1924 PD - Rebuilding the Solarian League Navy

Somtaaw wrote:Until they sort out their missile capabilities, even if they truly know what a podnought is, designing one would wind up with endless revisions as their pods (and MDM's) are going to be in a huge flux state for years. And every change to MDMs and/or pods, would lead to tweaking that podnought which can't even be started until they commit to some form of pod dimension stability.

It seems to me that there are two quasi-independent dimensions that they need to sort out in order avoid some of that tweaking. The first is the maximum pod size, which sets the door size and if they begin with cataphracts, then they already have a value for max size (since GA style multi-drive missiles are smaller). The second is the width of the rails and whatever is needed to move the pods along them.

I think that if you start with a generous sized pod; then if the missiles do get smaller, you can just put more missiles into them.

tlb wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:Until they sort out their missile capabilities, even if they truly know what a podnought is, designing one would wind up with endless revisions as their pods (and MDM's) are going to be in a huge flux state for years. And every change to MDMs and/or pods, would lead to tweaking that podnought which can't even be started until they commit to some form of pod dimension stability.

It seems to me that there are two quasi-independent dimensions that they need to sort out in order avoid some of that tweaking. The first is the maximum pod size, which sets the door size and if they begin with cataphracts, then they already have a value for max size (since GA style multi-drive missiles are smaller). The second is the width of the rails and whatever is needed to move the pods along them.

I think that if you start with a generous sized pod; then if the missiles do get smaller, you can just put more missiles into them.

Does that mean the SLN's ships will inevitably swell to the bigger size class-for-class as GA ships? Will we see big-assed BCs?

If they concentrate on BCs, can the hugely productive SL turn them out in shockingly decisive numbers?

The SL can show you the true meaning of quantity is its own quality. Especially if the tech is good enough.

Find Halsey and send him back to Pearl so that he can fast track everything. And also so he can give a speech to the population to engender patriotism for a Sphinx rising from the ashes. Does the draft exist on Sol?

tlb wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:Until they sort out their missile capabilities, even if they truly know what a podnought is, designing one would wind up with endless revisions as their pods (and MDM's) are going to be in a huge flux state for years. And every change to MDMs and/or pods, would lead to tweaking that podnought which can't even be started until they commit to some form of pod dimension stability.

It seems to me that there are two quasi-independent dimensions that they need to sort out in order avoid some of that tweaking. The first is the maximum pod size, which sets the door size and if they begin with cataphracts, then they already have a value for max size (since GA style multi-drive missiles are smaller). The second is the width of the rails and whatever is needed to move the pods along them.

I think that if you start with a generous sized pod; then if the missiles do get smaller, you can just put more missiles into them.

If they build the pods to Cataphract requirements, and then when they start getting smaller missiles, they could wind up with an awful lot of deadspace in the pod, too little to squeeze another launcher into it but too much to fill with anything truly useful either. Cataphract's were a great war-time compromise missile, but everything about them make for a bad base for all future missiles/pods. Too big, too low performance per missile, and too few missiles per pod.

So personally, until I had all-up MDMs, or at least true DDMs, not the half-n-half Cataphract, I wouldn't bother committing to a generic pod-size. Not since the League is, officially anyways, at peacetime now.


Take the extra year or two, get a true DDM/MDM built right, and then designing second-generation pods around that missile. After creating functional DDM/MDM second-gen pods, then start looking at ways for increasing how many missiles per pod (Mk16 pods vs Mk23 pods), or increasing how many pods per square meter (like the flatpacks)

cthia wrote:Does that mean the SLN's ships will inevitably swell to the bigger size class-for-class as GA ships? Will we see big-assed BCs?

If they concentrate on BCs, can the hugely productive SL turn them out in shockingly decisive numbers?

The SL can show you the true meaning of quantity is its own quality. Especially if the tech is good enough.

Find Halsey and send him back to Pearl so that he can fast track everything. And also so he can give a speech to the population to engender patriotism for a Sphinx rising from the ashes. Does the draft exist on Sol?

I expect the ships to get bigger within a class; but what do you mean by "shockingly decisive numbers"? The Solarian League is still the biggest political entity in human space, so it can eventually afford to produce ships in numbers that would be burdensome to anyone else.

It is unlikely that the draft exists for the Solarian Navy or Marines, the populations were so enormous that that they could easily make do with people that wanted to "join the Navy and see the world(s)".

Somtaaw wrote:If they build the pods to Cataphract requirements, and then when they start getting smaller missiles, they could wind up with an awful lot of deadspace in the pod, too little to squeeze another launcher into it but too much to fill with anything truly useful either. Cataphract's were a great war-time compromise missile, but everything about them make for a bad base for all future missiles/pods. Too big, too low performance per missile, and too few missiles per pod.

However you can always build smaller pods without much adjustment, as long as the new pod still works with the rail system. The big pod was to set the door size. The main place that would require changes is in the magazines.

cthia wrote:So they should be content with, er acknowledge, er accept, being a third-rate Navy? Do you think nearly a lifetime of institutional arrogance will allow them to?

Besides, why should they accept being third-rate among unequals, in the long run? After all, they have been a sleeping GIANT for a very long time. Sleeping, but a GIANT. It's only physics and mother nature.

No, they won't want to be content with that, which is why they'll pursue MDMs instead of LACs. My analysis was based on what they should do, not what they would do.

