Honorverse ramblings and musings

fallsfromtrees wrote:

cthia wrote:At the advent of Apollo, the RMN had no idea of its inevitable effectiveness. The RMN had no idea it would turn out to be such a force multiplier. I found myself expecting Apollo missile tactics to include specifically maneuvering for an up the kilt shot. A certain mission kill tactic. I know that this is asking for incredible performance out of Apollo, along with some complicated maneuverings. However, Apollo showed us this very capability throughout its life. I recall the RMN specifically targeting the wedge of an enemy ship. I recall the RMN putting on a mesmerizing dance of pirouetting missiles to target and destroy ... themselves.

So why, was an attack profile to maneuver for an up the kilt shot not employed? It became a moot point because of the effectiveness of the Apollo system even without such attack profiles. But now that the RMN has limited available missiles and offline productions. Then perhaps ... ?

n7axw wrote:In the specific case to which you are refering hitting the wedges of the targeted vessels was intended as a warning shot,informing those vessels to back off or the next salvo would be targeted for full effect.

As for up the kilt shots, yes, that can and is done. However modern laserheads can also penetrate and destroy sidewalls and armor. So up the kilt is not strictly necessary as desirable as it is from an attackers point of view.

Don

cthia wrote:Yes, I know that targeting the wedge was used as a warning shot in that instance. I was referring to the capability that that suggests.

I don't recall Apollo ever being used to specifically attack up the kilt. Would you point me in that textev direction? That would be so cool.

In fact, I thought an up the kilt shot is still and always will be desirable. It's a definite kill. And I always thought a single missile would be sufficient. Even the older far less capable missiles. The tactic would conserve missile stockpiles.

Actually, the preferred shot is down the throat - and it is the easier shot, as the front of the wedge is much wider than the back of the wedge. In addition, the main sensors (and most capable ones) are located at the bow of the ship, so it is a more desirable target.

Thanks for reminding me of that fallsfromtrees. In my mind, I always went with the flow. The flow being that a down the throat shot would be the most difficult because of all an enemy ship's extra countermeasures toward the bow. But since you brought it up, and this is the Apollo system we're discussing, then it should be included into the attack profile as well.

dreamrider wrote:Neither up the kilt or down the throat is "a definite kill". The shot still has to actually hit the vessel. Note that the target profile of an on-stern or on-bow shot is much smaller than a side shot, and a much tighter aiming firing moment, although not distorted by sidewall.

Further, the lack of sidewall is exactly the reason that the hammerheads are the toughest, most buffered portion of the warship armoring scheme. Its also the reason that few to no truly critical systems are located in the hammerheads.

Finally, of those 250+ missiles that are ideally distributed to each targeted SD in a wall, dozens of hits must be achieved, anywhere, to achieve mission kill. According to David and his Bu9 minions, that armoring scheme IS tough, in a sense that a mere appreciation of modern battlefield armor can't even approximate. Unless a golden bb detonates (not just takes out - detonates) a fusion core, an SD will typically remain functional after multiple laserhead strikes, even ones on the hammerheads.

Certainly in any salvo attack, the tac section programming and the Apollo AI will be going for some open end shots, with the missiles which will be able to achieve the critical but extremely narrow, extremely snap shot positions necessary. The majority of surviving missiles in the salvo simply will not be able to achieve those kinds of positions, and will optimize final attack positioning for a sidewall shot.

At least that has always been my understanding of the conditions at end-of-attack-run.

dreamrider

Thanks guys. All of your responses has been entertaining, and addressing an issue that has always puzzled me. And as always I am set straight on a few of my misnomers. For instance, I thought that an up the kilt or down the throat shot, a single shot, would ALWAYS result in a mission kill. I always thought that if a shot managed to accurately penetrate either, what would happen is a total cascade of failing systems, one after the other, resulting in a total destruction of the ship. So severe that a ship would just "disintegrate" from such an internal hellstrom. As destructive as any golden bb.

