Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests

Wormhole Assault: MA Style

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by kzt   » Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:52 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11337
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Jonathan_S wrote:I suspect that (for some unstated reason) you can't angle out the side of an approach lane. (Though I guess maybe you can; it's just really slow).

The lanes are the safest and most direct path into/out-of the standing grav wave that is the junction. This is calculated by the survey team and refined over time by astro control as the grav wave evolves and shifts.

So it's dangerous to leave the lane and you pretty much need to have a lot of very detailed analysis of the junction to not make it a suicide mission.
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by cthia   » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:06 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 14951
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

kzt wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:I suspect that (for some unstated reason) you can't angle out the side of an approach lane. (Though I guess maybe you can; it's just really slow).

The lanes are the safest and most direct path into/out-of the standing grav wave that is the junction. This is calculated by the survey team and refined over time by astro control as the grav wave evolves and shifts.

So it's dangerous to leave the lane and you pretty much need to have a lot of very detailed analysis of the junction to not make it a suicide mission.

Exactly! Which is my point about varying grav wave intensities. I would imagine leaving the lane is akin to the dangers of jibing into the wind, which if done incorrectly can get you dead.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by ThinksMarkedly   » Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:44 pm

ThinksMarkedly
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:39 am

Jonathan_S wrote:We know probes get destroyed when they get too close; but nothing about ships. (Though we do know it's dangerous to ships if they screw up the timing of converting to sails as they enter that part of the departure lane). So it's not outside the realm of possibility that the abort maneuver is simply to sail straight through without triggering your hyper generator.


By the way, did any of those probes transit? Or was Harvest Joy the first actual transit in both cases?
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by ThinksMarkedly   » Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:48 pm

ThinksMarkedly
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:39 am

Theemile wrote:I grant it's a loose analogy, because there is no toll booth to pay, which would stop the line moving as it does in real toll situations as the unprepared drivers rummage for quarters. My point was the cars in line are in a continual (but not necessarily continous) forward movement to the entry point and do not stop and shut down their engines in the process.


Indeed, which is why I think an automatic toll booth is an even better analogy. Not a full-speed one like Brigade XO was talking about, but a reduced speed one where people just drive slowly through, then speed up again. The traffic behind the toll is moving continually and continuously, at a very sedate pace. Ships/cars arrive at the end of that queue, slowing down from their regular speeds, then match the speed of the vehicle in front of them, until they're released.

The difference between a wormhole and an on-ramp toll booth is that after the booth you'd skip the motorway and be on the off-ramp, going for the local roadways. Now wouldn't that be nice?
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:01 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8269
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

ThinksMarkedly wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:We know probes get destroyed when they get too close; but nothing about ships. (Though we do know it's dangerous to ships if they screw up the timing of converting to sails as they enter that part of the departure lane). So it's not outside the realm of possibility that the abort maneuver is simply to sail straight through without triggering your hyper generator.


By the way, did any of those probes transit? Or was Harvest Joy the first actual transit in both cases?

No, they didn't. They weren't big enough to mount a hyper generator.

I found the passage about it in WoH
War of Honor Ch.34 wrote:Nothing smaller than a starship could mount a hyper generator, and only something with a hyper generator could hope to pass through a wormhole junction terminus. The scientists' probes had reported faithfully right up to the moment they encountered the interface of the terminus itself, at which point they had simply ceased to exist.

Unlike them, Zachary's ship did have a hyper generator. Which mean Harvest Joy could pass safely through the hyper-space interface which had destroyed the probes . . . probably. Whether or not she would survive whatever lay on the other side of it was another matter, of course.

So I guess they survived going down the transit lane, since they reached "the interface of the terminus itself". Maybe that means they did mount some kind of sail. Or maybe small rugged probes can (usually?) survive the grav effects of the transit lane until they reach the terminus itself?

Can't really say from the given text. All we know for sure is they didn't mount hyper generators and didn't go through before Harvest Joy
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by kzt   » Mon Apr 12, 2021 12:51 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11337
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Jonathan_S wrote:So I guess they survived going down the transit lane, since they reached "the interface of the terminus itself". Maybe that means they did mount some kind of sail. Or maybe small rugged probes can (usually?) survive the grav effects of the transit lane until they reach the terminus itself?

Can't really say from the given text. All we know for sure is they didn't mount hyper generators and didn't go through before Harvest Joy

David has stated that he's not doing hyper drones, you have to have an actual person on board. "Reasons" are the in-world explanation we've been provided.
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by Brigade XO   » Mon Apr 12, 2021 5:50 pm

Brigade XO
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3114
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: KY

In one of the books we were treated to a series of RMN BCs or heavy cruisers existing from the last of the wormholes in their orders to secure a chain of hyper bridges in Lacoon II. Each one existed the terminus and then pealed off in a different vector, sort of like a flower opening unevenly, into what was expected to be (and was ) an undefended wormhole. What wasn't mentioned was how far down the nominal outbound land the ships traveled before heading off to start setting up a parameter around the terminus.

