1926 PD - Export hardware

ThinksMarkedly wrote:Travis also said that the only way two impellers would ever work on the same missile is if they were separated by a boom that was either extremely thick or made of a material that they didn't have the science for yet. If it's so thick, he said it would cost as much as a frigate to build; if it's the latter, then the MAlign and TIY have solved the material problem somehow and that by itself might be a non-neglitible additional cost.

To be fair we've had nearly 400 years of tech development since he said that. The impeller rings may be more robust by now (they're certainly more powerful - as missiles are way quicker). So with modern missile impellers you might not need as much physical separation to protect two missile impeller rings from each other (even without the "baffle" that lets you stack them right next to each other). So "merely" the length of a normal missile now seems to be sufficient separation - and thus possibly fully enclose in its compensated acceleration. (Though a 3rd stage stuck atop the 2nd might not be -- maybe that's why we haven't seen a 3-stage Cataphract)

[Though I also speculate that the apparent smaller diameter of the 2nd stage might have something to do with protecting its CM derived impeller ring from the effects of the 1st stage's SDM derived ring]

Jonathan_S wrote:

ThinksMarkedly wrote:Travis also said that the only way two impellers would ever work on the same missile is if they were separated by a boom that was either extremely thick or made of a material that they didn't have the science for yet. If it's so thick, he said it would cost as much as a frigate to build; if it's the latter, then the MAlign and TIY have solved the material problem somehow and that by itself might be a non-neglitible additional cost.

To be fair we've had nearly 400 years of tech development since he said that. The impeller rings may be more robust by now (they're certainly more powerful - as missiles are way quicker). So with modern missile impellers you might not need as much physical separation to protect two missile impeller rings from each other (even without the "baffle" that lets you stack them right next to each other). So "merely" the length of a normal missile now seems to be sufficient separation - and thus possibly fully enclose in its compensated acceleration. (Though a 3rd stage stuck atop the 2nd might not be -- maybe that's why we haven't seen a 3-stage Cataphract)

[Though I also speculate that the apparent smaller diameter of the 2nd stage might have something to do with protecting its CM derived impeller ring from the effects of the 1st stage's SDM derived ring]

If you can stick a CM drive off One end of the missile inside its compensator field.... Uh hem, there is a 2nd end of the missile as well. --> 3 stage MDM.

Relax wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:To be fair we've had nearly 400 years of tech development since he said that. The impeller rings may be more robust by now (they're certainly more powerful - as missiles are way quicker). So with modern missile impellers you might not need as much physical separation to protect two missile impeller rings from each other (even without the "baffle" that lets you stack them right next to each other). So "merely" the length of a normal missile now seems to be sufficient separation - and thus possibly fully enclose in its compensated acceleration. (Though a 3rd stage stuck atop the 2nd might not be -- maybe that's why we haven't seen a 3-stage Cataphract)

[Though I also speculate that the apparent smaller diameter of the 2nd stage might have something to do with protecting its CM derived impeller ring from the effects of the 1st stage's SDM derived ring]

If you can stick a CM drive off One end of the missile inside its compensator field.... Uh hem, there is a 2nd end of the missile as well. --> 3 stage MDM.

I think Jonathan is saying that the nodes of the 2nd stage may be sitting in a grav "shadow" created by the 1st stage missile body, protecting the 2nd stage nodes like the baffle did by the body's mass. Yes, a third stage could be used, but it would require using a missile even slimmer than a CM so the 3rd stage nodes are in the shadow caused by the CM body, like a shoulder launched anti-tank missile.

I was thinking along these lines as well for a possible explanation of how the staging works vs the baffle, and the reasons why the Malign did not creating a 17 stage, pod launched missile using only Javelin missile bodies stacked end on end. i.e. If spacing is all that is needed, why do pod launched missiles still use CMs as the upper stage and still only have 2 stages, since the requirement of ship born tubes is not extant.

Yeah - all we know is that we've never seen or heard of a 3-stage cataphract. We don't know why.

It might be a technical issue (for some reason it doesn't work; or doesn't work effectively), it might be a doctrinal issue (they don't see a need for it), if might be a secrecy issue (they have them and might be holding back for when they think they really need it), it might be an economic issue (though this seems unlikely).

We just don't know.

Jonathan_S wrote:Yeah - all we know is that we've never seen or heard of a 3-stage cataphract. We don't know why.

It might be a technical issue (for some reason it doesn't work; or doesn't work effectively), it might be a doctrinal issue (they don't see a need for it), if might be a secrecy issue (they have them and might be holding back for when they think they really need it), it might be an economic issue (though this seems unlikely).

We just don't know.

The Malign knows that RMN and RHN had 3 and 4 drive missiles, Even though the SLN doesn't. You would think we would have seen a 3 or 5 stage missile at Galton if it was possible (Since Galton was only planned to be thrown under the Bus at the last minute (though it seems that had been a contingency for the last decade or so.)

The more I think about this, the more plot driven it seems.