Investing on LACs and more efficient power generation would have a much greater economic benefit because it percolates to the civilian sector, for a much smaller capital spending. It allows the SLN to protect all its member systems with the lowest possible treasury dedicated to ships. Any other solution would either cost more or not cover every system all the time. Plus, the tech tree would allow growing from the ground up, benefiting first destroyers and light cruisers, before applying to cruisers and the wall of battle.

Theemile wrote:One thing I have not seen any of you address is Time. All that you have mentioned is needed to go toe to toe with the GA. The the requisite here is fieldable hardware in the factories/yards within 24-30 months.

To go toe to toe with the GA? Forget it. There's no one thing they could do that would let them close the gap to the GA within 24 months, even assuming it's all R&D and no production. There are too many deficiencies in too many areas. MDMs or LACs or pod-layers would only get the SLN up to Buttercup-era hardware, not to Second War level of missile density and fire control, to say nothing of Apollo or whatever the Dynamic Duo has come up since and hasn't been put to production.

If the call is to fight the GA to win or at worst a stalemate, forget R&D. Devote everything into production of things they know how to build and build them in massive quantities. "Quantity is a quality of its own" is their only solution, even it takes 100:1.

tlb wrote:It seems to me that there are two quasi-independent dimensions that they need to sort out in order avoid some of that tweaking. The first is the maximum pod size, which sets the door size and if they begin with cataphracts, then they already have a value for max size (since GA style multi-drive missiles are smaller). The second is the width of the rails and whatever is needed to move the pods along them.

I think that if you start with a generous sized pod; then if the missiles do get smaller, you can just put more missiles into them.

Mostly what MDMs are is shorter than Cataphracts. And it's hard to simply fit more missiles into a fixed size pods when the missiles get shorter; because even if you could launch missiles stored nose to tail you couldn't fit more in until the missile length was cut by at least 50%.

However -- when you lay out the rails only 2 of the dimensions of the pod are fixed by the position of the rails (Though any 'elevators' that move pods from one set of rails to another have to worry about being large enough for all 3 dimensions).


So you could potentially design your pod-rails such that the pod's are orientated to hold the missiles parallel to the rails; so once you design a shorter missile you can shorten the pods -- basically Keep the pod cross section (which dictates rail spacing and pod door size) the same while changing the pod length.
And shorter pods would let you fit more onto the same length of rail; For example, just pulling numbers out of thin air, if you went from a 20m pod to a 15m one you could fit 1/3rd more pods (rounded down).

Your right about needing to rework and clean out SLN Intelegence though politics will also mess up that process. Let's get a round of applause for the Ghost Hunters and a hard run through the entire Intelligence and Analysis community to trigger more nannie outfitted agents.

If the SLN has any significant knowledge on LACs and CLACs then they probably should look at those two things as one side of the package of what to build Bear in mind that this also entails pushing compensators, engagement ranges of missiles including at least DDM and better CM.

What would the actual practice directive be looking for? What is the short to medium term problem that the SLN has identified? The GA is so far outside their engagement envelope that, while they have to start digging and working on acquiring the tech, that is going to be a long journey and in the short term they will not be fighting the GA or allied partners (Erwhon, Andermani, Maya (that one really hurts), but problem closer to home including systems that have already and are probably going to be leaving the SL and other interesting things like this new RF which seems to have essentialy close to leading edge SLN tech and are aggressively courting systems within and outside of the SL.

Engagement range on missiles, more volume of fire with better missiles, longer ranged and smarter CMs, and serious look at how to provide pods -and the controls to use them- to thicken the at least initial volumes of fire.

Short tem, what can you deploy that can provide practical defence against near-peer (if now 2nd/3rd rate navy? It's going to take a couple of years .

cthia wrote:

Theemile wrote:One thing I have not seen any of you address is Time. All that you have mentioned is needed to go toe to toe with the GA. The the requisite here is fieldable hardware in the factories/yards within 24-30 months.

Can you develop a working MDM inside of 30 months and setup the production line? Can you design an SD(p) that would stand up to battle and start construction in that time frame? You certainly can't iterate much with a design that takes 36-60 months to build.

With at fact in mind (and the knowledge that you don't have to have a final product, just one that can reliably go into battle with a fair probability of success, given the right realistic conditions/tactics) would you change your priorities?

And if not, what development direction would you take to get success?

I have heard references to time working against them before. But I don't get it. Is the SLN pressed for time? Only the navies of the GA can defeat them, and those navies have no such urges. And they aren't fighting an on-going war. So, what's the rush?

They should take their time and do it right. It is like your favorite band that suffers a setback and takes forever to produce a new album.

But it is awesome when it is worth the wait.

"Especially if the genre is heavy metal", says the SLN.

Theemilee wrote:No, but this hypothetical question posits that the new government is looking to get something done on on a tight schedule within limits as a way to force the SLN to change.

without a timeline - well you see the answers above, everyone is arguing for different tech, all with good reasons.

Without a mandate, (and a real threat) the SL will get analysis paralysis. They will head down thousands of dark corridors, and build nothing, or dozens of 1/2 A$$ed garbage.

But if you have an (artifical) focus, and are forced to put all your eggs in one basket, NOW.... sometimes the noise falls away and you focus on what's achievable.

Thanks!

A thought occurs. Does one good turn deserve another? The SL should attempt to purchase designs from Haven, since the shoe is on the other foot. A stripped down LAC design shouldn't be classified, should it?