?

tlb wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:There's been speculation here before about whether a buckler wall might work to clear particles or micrometeorites from a ship's path -- however because the buckler is only slightly wider than the ship's maximum beam (width) it would carve only a very narrow path (possibly too narrow to prevent particles angling in behind it into the ship's path).
It also wouldn't provide any protection during a flip maneuver or if you have to change vector so were accelerating at an angle to your base velocity.
(The former, if sidewalls do provide extra protection, you could possibly mitigate by switching from buckler to full bow wall; then using thrusters to pitch until your wedge was interposed. But the later seems insolvable)

I am not sure that a buckler is limited to being only slightly wider than the ships beam. But if it is, the solution would be to form it closer to the ship, so the wedge and sidewalls stop anything that tries to angle in behind. That also takes care of the ship while flipping (which will require a second buckler behind before the front buckler is turned off) or turning.

I misremembered, it was "less than twice the maximum beam"; not "only slightly wider than the maximum beam".

The only buckler that was described in much detail (though that name wasn't used until later) was Hexapuma's

Shadow of Saganami wrote:Hexapuma's bow wall could be brought up in two stages. [...]
The first stage wasn't a complete wall, however. It was a much smaller, circular shield, its diameter less than twice the ship's extreme beam. It offered no protection against beams coming in from acute angles, and a laserhead could actually slip right past it before detonating. But against the energy weapons of a single target, Hexapuma could place that defense directly between her hull and the enemy . . . and continue to accelerate at full efficiency.

It's possible that if using it only for particle and micrometeorite protection you could pull it in closer - but my assumption (especially when it talks about laserheads being able to theoretically slip behind it) is that for combat it is out at the same ~10km standoff as regular sidewalls are.

If you can pull it in closer it'll protect the ship's bow from wider angles than if it's out at 10km (but the turn or firing angles that keep the ship's full length inside its cleared path remain narrower than the angles that protect the bow). Turning might not be too bad, the side-sidewalls ran way out ahead of the ship, so you don't need to turn much before their leading edge is interposed - so if you can pull the buckler in close that might provide continuous coverage*. But pitch up or down maneuvers remain dicier, as there's nothing filling the ~30ish km gap between the rim of the buckler and the interior of the upper (or lower) wedge plane) so you'd have a fairly large vulnerable aspect, even with the buckler in tight.


Edit: Oh, and there's no evidence of whether a buckler (which in "not directly connected to the wedge" [HoS]) can be used without an active wedge; and even if it could there's no guarantee it could be used in a grav wave (which is the only significant place a higher top speed would be useful).

---
* You wouldn't want it that close for combat because much of the sidewall's effect is deflecting and diffusing the beams, and you need standoff room behind the sidewall to allow the affected beam to miss or weaken by spreading. But if it has a particle screening capability then the standoff shouldn't matter anywhere near as much for that

Jonathan_S wrote:Oh, and there's no evidence of whether a buckler (which in "not directly connected to the wedge" [HoS]) can be used without an active wedge; and even if it could there's no guarantee it could be used in a grav wave (which is the only significant place a higher top speed would be useful).

I think it is very clear that a buckler cannot be used in a gravity wave, since it is just another side wall. Just one that is not connected to the wedge.

Whether a buckler can be brought up without a wedge is more interesting and is the same as asking whether a sidewall can be brought up without a wedge. I think the answer depends on whether either can be brought up when the Beta nodes are not "hot". I suspect that they require "hot" nodes, in which case they could be brought up without the wedge. But why bother, when the wedge could be brought up at the same time? Now it may be that the wedge takes longer to form and so the buckler or sidewall is near final form first.

A counter argument could be that bringing up the wedge is such a major energy investment that it might not be possible to bring the wedge up if the sidewall (or buckler) is already formed. therefore it is imperative to bring the wedge up first, so it can begin collecting energy from across the Alpha wall; which frees up resources to allow the sidewall and buckler to come up.

PS: If it is possible to turn with a close in buckler, but it is not possible to pitch up or down; then all the ship needs to do is to first rotate the appropriate 90 degrees to convert that pitch into a turn.

tlb wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:Oh, and there's no evidence of whether a buckler (which in "not directly connected to the wedge" [HoS]) can be used without an active wedge; and even if it could there's no guarantee it could be used in a grav wave (which is the only significant place a higher top speed would be useful).