There is ZERO canonical evidence for any such thing as a "grav shadow". You guys are grasping at straws trying to dance around the issue. Or trying to put single ply tissue on a wet toilet seat of the already existing canonical evidence reasoning of the early books + justification for the new tech baffle to begin with.

There is a solution! YES, a Solution!

MALIGN know about the baffle(we know they do), cannot 100% recreate it, but have a PSEUDO baffle between the 1st stage and 2nd stage which is ~good enough if FAR enough away. If true, then they could make a 2 or 3 stage MDM just fine. DW just "forgot" to mention it...

We still have a major issue as the 2nd impeller is still VERY close to the 1st as one must remember that the LASER head = ~60% of the missiles nose in front of the impeller. This portion still must go with the CM 2nd impeller stage. Is a partial solution, laser head is still inbetween the two impeller stages. 2nd stage goes ballistic for a tiny portion of time and has to FLIP(not hard)

EDIT: If the flip were possible, the Cataphract missile head would be NO DIFFERENT than that of a regular missile. Its not, its smaller/weaker--> So WHY? No idea, which once again suggests the 2 impellers are VERY close together as the laser head ~60% missile length is now missile on a CM cataphract and it is stuffed onto the CM and now we are back at square ONE of this debate of HOW can 2 impellers be VERY close together which according to tech canon is not possible ergo justification of baffle.

Of course this brings up next Q, a ship is not a missile, but how can shuttle impellers etc not be effected by the ships impeller...

Ok, now lunch is over

Still means you can jam a 3rd stage off the rear with nothing but capacitors in between and a gap. Would be a VERY long missile tube, but then RHN/RMN already has MONSTER long missile SD grade missile tubes with their MDM's. Only RMN has gone back to ~smaller missiles in comparison to "super capacitor" missiles.
________________________________________
Compensator FIELD SHAPE is determined by its interaction with the impeller. Thus the IDENTICAL shape of the ships & missiles looking like female sex toys . This basic reality was stipulated way back in the VERY beginning of the series. Otherwise it would make FAR more sense to fire square missiles and waste less internal volume!

The entire justification of the Cataphract is that the impeller(2nd) impeller is far enough away to not interfere with the impeller on the back of the missile.

If a compensator field is tied to an impeller position(it is) then there is EQUAL compensator field off the rear of the impeller as the front. Otherwise there is no way ships could haul LAC's via tractor in the compensator field created by a BC in HotQ. Now it is not as "nice" back there as in between the two ends, but it works as justified by the existence of the Cataphract CM 2nd stage to begin with.

Therefore if you can jam an 2nd impeller on the front of a missile, without causing said impeller to burn up, there is no reason you cannot also jam an identical impeller equal distance off the back end as well.


SOrry, no editing, lunch break is over got to go.

Relax wrote:Of course this brings up next Q, a ship is not a missile, but how can shuttle impellers etc not be effected by the ships impeller...

That's what led me to speculate (yes, without any text-ev for it) that being inside the diameter of an impeller ring somehow minimized the impact on other impeller rings.

Ships don't fry the impellers of their smaller craft, RDs, or missiles, pinnaces or assault shuttles don't fry the impellers of their anti-air impeller-head missiles, etc.

But that's just one possible explanation (and at least part of the explanation is presumably that boat bays and magazines aren't particularly close to the ship's impeller rings - so there's also separation distance -- though I'll note chase tubes, including a Roland's entire anti-ship missiles battery, have to feed missiles through the impeller rings; so they're at least briefly closer to them)


But at the end of the day RFC hasn't given us enough details to know why ships don't mess up those impellers or why cataphracts work. And so we can only blindly speculate on what the limits of a given approach are

Relax wrote:There is ZERO canonical evidence for any such thing as a "grav shadow". You guys are grasping at straws trying to dance around the issue. Or trying to put single ply tissue on a wet toilet seat of the already existing canonical evidence reasoning of the early books + justification for the new tech baffle to begin with.

There is a solution! YES, a Solution!

MALIGN know about the baffle(we know they do), cannot 100% recreate it, but have a PSEUDO baffle between the 1st stage and 2nd stage which is ~good enough if FAR enough away. If true, then they could make a 2 or 3 stage MDM just fine. DW just "forgot" to mention it...

We still have a major issue as the 2nd impeller is still VERY close to the 1st as one must remember that the LASER head = ~60% of the missiles nose in front of the impeller. This portion still must go with the CM 2nd impeller stage. Is a partial solution, laser head is still inbetween the two impeller stages. 2nd stage goes ballistic for a tiny portion of time and has to FLIP(not hard)

EDIT: If the flip were possible, the Cataphract missile head would be NO DIFFERENT than that of a regular missile. Its not, its smaller/weaker--> So WHY? No idea, which once again suggests the 2 impellers are VERY close together as the laser head ~60% missile length is now missile on a CM cataphract and it is stuffed onto the CM and now we are back at square ONE of this debate of HOW can 2 impellers be VERY close together which according to tech canon is not possible ergo justification of baffle.