(I always viewed it as Luke using the force trying to hit that one sensitive spot on a 'Death Star', its only vulnerable, but highly catastrophic tender spot.)

A concept later championed during "Independence Day" of that one shot that will "bring those damned ships down."

Now I know that of any particular salvo that a missile has a throat or kilt shot preprogrammed - but only as an after thought, a secondary attack profile, if it should so become available (as I've always envisioned it), but not as a main attack profile.

I had all but forgotten about this particular concern of mine until now, when missiles have become such a premium for the RMN. It seems the RMN's present critical stockpile could be pampered if a "mission kill" on an SD went from 250+ missiles in a single salvo to around a dozen or so of methodically attacking throat or kilt shots. An attack profile that is the "main" attack profile, and not the incidental.

Such as my thoughts anyways.

n7axw wrote:

cthia wrote:At the advent of Apollo, the RMN had no idea of its inevitable effectiveness. The RMN had no idea it would turn out to be such a force multiplier. I found myself expecting Apollo missile tactics to include specifically maneuvering for an up the kilt shot. A certain mission kill tactic. I know that this is asking for incredible performance out of Apollo, along with some complicated maneuverings. However, Apollo showed us this very capability throughout its life. I recall the RMN specifically targeting the wedge of an enemy ship. I recall the RMN putting on a mesmerizing dance of pirouetting missiles to target and destroy ... themselves.

So why, was an attack profile to maneuver for an up the kilt shot not employed? It became a moot point because of the effectiveness of the Apollo system even without such attack profiles. But now that the RMN has limited available missiles and offline productions. Then perhaps ... ?

In the specific case to which you are refering hitting the wedges of the targeted vessels was intended as a warning shot,informing those vessels to back off or the next salvo would be targeted for full effect.

As for up the kilt shots, yes, that can and is done. However modern laserheads can also penetrate and destroy sidewalls and armor. So up the kilt is not strictly necessary as desirable as it is from an attackers point of view.

Don

Also, that warning shot, amazing as it was, wasn't Apollo. That was Hiram Ivanov's trio of Sag-C cruisers with a 30 million km Mk16 DDM shot.

Then, as fallsfromtrees said, if you're going for a no-sidewall shot wedge geometry means that a down the throat shot is easier that up the kilt; the wedge opening is over 4 times the height (on an SD; 190 km vs 40 km).
And unless you take a pretty curving path to the target coming all the way in to dead ahead or astern give their defenses a little extra time to engage you, as opposed to firing the instant you reach 50,000 km from the target. Combine that with ktz's point that the sidewalls extend all the way to the front (and rear) of the wedge and are only 20 km apart, and it's a narrow (though tall) shot to pull off.

On a lighter ships, like a DD or CL a dead-on down the throat hit could likely be shattering; they just don't have much if any armor to deal with shots that aren't interdicted by sidewalls -- and one rampaging down the length of a ship has a chance to hit many more systems than one that 'only' blows across the width of it. But a SD is amazingly heavily armored, and just isn't subject to the same level of vulnerability.

Untapped Apollo Tactics

In the early days of Apollo, I think it was Honor who said, paraphrasically "we are just scratching the surface of potential Apollo tactics and capabilities." Specific attack profiles targeting the throat and kilt is my lone contribution to this area of thought. FTL capability of the missiles, processing power of the missiles, and end-run attack speed seems it would make it easy to attack a throat or kilt. Employing tactics of six to eight "eight-pack" salvos programmed to attack at optimum angles that leaves very low maneuvering options for an enemy ship. Akin to the inverted V formation that Honor employed against the Peeps to allow her ships at least one shot against any Peep ship, in that instance.

My niece has always toyed with possibilities herself. She says that with an Apollo system a fleet can execute its own pincer maneuver, simultaneously attacking from the fore and aft. No need for an extra fleet to hyper in to trap an enemy.

She also contends that the Apollo missile system can imitate mobile minefields. Analyzing a fleets attack vectors and sending "eight pack" salvos floating ballistically waiting for "suckers" as did Honor's Cerberus tactics. "Uncle, Nimitz can analyze SLN attack profiles."

