Fall 1924 - The changes of ship roles

Jonathan_S wrote:But having the ability to scout (RDs) and light defenses might tempt system commanders into using them for duties other than carrying dispatches around as quickly as possible. And given the non-trivial costs of those extra systems they'd have been able to afford fewer dispatch boats in the first place, making diverting one to other duties even less justifiable.

I'd say the new dispatch boats should stick with the aesthetic of minimal hull wrapped around secure message storage, fusion generator, military hyperdrive (now streak drive), military impellers, particle shielding, nodes and compensator, plus minimalist crew quarters. Basically the cheapest design you can use to get the desired transit speed.

I agree that the DB should be kept as a DB. Especially because it should not be armed if it's meant to go everywhere: interstellar law probably say that every civilian ship is to be accepted into a system and be allowed to purchase fuel and consumables, but warships don't need to be extended the same courtesy. They are allowed into the system at the discretion of the host.

Moreover, DBs can be diplomatic ships, which might enjoy further privileges.

If you want to little ship to scout, make a scout / prowler ship. Take the hull of a Nat Turner RTN Frigate (which was built by a civilian yard, BTW), shrink it to the minimum size that can still mount some CMs (probably chase), PDLC (probably broadside) and give it the best impellers and compensators you can procure. This little ship should be extremely stealthy and pull over 800 gravities so it can run from anyone, because it isn't supposed to fight.

Brigade XO wrote:Your Dispatch Boats should probably have at least minimal point defense with PDLC and make sure it covers the stern area as well. A DB shouldn't be sent into known harm but should be able to use light speed defense weapons to help it run away successfully. They have speed, not armor and shouldn't think of going after any other ship- even a run-of-the-mill pirate on a commercial ship with some weapons. That sort of pirate isn't likely to waste a lot of missiles (nor have that many) trying to kill a DB.
So, does now RMN have the Streak Drive? I remember that there is information on it but has it been worked up to where RMN has a workable drive? Information flow is important and the Streak surely would help. If your using the DB to shuttle information and "something" comes up, having one that can probably deal with one, perhaps two missiles would be a plus but mostly it's to cover yourself as you run for the hyper limit. Normally a system should be able to identify an actual warship showing up and warn whatever is in-system that there is a potential problem- at which time the DB should get itself running for the hyper limit somewhere other than the vector the bogy is approaching from. Run like hell and keep recording everything till it get out of the system.

WW II PT boats often mounted twin-50cal mounts which were used for a lot of things. Like anti-aircraft defense, shooting up other small boats and strafing the crap out of whatever might be a Problem. That and giving the Problem a reason to flinch and screw up it's aim. The one I'm failure with had a twin 50 turret, a 20mm on the stern and torpedoes....and hated anybody's aircraft, also preferring to be out at night when the aircraft (of either side) were not out hunting them. If I recall correctly, Kennedy's PT 109 added on a 37mm anti-tank gun but there seems to have been a bunch of field modifications to make them more dangerous to what they might encounter.
Not suggesting you should strap a box-launcher or two on a DB. It would give you range but mostly that would be more along the line of distracting a potential enemy in what you hope is a stern chase and make them waste time fending them off- presuming the DB has enough sensor and tactical power to feed the missiles the initial target and then continue running like hell for hyperspace.

The PT boat - or more accurately the MGB (motor gun boat) analog in the Honorverse is the LAC; not the dispatch boat.

But I disagree about putting even a light defensive weapon on a dispatch boat. For one historically we're told they don't have them. But it wouldn't just be adding a PDLC, it'd be the cluster, the superconducting capacitor rings to run in, the tactical computers to aim it, the sensor system so the computer knows where to target it. All that probably adds 5-10% to the cost of the ship.

This isn't strapping an extra .50 cal machine gun on that's aimed by eye - this is putting on the equivalent of a WWII era British "Stabilized Tachymetric Anti-Aircraft Gun" (STAAG) mount with its built in fire control and radar sensor (something a PT boat lacks the power to run, or buoyancy to even carry) or a 1970's Phalanx CIWS (again more than a PT boat can manage).

Even ignoring diplomatic questions, I think any commodore, admiral, or government would prefer 20 unarmed minimalist dispatch boats for the cost of 18-19 ones armed with a point defense than on a good day might stop 2 or 3 crappy missiles. They're always short on them, so giving some of their potential ones up in order for a virtually never needed (or else insufficient) point defense capability is going to look like a bad deal.

