get larger to shove even more capacitors into.

c) And if you even could still squeeze it into an existing missile tube at all you might easily end up giving up yet another step in warhead size to fit in this not very helpful ability - say SDs now throwing missile with DD instead of BC sized warheads and BCs losing the ability to fire them entirely

I don't see this working out as a viable weapon even if/when the MAlign gets the tech necessary to make it technically feasible.


Though if you wanted to build a missile so large nothing could fire it you could, I suppose, build a missile with a single booster that carried a pair of sprint stages stuck onto the nose. You'd still have issues separating them to the point they can safely bring up their wedges - but it might be smaller than simply an entire additional Cataphract. And except for the delay in achieving separation there wouldn't seem to be any technical issues with the drives in making that technically feasible.

To edit your text above, " you cannot shut down and restart missile drives." It's just plain honorverse physics.

I appreciate the musings on possible workarounds. It is truly interesting. You guys really shouldn't give my warped brain any toys to play with.

However, I wasn't suggesting two wedges being active simultaneously. The separated stage would separate moments before entering attack range and would contain only reactor housing and graser. Ditto for main missile. Main missile could possibly contain an additional stage which lights off after it clears the separated stage.

I was under the impression that the wedges are dropped before the missile fires, thus are no longer needed after the missile reaches attack range? No?

At any rate, I'm going for a missile which separates into two distinctly different sections which fire independently. That would confound point defense much like Shannon's Tripple Ripple confounded Manty doctrine. At least until adjustments are made. Like against Shannon's TR. But then the MA can alter time of separation.

cthia wrote:I appreciate the musings on possible workarounds. It is truly interesting. You guys really shouldn't give my warped brain any toys to play with.

However, I wasn't suggesting two wedges being active simultaneously. The separated stage would separate moments before entering attack range and would contain only reactor housing and graser. Ditto for main missile. Main missile could possibly contain an additional stage which lights off after it clears the separated stage.

I was under the impression that the wedges are dropped before the missile fires, thus are no longer needed after the missile reaches attack range? No?

At any rate, I'm going for a missile which separates into two distinctly different sections which fire independently. That would confound point defense much like Shannon's Tripple Ripple confounded Manty doctrine. At least until adjustments are made. Like against Shannon's TR. But then the MA can alter time of separation.

I think the timing on when the wedge drops on a regular missile is very tightly tied to the attack, not just when it is in "attack range". I envision it it in these steps: 1-wedge drops, 2-an instant later the rods are ejected ahead and out (if the wedge were still active now the rods would fall behind, due to acceleration) 3-after waiting long enough for the rods to point in the correct direction, the shaped nuclear charge is detonated. This all takes place in the least possible time, because the components are unprotected when the wedge drops.

What if your one-shot graser was put into a minimum pod with targeting electronics and a plasma capacitor fed by the missile? Then your missiles has several of these pods and drops them one at a time when it is in attack range, while it continues to accelerate; the grasers to fire as soon as they acquire their target (the onboard system having been updated by the missile before the drop).