She also alludes to the possibility that fleets can be steered to where you want them by activating coasters on vectors that may constitute stealthed ships.

She's a little 13-yr-old Norma Schwarzkopf.

--snipping--

cthia wrote:Untapped Apollo Tactics
...
My niece has always toyed with possibilities herself. She says that with an Apollo system a fleet can execute its own pincer maneuver, simultaneously attacking from the fore and aft. No need for an extra fleet to hyper in to trap an enemy.

She also contends that the Apollo missile system can imitate mobile minefields. Analyzing a fleets attack vectors and sending "eight pack" salvos floating ballistically waiting for "suckers" as did Honor's Cerberus tactics. "Uncle, Nimitz can analyze SLN attack profiles."

She also alludes to the possibility that fleets can be steered to where you want them by activating coasters on vectors that may constitute stealthed ships.

She's a little 13-yr-old Norma Schwarzkopf.

Yes she is! and I'm sure Saganami Island will recruit her RSN. Or ought to, with the minor caveat that it's not PD1922 yet here on Terra.

She's absolutely correct on the pincer though; the only reason that Eighth fleet entered the inner system at Lovat was as bait, plus an serious "trash both fleets and infrastructure" demonstration that the new technology could not be stopped.

That said, the "mobile mine field" only works if you're being pursued on a guessable vector, a la First Hancock or (in a Short Victorious War), or like what HMS Ajax did to the pursuing ships at Solon, because once a missile's impeller is kicked on, it generates velocity that will quickly take it out of position, even though it is "floating ballistically" afterwards.

An example where it might work would be something like "drop all limpeted pods from multiple ships and tow them to each side of a base course where you can bait your enemy to "enter the valley of death". (imparting little or no momentum on the HonorVerse battle scale for MDMs)

Engage them at long range with some of your ship's missile capacity to focus the defenses forward, and plot your bait- formations course and missile fire to "steer" the enemy into the range basket of the drone towed and therefore nearly stealthed missile pods, (like at Solon) then update your Apollo attack profiles and launch from two of the remaining three sides. Likely result is an even quicker KA-BOOM for many more enemy ships.

cthia wrote:Thanks for reminding me of that fallsfromtrees. In my mind, I always went with the flow. The flow being that a down the throat shot would be the most difficult because of all an enemy ship's extra countermeasures toward the bow. But since you brought it up, and this is the Apollo system we're discussing, then it should be included into the attack profile as well.

Generally, a ship has the same countermeasures on the bow as on the stern. The bow is more vulnerable because there is a 200 km tall window instead of a 50 km tall window (or something like that; I forget the exact numbers).

cthia wrote:Untapped Apollo Tactics

In the early days of Apollo, I think it was Honor who said, paraphrasically "we are just scratching the surface of potential Apollo tactics and capabilities." Specific attack profiles targeting the throat and kilt is my lone contribution to this area of thought. FTL capability of the missiles, processing power of the missiles, and end-run attack speed seems it would make it easy to attack a throat or kilt. Employing tactics of six to eight "eight-pack" salvos programmed to attack at optimum angles that leaves very low maneuvering options for an enemy ship. Akin to the inverted V formation that Honor employed against the Peeps to allow her ships at least one shot against any Peep ship, in that instance.

It is probably true that targeting the throat or kilt is easier with Apollo than with conventional missiles. That does not mean it is easy. Note that it is also easier for Apollo to target the broadside than conventional missiles, but even with Apollo, not every missile hits its target.

There are several problem with targeting the kilt or throat. Remember that these aspects are only 20 km wide (the distance between the two sidewalls), compared to 115 km wide (the average separation of upper and lower wedges). Also, the missile has to target the throat or kilt while flying past it. Most of the momentum of the missile is in the direction from the launching ship to the target ship, so the missile is flying past that opening at a significant fraction of the speed of light. The missile has only milliseconds to target and fire at the ship as it blazes past the throat. On the other hand, if the target ship has its broadside toward the target, the missile is not flying past the target window--it is flying right at the target window. That makes it a lot easier to target.