Jonathan_S wrote:The PT boat - or more accurately the MGB (motor gun boat) analog in the Honorverse is the LAC; not the dispatch boat.

But I disagree about putting even a light defensive weapon on a dispatch boat. For one historically we're told they don't have them. But it wouldn't just be adding a PDLC, it'd be the cluster, the superconducting capacitor rings to run in, the tactical computers to aim it, the sensor system so the computer knows where to target it. All that probably adds 5-10% to the cost of the ship.

This isn't strapping an extra .50 cal machine gun on that's aimed by eye - this is putting on the equivalent of a WWII era British "Stabilized Tachymetric Anti-Aircraft Gun" (STAAG) mount with its built in fire control and radar sensor (something a PT boat lacks the power to run, or buoyancy to even carry) or a 1970's Phalanx CIWS (again more than a PT boat can manage).

Even ignoring diplomatic questions, I think any commodore, admiral, or government would prefer 20 unarmed minimalist dispatch boats for the cost of 18-19 ones armed with a point defense than on a good day might stop 2 or 3 crappy missiles. They're always short on them, so giving some of their potential ones up in order for a virtually never needed (or else insufficient) point defense capability is going to look like a bad deal.

The entire point is take a standard civi design and dual use it to save $$$. The LAC is useless, it has no hyper generator. Today said boats are used all over the world. take a common speed boat design and add a machine gun and maybe a rocket or two with RADAR added. Take systems off and sell them after they get old. They are not purpose built unless your government loves wasting money(many do)

DB is already built for long endurance.

You make my point for me. CIWS system has everything built into its mount; Radar, 3d control, and only thing you add is the ON weapons free button... Standard DB with a bolt on PDLC + bolt on RD mount with RD.

There is literally nothing different. In time of peace and for all missions not requiring the scout function, unbolt said PDLC/RD mount and you are a normal dispatch boat which your navy needs by the dozen per task group anyways.

It adds zero cost other than to store a common PDLC which your other ships use anyways and RD mounts your other ships use anyways in your task force repair ship or equivalent. These are common items in repair inventories.

Relax wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:The PT boat - or more accurately the MGB (motor gun boat) analog in the Honorverse is the LAC; not the dispatch boat.

But I disagree about putting even a light defensive weapon on a dispatch boat. For one historically we're told they don't have them. But it wouldn't just be adding a PDLC, it'd be the cluster, the superconducting capacitor rings to run in, the tactical computers to aim it, the sensor system so the computer knows where to target it. All that probably adds 5-10% to the cost of the ship.

This isn't strapping an extra .50 cal machine gun on that's aimed by eye - this is putting on the equivalent of a WWII era British "Stabilized Tachymetric Anti-Aircraft Gun" (STAAG) mount with its built in fire control and radar sensor (something a PT boat lacks the power to run, or buoyancy to even carry) or a 1970's Phalanx CIWS (again more than a PT boat can manage).

Even ignoring diplomatic questions, I think any commodore, admiral, or government would prefer 20 unarmed minimalist dispatch boats for the cost of 18-19 ones armed with a point defense than on a good day might stop 2 or 3 crappy missiles. They're always short on them, so giving some of their potential ones up in order for a virtually never needed (or else insufficient) point defense capability is going to look like a bad deal.

The entire point is take a standard civi design and dual use it to save $$$. The LAC is useless, it has no hyper generator. Today said boats are used all over the world. take a common speed boat design and add a machine gun and maybe a rocket or two with RADAR added. Take systems off and sell them after they get old. They are not purpose built unless your government loves wasting money(many do)

DB is already built for long endurance.

You make my point for me. CIWS system has everything built into its mount; Radar, 3d control, and only thing you add is the ON weapons free button... Standard DB with a bolt on PDLC + bolt on RD mount with RD.

There is literally nothing different. In time of peace and for all missions not requiring the scout function, unbolt said PDLC/RD mount and you are a normal dispatch boat which your navy needs by the dozen per task group anyways.

It adds zero cost other than to store a common PDLC which your other ships use anyways and RD mounts your other ships use anyways in your task force repair ship or equivalent. These are common items in repair inventories.

PDLCs pretty clearly aren't self contained CIWS -- and given that they need to be gravimetrically and radar tracking objects arriving at somewhere between 0.25 and 0.8c; which they need to engage at upwards of 100,000 km and stop cold before reaching 50,000 it'd be kind of shocking if they were.