I think it is very clear that a buckler cannot be used in a gravity wave, since it is just another side wall. Just one that is not connected to the wedge.

Whether a buckler can be brought up without a wedge is more interesting and is the same as asking whether a sidewall can be brought up without a wedge. I think the answer depends on whether either can be brought up when the Beta nodes are not "hot". I suspect that they require "hot" nodes, in which case they could be brought up without the wedge. But why bother, when the wedge could be brought up at the same time? Now it may be that the wedge takes longer to form and so the buckler or sidewall is near final form first.

A counter argument could be that bringing up the wedge is such a major energy investment that it might not be possible to bring the wedge up if the sidewall (or buckler) is already formed. therefore it is imperative to bring the wedge up first, so it can begin collecting energy from across the Alpha wall; which frees up resources to allow the sidewall and buckler to come up.

PS: If it is possible to turn with a close in buckler, but it is not possible to pitch up or down; then all the ship needs to do is to first rotate the appropriate 90 degrees to convert that pitch into a turn.

For the turning; yes absolutely -- since there's need to maintain any particular orientation if you can yaw but not pitch you can simply rotate until your yaw motion can give you the heading you want. (Ships don't have to worry about those pesky lift and gravity issues that generally preclude doing the same in aircraft)

As for sidewalls:
* Normal sidewalls -- I think the text is quite clear cannot be active without an active wedge to tie into. Until the wedge forms they don't seem to work.

* (Full) Bow/Stern Wall -- I believe have the same limitation; as they similarly tie into the wedge.

* Spherical, or bubble, sidewal -- Text is equally clear that this does not need a wedge (and it's implied cannot be active while a wedge is active) -- but that it can work with sails active and while in a grav wave. (Nobody does; because the tradeoffs aren't worth it. But the text wouldn't say it would be an advantage for grav wave combat if it couldn't actually be used in a grav wave)

* Buckler wall -- The text is less clear hear (probably because we have so little of it). Obviously it can work while a wedge is active; because we're told it can and see it doing so on a few occasions. But it isn't clear whether it can only work while a wedge is active.
Basically does "not directly connected to the wedge" mean that it must indirectly connect to an active wedge in order to work?
Or is that reading more into the text than is intended to be there?

Thanks for all of the responses. What misery loves more than company is not being miserable. All of your responses certainly make sense and eases my nagging suspicion that another trick is being missed.

I do have a question or two though. I agree that the geometry of the ship would seem to get in the way of creating another wedge, but exactly where are the repulser beams originating from? Why do the sidewalls/wedge not interfere with the operation of the repulser beams for the particle screens? MaxxQ is needed now.

If repulser beams are installed inside the wedge, then wouldn't it be impossible to project the beams when the ship is flipping? How quickly does a ship flip end to end?

At any rate, I was thinking that increasing acceleration, and even top speed in hyper, might give a streak drive equipped ship even more of an advantage.

And a warship that can accelerate faster in hyper with even a higher top speed might have a greater tactical advantage of successfully attacking in hyper. Hyper raiders?


****** *

On a separate case. We are all at a loss as to why certain technology was not found at Galton. But should we be? Would Technodyne be allowed to keep copies of certain tech? Would Beowulf retain copies of missiles it was making for the RMN? Would Galton be allowed to keep copies of classified technology? If not, shouldn't the RMN be aware of that practice?

penny wrote:We are all at a loss as to why certain technology was not found at Galton. But should we be? Would Technodyne be allowed to keep copies of certain tech? Would Beowulf retain copies of missiles it was making for the RMN? Would Galton be allowed to keep copies of classified technology? If not, shouldn't the RMN be aware of that practice?

To begin, Beowulf DID have the system defense version of the Apollo missiles that were being produced for Manticore. That is why, even after the destruction of all the Mycroft stations, less than half of the attacking Solarian fleet made it back to Earth (it might have been only one third).

Even if a manufacturing plant did not keep quantities of its manufactured product around, it would still have to have the plans to maintain the assembly line, there would still be product waiting to be shipped and there would still be things in various stages of construction in the assembly process. It is impossible for an entity to construct something worthwhile without knowing if they did it right. So investigators from the Grand Alliance will find out what Galton knew and when they knew it; including such things as the streak drive or 3 second graser, and very specifically NOT including the spider drive.