Of course this brings up next Q, a ship is not a missile, but how can shuttle impellers etc not be effected by the ships impeller...

Ok, now lunch is over

Still means you can jam a 3rd stage off the rear with nothing but capacitors in between and a gap. Would be a VERY long missile tube, but then RHN/RMN already has MONSTER long missile SD grade missile tubes with their MDM's. Only RMN has gone back to ~smaller missiles in comparison to "super capacitor" missiles.
________________________________________
Compensator FIELD SHAPE is determined by its interaction with the impeller. Thus the IDENTICAL shape of the ships & missiles looking like female sex toys . This basic reality was stipulated way back in the VERY beginning of the series. Otherwise it would make FAR more sense to fire square missiles and waste less internal volume!

The entire justification of the Cataphract is that the impeller(2nd) impeller is far enough away to not interfere with the impeller on the back of the missile.

If a compensator field is tied to an impeller position(it is) then there is EQUAL compensator field off the rear of the impeller as the front. Otherwise there is no way ships could haul LAC's via tractor in the compensator field created by a BC in HotQ. Now it is not as "nice" back there as in between the two ends, but it works as justified by the existence of the Cataphract CM 2nd stage to begin with.

Therefore if you can jam an 2nd impeller on the front of a missile, without causing said impeller to burn up, there is no reason you cannot also jam an identical impeller equal distance off the back end as well.


SOrry, no editing, lunch break is over got to go.

I agree (and stated above) there was no canonical evidence for the grav shadow. But David has left out details before - and it's a plausable explanation - because the baffle creates a "grav shadow" to protect adjacent nodes.

Missile drive nodes are on the back of the missile body, as seen in this drawing by Maxxq:

https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/4c2562a6-da78-48fd-ac00-d4549a769164/d7pa3eo-c86a30c7-f452-4862-ad07-69afaa717243.jpg/v1/fill/w_1024,h_559,q_75,strp/mk23_v2_003_by_maxxqbunine_d7pa3eo-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NTU5IiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvNGMyNTYyYTYtZGE3OC00OGZkLWFjMDAtZDQ1NDlhNzY5MTY0XC9kN3BhM2VvLWM4NmEzMGM3LWY0NTItNDg2Mi1hZDA3LTY5YWZhYTcxNzI0My5qcGciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTAyNCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.XIv-e4QsMFUIDsLPLS2N7Rm8i5dLF7w1psjZlmNbcG0

A CM superglued on the front of a Single drive missile would have an entire length of the body of the 1st stage (shipkiller) missile, with the CM's nodes against the nose of the main missile. A CM on the back (node side) would only have the length of the CM body between it's nodes and the main body nodes, ie a shorter length. This shorter length may not be sufficient to protect the back CM's drive nodes. similiarly, gluing a 2nd CM on the front has the same distance issue - 1 CM body between the nodes.

As for the warhead, we never heard if the stages actually separate, it's quite possible that the CM drags the entire main missile along with it - carrying the warhead - all you'd need to do was move the sensor package to the front of the CM.

Relax wrote:Compensator FIELD SHAPE is determined by its interaction with the impeller. Thus the IDENTICAL shape of the ships & missiles looking like female sex toys . This basic reality was stipulated way back in the VERY beginning of the series. Otherwise it would make FAR more sense to fire square missiles and waste less internal volume!

The entire justification of the Cataphract is that the impeller(2nd) impeller is far enough away to not interfere with the impeller on the back of the missile.

If a compensator field is tied to an impeller position(it is) then there is EQUAL compensator field off the rear of the impeller as the front. Otherwise there is no way ships could haul LAC's via tractor in the compensator field created by a BC in HotQ. Now it is not as "nice" back there as in between the two ends, but it works as justified by the existence of the Cataphract CM 2nd stage to begin with.

Ships taper out from their two sets of impeller nodes (making a thicker middle) missiles (at least those we have drawings of) barely taper; and that's after the rear impeller. (And then pinnaces have a single impeller ring and no such shape restriction; having wings that stick way out to the sides.

Also a correction, the LACs towed in HotQ were not inside the sihp's compensation. One was wrecked when a twelve-ton pressure tank came adrift and punched a three-meter hole half the length o the ship -- something that couldn't have happened if it was in the no perceived acceleration zone created by a ship's compensation field.

So it's an assumption (though not an unreasonable one) that a missile's impellers will have an equal compensated volume in front and behind their ring. But I can't think of anything in the text that actually says that.

All valid points guys. --> We don't know. Never will.

I still have a massive problem with WHY a CM can magically haul around an entire missile Laser head weighing ~50 tons(cruiser grade) or upwards of 100t for a capital grade missile, yet have ZERO degradation in acceleration, or time duration... I mean what fool would not put that CM drive as the MAIN drive? It would have superior kinematics by far. Grr.

I know the series is ~finished(close enough), but the cataphract situation just really torqued my tail feathers over last couple of years.

Almost wish Cachat had never been invented and Raoul grew up. But hey, wishes and fishes among mice and men keeps the doctor away right? Oh wait, hrmm...