But the clearest example that they aren't that comes to mind is the sim Wayfarer was running in Silesia -- when Wanderman pulled off his software trick to get the gravitics back up to see the simulated attackers. He dropped Radar Six out of the net and by doing so "cut half [Lieutenant Jansen's] starboard point defense radar out of the circuit". But routing the grav sensors through the pre-processing node for Radar Six could hardly drop half the starboard point defense radar if each of the 10 PDLCs on that flank was a self-contained CIWS with its own sensors.
(Though WoH mentions that there are "supporting [sensor arrays] dedicated laser cluster fire control" in addition to "the main arrays")

Also we have mention in HotQ of Fearless controlling the PDLC targeting for her escorts "Fearless's counter missiles were responsible for long-range interceptions, with Apollo's and Troubadour's taking the leakers. Any that got through both missile layers would be engaged by the massed laser clusters of all three ships under Fearless's control.". And if they were entirely self-contained CIWS then the SLN's laser clueters wouldn't have gotten more effective against follow-up salvos at Hypatia "the laser clusters were claiming more kills as updated profiles on the attack missiles’ terminal maneuvers and emission signatures were relayed throughout the task force" [UH]. ToF also has an example of seemingly somewhat centralized control of them "Point Defense Three retargeted the laser clusters guarding Charlemagne's port quarter, training around to meet the wave of missiles roaring in"

And of course we saw that Hexapuma's tactical computers can order PDLCs to offensively engage specific spots on nearly targets, say on an idiotic Jessik ship that has just blown away an RMN boarding pinnace. (Though that doesn't preclude them also having a self-contained CIWS mode)

They do repeatedly say the PDLCs are under "computer control" -- but I'm fairly sure that's the big tac department computers that they're talking about. By having access to multiple sensors, and more info on enemy ECM, those more centralized computers have the best chance of sorting out decoys from actual missiles, seeing through jamming attempts, and generally prioritizing targets across all the PDLCs that can bear (so you don't end up with half the mounts autonomously deciding to all target the same missile and ignoring its companions). Certainly better chance than a self-contained CIWS with only its small on-mount sensors would have.

When you only have a single PDLC there is nothing to "centrally" coordinate. Local control works just fine.

In either case, even if PDLC is not "attachable" RD's certainly are, and a navy will have your standard DB chasis cheap hyper capable scout. Could argue for an attachable box launcher of CM's as more realistic. No scout should be doing anything other than hypering out if found.

The use of "scouts" to unknown systems would be fairly rare I would think.

PS: I find the ability to hit AnY fractional c missile with a PDLC from a mathematics perspective to be absurd, but we are expected to close our eyes on this one.

Jonathan_S wrote:But I disagree about putting even a light defensive weapon on a dispatch boat. For one historically we're told they don't have them. But it wouldn't just be adding a PDLC, it'd be the cluster, the superconducting capacitor rings to run in, the tactical computers to aim it, the sensor system so the computer knows where to target it. All that probably adds 5-10% to the cost of the ship.

BTW, shouldn't all ships, civilian or not, come with a mounted chase PDLC to shoot interplanetary debris out of the way? We're told the warships have this functionality on automatic. It's true that warships tread where civilians ought not to (they should stick to cleared lanes), but not all interplanetary debris can be swept away all the time. So civilian ships should come with a "deflector laser" equivalent to Star Trek's deflector shields, shouldn't they?

Brigade XO wrote:
WW II PT boats often mounted twin-50cal mounts which were used for a lot of things. Like anti-aircraft defense, shooting up other small boats and strafing the crap out of whatever might be a Problem. That and giving the Problem a reason to flinch and screw up it's aim. The one I'm failure with had a twin 50 turret, a 20mm on the stern and torpedoes....and hated anybody's aircraft, also preferring to be out at night when the aircraft (of either side) were not out hunting them. If I recall correctly, Kennedy's PT 109 added on a 37mm anti-tank gun but there seems to have been a bunch of field modifications to make them more dangerous to what they might encounter.
Not suggesting you should strap a box-launcher or two on a DB. It would give you range but mostly that would be more along the line of distracting a potential enemy in what you hope is a stern chase and make them waste time fending them off- presuming the DB has enough sensor and tactical power to feed the missiles the initial target and then continue running like hell for hyperspace.

At the BB Massachusetts museum at Fall River, they have a pair of PTs - the decks are filled with every type of weapons system traditionally loaded on their decks - they were so filled with weapons systems, they were unusable - my friend and I were making fun of the museum showing such (non-realistic) ships - fortunately, at the aft of the 2nd boat was a placard that the loadout represented all the variations crews mounted over the years, not a realistic loadout.