Good point. IINM, Beowulf also had the FTL platforms?

But did they retain them after producing them, or were they instead given back to them after they were delivered to the MBS? I don't think it matters though. Obviously certain tech was declassified, or rather Beowulf was given certain clearance to field specific tech. Same as how our allies are given limited versions of our fighter jets.

But I wouldn't think that examples of classified technology would be left lying around at any production facility after they are delivered. Would Lockheed Martin necessarily be allowed to retain an F-35 after production?

Plans and data can easily be destroyed. Those plans burned with the space stations at Galton. I would also assume a paranoid entity like Galton had an even more effective strategy for destroying data.

Does textev give specific data about what slagging hardware means? I have a vision of highly corrosive acids let loose on computer hardware melting it into nothing. And after Detweiler visited Galton giving warning the Manties might show up, there was plenty of time for a heightened readiness to protect data.

penny wrote:Good point. IINM, Beowulf also had the FTL platforms?

But did they retain them after producing them, or were they instead given back to them after they were delivered to the MBS? I don't think it matters though. Obviously certain tech was declassified, or rather Beowulf was given certain clearance to field specific tech. Same as how our allies are given limited versions of our fighter jets.

But I wouldn't think that examples of classified technology would be left lying around at any production facility after they are delivered. Would Lockheed Martin necessarily be allowed to retain an F-35 after production?

Plans and data can easily be destroyed. Those plans burned with the space stations at Galton. I would also assume a paranoid entity like Galton had an even more effective strategy for destroying data.

Does textev give specific data about what slagging hardware means? I have a vision of highly corrosive acids let loose on computer hardware melting it into nothing. And after Detweiler visited Galton giving warning the Manties might show up, there was plenty of time for a heightened readiness to protect data.

Yes, Beowulf had both the Apollo system defense missiles and the FTL Mycroft control systems to use them; not because they were given back nor declassified, but because everyone knew that the SLN would try to hit Beowulf (you created a thread on that very point).

Part of the Galton deception is that the Grand Alliance has to find out everything that Galton could do and everything for which Galton was to take the blame. So no destroying factories nor plans.

Most things are not shipped immediately on being produced, very few things are turned over one by one. Instead they are grouped in quantities suitable for shipping. It is possible that even F-35's are released in a tactical group, so they do not take a first official flight alone.

penny wrote:I do have a question or two though. I agree that the geometry of the ship would seem to get in the way of creating another wedge, but exactly where are the repulser beams originating from? Why do the sidewalls/wedge not interfere with the operation of the repulser beams for the particle screens? MaxxQ is needed now.

If repulser beams are installed inside the wedge, then wouldn't it be impossible to project the beams when the ship is flipping? How quickly does a ship flip end to end?

The books describe them various as "particle and radiation shielding", "particle screening", "particle and anti-radiation fields", "particle screens".

But a couple of spots more more detailed - and I read them as reinforcing my belief that this is a field that encapsulates the entire ship; not a beam focused against particles from a specific direction.

In Fire Forged wrote:The space between the sidewall and the hull is filled with particle and radiation shielding to deal with natural space hazards. These shields plow debris and radiation out of the ship’s path using a weaker gravitic field. Instead of the sidewall’s small localized region of incredibly high acceleration, these shields are more gradual. They typically work on particles for longer periods, pushing their trajectories away from the vessel’s hull. Specially mounted detection systems and the ship’s energy weapon projectors vaporize the rare piece of debris too large or fast for the particle shields to deflect by themselves. High grade systems render normal space speeds of 80% lightspeed relative safe under most conditions

Echoes of Honor has this when the escaping captives are forced to use Camp Charon's defenses against the Peep forced labor convoy's escorts)

Echoes of Honor wrote:Only her standard, station-keeping particle screens were up, and those were intended mainly to keep dust from accumulating on her hull.

Which makes it clear that particle shielding is something that isn't necessarily always on. "

Also the the ship diagram of HMS Minotaur at the end of EoH has an inset close-up of a cylinder with three hoops around it labeled "Radiation/Particle Shield Generator" - looking smaller and squatter than the somewhat similar looking "Sidewall Generator" that's also in that inset.


