Archives

Title Posted
Kinetic anti-ship attacks Oct 2002
Maneuver, combat and missiles Oct 2002
Marines aboard ship Oct 2002
MetalStorm missile tubes Oct 2002
Post-battle debris concerns Oct 2002
FTL LACs Oct 2002
LACs as parasites Oct 2002
<em>Shrikes </em>and <em>Ferrets </em>are not fighters Oct 2002
Q-ships Oct 2002
Q-ships as convoy escorts/raiders Oct 2002

Filters

Narrow the posts above by selecting a series or specifying a keyword.

Options

Pearls of Weber

A collection of posts by David Weber containing background information for his stories, collected and generously made available Joe Buckley.

Missile pods as strap-on weapons?

  • Series: Honorverse
  • Date: October 22, 2002

I'd have to say that would not be a good idea. For one thing, they're bigger than some of you seem to be assuming. In point of fact, the Manties' present capital-ship missile pods are considerably larger than a pinnace or an assault shuttle. In fact, they're a little more than half the beam of a standard DD in their widest dimension, which is why Wayfarer could deploy no more of them simultaneously and why a pod-SD (by the way, I like the term; I hadn't thought of it for myself. Perhaps we should call them SD(P) from now on? ) can deploy even less in a salvo than Wayfarer could. The depth of the after aspect of the wedge is not much of a factor; the physical dimensions of a pod which must pass through a physical hatch are. Moreover, when used as broadside weapons, one would be required to shut down one's sidewalls while one launched (assuming one could launch from a broadside--see below), which could be a major disadvantage if one were under threat of attack at the moment of launch. Why drop the sidewall? Because unlike the fixed, conventional launcher, your pod has no "gunport" in the sidewall through which to eject the missile(s) it is blasting off.