But what crews would bolt on their ships to increase survivability was impressive.

As any FYI, the museum is also the museum of all the WWII PT squadrons. Interesting place to see WWII naval history.

Theemile wrote:Traditional Warship Roles include:

System Policing
System Picketing
Tactical Scouting
Missile Screen
Strategic Scouting
Convoy Escort
Presence
Show the Flag
Commerce Raider
System Raider
System Defense
Strategic Offence
Wall Adjunct
System Control
Marine Carrier/Escort
LAC distribution

Finally typed it up: Sorry for delay: Rearranged

Traditional Warship Roles include:

Presence: Fort, but not realistic. Most star systems have no one living. A long term monitoring Drone working via solar power is required. Stealth required.

System Control: Must be able to work beyond hyper limit. Hypergenerator required. Frigate/Destroyer depending on how cheap said system is. Politicians wouldn't cut the military budget...

System Policing: Cutters/Pinnace/Shuttle

System Picketing: Stealth + RD + speed paramount. Smallest crew possible. DD/CA if you assume one can mousetrap: Personally, I think this is hopeless in reality, but it is in the books. But if you bring FTL component pods along... It actually could become reality.

Strategic Scouting: Multisystem outside hyper limit. Smallest crew possible. DD With giant telescopes looking from ~1 light week out. Should be able to see nearly everything of relevance.

Tactical Scouting: Inside hyper limit Stealth paramount → RD

Convoy Escort: Why is there a convoy to begin with? Pirates do not go after convoy's so we are talking about war scenarios in which case you want CA's but due to economics what you actually get are DD's and hope they can get their charges into hyper where the CA's attacking can't track them hopefully due to poor sensor conditions.

Commerce Raider: Knowledge is better than a class of ships(cough BC). Where to be and When. Picking numbers. Therefore, just bring more CA's or CL's/DD's. You have the initiative. No reason to bring expensive large ships. Just bring more cheap ships which you need when the convoy scatters anyways.

Show the Flag: Ego and Pride parade for allies, brow beating for potential threats. CA's do this just fine, but honestly, so do DD's. Allies say hi ooo shiny, and potential enemies know the SD'P are potentially coming.

Missile Screen: Whatever can pack maximum number of launchers and control channels per ton in. Pretending forward position is relevant instead of building longer ranged CM's with FTL component is dumb. Already present in Uncompromising Honor. CM pods are required going forward. CLAC is effectively dead. Especially when one looks at manpower requirements.

System Defense: Forts and highly armored FTL components for both long range attack missiles and CM's. Permanent armored Wedge barriers around your industry. Also allows one to approach at a normal vector close with impellers for all civil craft as the worst that happens is they ram the impeller wedge of said fort and immolate themselves and maybe blow a node or 2 on the MUCH larger fort.

Strategic Offense: With the absolute gargantuan ranges available with FTL, the need for mass limitation of SD'P in effect disappears as the need for high acceleration in effect disappears. Total amount of control channels for offensive/defensive fire is paramount along with missile loads. Obliterate everything from beyond the Hyper limit. Stop pretending one is going to do maintenance in the heat of battle and it will make one damn bit of difference. SD'P should have a crew no larger than a DD/CL. Tonnage: Much higher than current SD'P. An acceleration of 10G is perfectly acceptable. Just call them Hyper capable Forts.

System Raider: Stop pretending there is any reason to raid a system that does not require the biggest baddest unit you can bring in the age of FTL pod launched alpha strike with control missiles multiplying channels available. The only difference is one needs a bit more acceleration to get between systems in a quicker fashion than the category of Strategic Offense. As one unit can only be in a single place at a time. This truly would bring back the REAL definition of Battle cruiser, Exact same armament of Battleship, but faster with slightly less armor. Ergo the tonnage will be that of an SD ~9Mton and it will have all the bells whistles of current SD'P.

Wall Adjunct: Logistics, common civilian hull design for containerized cargo that one can easily bolt on additional components from a 2nd fusion plant, to sidewall generators to CM launchers etc in whatever number required for a variety of tasks that can keep up with the fleet.


LAC distribution: There will not be LAC's going forward. Their role is utterly obsolete in the age of FTL control links

LAC's, CL's, BC, CLAC are obsolete due to FTL/MDM: Add hyper capable Fort. SD'P becomes a REAL BC via wet navy definition.