"particle and radiation shielding which protected the throat of any impeller wedge" -- though that doesn't necessarily mean it only protects that aspect; since only that direction was relevant to the surrounding text.

Oh, and in Oyster Bay the Cataphract missile equipped pods followed in the wake of "specialized pods which carried nothing but low-powered particle screens and the power supplies to maintain them for the ballistic run in-system to their targets" -- guess they were worried about months of particle erosion at those ballistic speeds.



(And, for what it's worth, they must be so low powered as to be nearly undetectable at any range, despite being a gravitic field - because the OB pods didn't get detected on their months long flight into the heart of the Manticore Binary System)

penny wrote:And a warship that can accelerate faster in hyper with even a higher top speed might have a greater tactical advantage of successfully attacking in hyper. Hyper raiders?

Somehow achieving a higher top speed in hyper might be a slight tactical benefit. At least you'd be able to run down ships that had military grade shielding; which you can't now.

But remember that hyper combat is so unlikely, that it is so hard to find enemies there due to the high particle densities restricting sensor range, that no major navy has ever found it worth equipping their ships with a spherical bubble sidewall -- despite it giving them a nearly insurmountable edge in grav-wave combat (and ships spend as much of their time in hyper in grav waves as they can)
A bubble wall basically halves the effective weapons range of their opponents; giving the ship carrying it a massive "immunity zone" where their guns can kill the enemy but the enemy's can't hurt them.


So it seems unlikely that navies are going to spend much effort on something whose main advantage is a small benefit to hyper combat. Not unless it's a nearly free byproduct of some other desired improvement.

penny wrote:Good point. IINM, Beowulf also had the FTL platforms?

But did they retain them after producing them, or were they instead given back to them after they were delivered to the MBS? I don't think it matters though. Obviously certain tech was declassified, or rather Beowulf was given certain clearance to field specific tech. Same as how our allies are given limited versions of our fighter jets.

But I wouldn't think that examples of classified technology would be left lying around at any production facility after they are delivered. Would Lockheed Martin necessarily be allowed to retain an F-35 after production?

Plans and data can easily be destroyed. Those plans burned with the space stations at Galton. I would also assume a paranoid entity like Galton had an even more effective strategy for destroying data.

Does textev give specific data about what slagging hardware means? I have a vision of highly corrosive acids let loose on computer hardware melting it into nothing. And after Detweiler visited Galton giving warning the Manties might show up, there was plenty of time for a heightened readiness to protect data.

Well (until they got blown up by the Silver Bullets) Beowulf had lots of the Mycroft FTL control platforms for their swarms of Apollo system defense missiles.
That was the core of their new system defense.

As extremely close and trusted allies of Manticore (and Haven) they got the entire RMN tech package for their own. They weren't just a factory licensed to make the stuff for Manticore. They have it for themselves and some of the new Bolthole to Beowulf SD(P), etc. are going to be kept for Beowulf's system defense force. Replacing their old pre-pod SDs.


But even if that wasn't true comparing Beowulf to Galton is a bad analogy. Galton was intended to be the ultimate decoy -- if anybody got that far into the onion it was supposed to convince them that they'd found (and defeated) the MAlign's bastion and homeworld. The MAlign's counterpart to Manticore itself.

Not finding the spider tech at Galton would be like managing to take over Manticore and, despite knowing that the RMN uses multidrive missiles and FTL fire control, no such missiles are used against you in the defense of the system; no examples are found in wreckages of their navy or forts, no such missiles are found in their armories or missile colliers, and there's no evidence that anybody in the system even suspects that such things might be possible. You'd be really sure that something is very wrong, and this system does NOT look like it was actually the ultimate source of your enemy's weapons and technology that it was purported to be.


Not finding detailed construction plan, or having the assembly lines destroyed sufficiently to prevent reverse engineering might be believable. But really only if the actual weapons had been used to resist your attack; or if there was generalized knowledge of their existence among the naval personnel; or if there were sims or tactical documents that talked at least generally about their tactical uses; something that shows they existed -- even if you get nothing that's help you counter them or reproduce them.
But total absence of anything like that is just not believable.