So let's just throw some numbers out. Suppose that hits down the throat cause 5 times more damage than hits through sidewall. If it is more than 5 times harder to hit the throat than the broadside, then it does not make sense to always aim for the throat. I don't have any way of judging what the true numbers are, for either side of the equation, unfortunately. I suspect that the equation balances out against targeting the throat, but I can't say for sure.

Looking at it another way, I suggest that it is best to have some missiles try to get to the throat and kilt and broadside. You don't want the enemy to know that, for instance, you are always going for the throat, because that will let him focus his defenses there. Indeed, this appears to have been happening back to the early days of the First Havenite War. We have always seen some missiles trying for a throat shot if it was available, while most missiles go for the much easier broadside. So, would say that this is standard practice and has been for decades.

The up the kilt or down the throat shots will be much, much easier with weapons that you can't localize effectively before they are in attack range, or at least not well before. Prediction becomes a lot easier when they have no reason to be evasive, and at least somewhat easier if the evasion doesn't have a particular visible threat in mind.

You won't manage that with missiles moving under impeller drive, but you may manage it with:
1 - Spider drive missiles, even if they have to be huge, if the payload scales up decently well too.
2 - Spider drive bus vehicles for impeller drive missiles that fire off only for the final stage of the attack. (Mostly something to consider if (1) does not pan out at all.)
3 - Very stealthy recon-drone based missiles like the ones used for the Cromarty Assassination, although you would need to improve the combination of size, payload, speed, and stealth considerably to make that work.

Any of these would be fired off in vastly fewer numbers than conventional missiles, and if detected, would be trivially easy for defenses to destroy. But if and to the extent that you could rely on both stealth and often getting no-wedge/sidewall/buckler-interposed shots, you could expect to do the job without needing numbers to saturate defenses or to do the damage through the teeth of the primary passive defenses.

I'd hate to build capital ships on the basis of the hope of retaining stealth weaponry. But some planners may not share that hesitation, and if you're able to launch without fear of notice or retaliation, you could build the weapons and deploy them from units not specialized for them (dropped out freighter bays, limpeted to the hull or towed by tractor like missile pods) or deploy them from cheaper, faster, smaller specialist warships. Another possibility is the use of such munitions from something specialized for a more conventional attack, like a podlayer, if the munitions can be carried and deployed like the missile pods, as a substitution for some of them.

In effect, it's an Oyster Bay style of attack, carried over to maneuvering starship targets.

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:How, when you write about Soap Operas in Space,
can you possibly omit "Another World?"

Besides the very name:

Don't you know that two or three actors trained by AW,
moved on to Star Trek: The Next Generation??

As for Awareness of other cultures,
AW was the Soap that sent a couple to Italy for their
wedding ... and conducted the service in Italian!

AW tested a teenager's claim to have spent years in
France, by having another teen question her in French!!
(Real French; I was so proud that I understood it.)

H. True Map-addict

Love this post Howard. But I just have to ask. How did the teenager fare during that "French inquisition?"

cthia wrote:Later conversation.

"Give it to Katyanna. She loves soap operas."

"You can't compare the Honorverse to soaps sis!"

"Sure I can. Manticore is "As The World Turns." Grayson is "The Guiding Light." Masada is "All My Children." The SLN are "General Hospital." The genetically engineered slaves are "The Bold and the Beautiful."

"You forgot the RHN."

"Ryan's Hope."

"Beowulf?"

"90210 and Peyton Place."

My sister. If it isn't John le Carre, Stephen Coonts, Michael Deaver, etc. Forget it. Sci-Fi isn't her cup of tea, or coffee.

Though I must admit. The soap comparisons are rather funny.

Has anyone ever raised the speculation as to whether spider drive (no capitalization needed) graser missiles have a prayer in the universe of attacking an impeller mobile enemy force which is not approaching the launch ship fairly directly?

Do they have the accel to even catch a maneuvering enemy force?

dreamrider