PS: CA's will have larger Marine complements all other classes will be minimized. Possible DD/CL combined with empty space allowed for marines

Theemile wrote:

Brigade XO wrote:
WW II PT boats often mounted twin-50cal mounts which were used for a lot of things. Like anti-aircraft defense, shooting up other small boats and strafing the crap out of whatever might be a Problem. That and giving the Problem a reason to flinch and screw up it's aim. The one I'm failure with had a twin 50 turret, a 20mm on the stern and torpedoes....and hated anybody's aircraft, also preferring to be out at night when the aircraft (of either side) were not out hunting them. If I recall correctly, Kennedy's PT 109 added on a 37mm anti-tank gun but there seems to have been a bunch of field modifications to make them more dangerous to what they might encounter.
Not suggesting you should strap a box-launcher or two on a DB. It would give you range but mostly that would be more along the line of distracting a potential enemy in what you hope is a stern chase and make them waste time fending them off- presuming the DB has enough sensor and tactical power to feed the missiles the initial target and then continue running like hell for hyperspace.

At the BB Massachusetts museum at Fall River, they have a pair of PTs - the decks are filled with every type of weapons system traditionally loaded on their decks - they were so filled with weapons systems, they were unusable - my friend and I were making fun of the museum showing such (non-realistic) ships - fortunately, at the aft of the 2nd boat was a placard that the loadout represented all the variations crews mounted over the years, not a realistic loadout.

But what crews would bolt on their ships to increase survivability was impressive.

As any FYI, the museum is also the museum of all the WWII PT squadrons. Interesting place to see WWII naval history.

We have been there, gave my wife a better appreciation of what her father was doing in the War.

Humm. Somewhere in the New Guinea area in WWII a certain Gunners Mate had some concerns about lack of AA and other defensive armament to go with the twin 50cal turret mount and the 20mm (single) on the stern. He scrounged a pair of .30 cal machineguns with the ring mount from an derelict aircraft -and apparently got permission from his CO because he was working at mounting the pair on a pedestal "somewhere" on the deck of his PT. He had it set up but not attached yet when somebody tripped and knocked it overboard. He did try a very jury-rigged -air line into a bucket- diving rig to try and recover it but that proved impractical and almost drowned him- and he abandoned the guns in however many feet of water where their semi-temporary base of the moment was. They were really not happy about anybody aircraft seeing them. He had other memories to impart, I have them written down. Fun stuff like crawling along at very low speed INSIDE the reef on islands to look and listen for enemy vehicle movement and...when they discovered something, radio the information the the Destroyer just outside the reef to be dealt with.......which consisted of the DD lighting off it's searchlights to let them get then have Visuals on the vehicles for the 5" mounts.....and also backlighting the PT Boat which then had to ram all three throttles to FULL and go like a bat to get the hell out of return fire from whomever was protecting the trucks. Scouting.....such a simple concept.

Relax wrote:Traditional Warship Roles include:

Presence: Fort, but not realistic. Most star systems have no one living. A long term monitoring Drone working via solar power is required. Stealth required.

Interesting. I tend to view Presence missions more along the classic Royal Navy lines, an complement to the Show the Flag mission -- being seen patrolling near rivals; port visits to allies and friendly nations; participating in exercises with their navies, and otherwise being seen as continuing to show and interesting in keeping an eye on your friends and potential enemies. (With said port visits including throwing tours or parties on the ships, often in support of your diplomats)

Show the Flag is the rarer visits by your big units, often in conjunction with a major diplomatic event; while Presence is the day to day, well, being present.


Friends are reassured that you still care and are paying attention. Potential friends feel confidence that you'll be in position to help them. And potential enemies see that you still have interest in the area and likely aren't going to sit still should they decide to try to expand at the expensise of your friends, or even your remote territories *cough* Falklands *cough*. (Where its said that the UK's decision to withdraw it only ship assigned to the south Atlantic, HMS Endurance, was one of the things that helped the Argentine military rulers that the UK wouldn't actually dispute the lost of the islands)

(All this is why submarines are nearly worthless at presence missions. They can be great for surveillance or intel gathering, and having them near to hand should a potential enemy pick a fight is right helpful. But the very stealth that makes them so good at those missions means they do a poor job at maintaining relationships by being seen to be around)


Now these presence missions normally aren't carried out day to day by your most powerful ships. It's enough that there's a steady stream of smaller ships -- and that your potential enemies know that even though they could defeat one of those, that all that would do is summon the wrath of the rest of your navy down upon their head.


What you're calling presence I'd call more like covert surveillance.