We have also been given a description elsewhere of (I think from Helen on Hexapuma) of watching a freighter come out of the junction and just keep going. That would make a lot of sense as for a commercial ship with no cargo to land at the Junction nor any scheduled to pick up, that they would head for the closest point at which they could engage the hyperdrive and then go into hyperspace. This presumes that they were not going to have to circle around and enter a different lane through the Junction for an other of the termini. Say they came from Sigma Draconis and needed to then transit to Basilisk to get to that said of Silesia.

I suppose it depends on what conditions actualy are at any given terminus (or the Junction) and IF a wormhole from point a to point be creates a divot or depression in the fluxing fields of the wormhole and you are entering or existing though some sort of foyer or portal/ funnel in the fields around the wormhole where the threshold of the terminus is. I don't have the physics for describing that. And it has not been explained that way. Just there is a point (measured in km) where you can approch a terminus and providing you configure your W-sails in a timely manner you just transit through. Given the painstaking research shown being done by the Harvest Joy crew, you have to be really sure you are aiming at the present location of the presumed terminus.
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by cthia   » Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:42 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 14951
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

Jonathan_S wrote:
cthia wrote:The outbound transit lane?

All examples that are given are all single ship transits, and not at all like anything with the potential to become as messy as stacked mass transits. I simply do not see a wedge as being a finely-controlled method of nuanced propulsion. One minute separation when stacking for a mass transit doesn't seem to leave enough margin for error. Even when ACS has to stack 'em and rack 'em upon exit.

In Theemile's example at the toll booth, do note the constant stop and start action, controlled by the brake and the impulse power of the engines. The ship ahead of you is always unpredictable. The universe supplies lots of imperfect variables. Further hindered by the fact that no single ship can prematurely cross a certain threshold, lest it initiate a single transit.

Also note that the impulse power of a car's engine and the brake are a perfect combination. Impulse power does not overpower the capability of the brake in this stop and go environment. Much like what would happen descending a steep mountain if the driver is inexperienced. A wedge would seem to overpower the ability of the thrusters in a nuanced situation.

And again, each ship stacked for a mass transit is sitting in varying turbulence caused by grav waves heading into the junction. I can imagine mass transits being amongst the top situations which burn the most fuel where thrusters are constantly firing.

At any rate, it would be a sick joke to have a "no tailgating" sign on whatever passes for a bumper.

Couple things.
First, 1 minute separation isn't a mass transit. That's ACS's normal traffic minimum separation. If a mass transit is the Blue Angels making a formation take-off the one minute interval is the delay ATC imposes between airliner take-offs on a single runway (with a longer interval if you're taking off after a 747 or A380).

Second, whether the wedge (or sails) would overpower the thrusters would depend on what power setting the wedge (or sails) were set for. Remember that a warship's thrusters are capable of at least 150g (though you burn fuel like crazy at that thrust), as we saw at Cerberus. That's more than enough delta-v to correct minor deviations in velocity or position when the wedge (or sails) are set for low accelerations. (And again, when we saw Fearless do this she was accelerating at 20 g; 13% of what her thrusters alone could provide).

Third, the final alignment would happen under sail. It seems like ships departing from the Junction transition to sail minutes before transit (since they've got to accelerate down that final 90,000 km under sail). As mentioned before we're not sure if sails have better station keeping capabilities than wedges.

Still, for a mass transit you probably use even lower accelerations than a single ship, to give time to get everybody into whatever alignment is required. And that means your thrusters are even more capable of braking (or sidestepping) against the sail; given its minimal power settings.


And as for the risk of crowding and causing a mass transit; I don't think that's a concern under ACS's normal rules. We saw smaller warships hitting 10 seconds intervals without triggering a mass transit. I suspect you'd need to be much closer and triggering your hyper generator within fractions of a second in order to mass transit. So the normal 60 second interval leave vast amounts of safety margin against minor errors in position and velocity. (And most civilian ships going through would be large enough, over 2.5 mtons, to force a longer interval since their transit will lock the Junction down over 60 seconds anyway; so ACS will have them at a larger interval. Dispatch boats, yachts, or liners are smaller, but even most small freighters seem to be in the 3 - 4 mton range)

Every explanation is appreciated, but in every explanation something seems off. Something very important appears to be missing.

Each single translation is instantaneous as we've discussed before. There must be a point where the transit can be initiated - which is the point where the transit lane begins to "bite" upstream. Yet, how can this happen simultaneously for each ship in a mass transit. And if it doesn't happen for each ship simultaneously, then how can each ship be part of the mass transit. Think of a 100 meter dash in the Olympics. It seems that all of the runners must cross the finish line in a "photo finish" to be a part of the mass transit.

It seems obvious that the "bite" will occur for the leading ships in the formation before the ships bringing up the rear. Which means the forward ships will be "riding the bite." (I can't shake the image of riding the clutch on a manual shift auto, thus experiencing more wear and tear. You can destroy your clutch if you ride it too long before shifting.)

One possible explanation is that once the lead ships trigger the transit, all ships in the lane will be considered as one transit even though each ship is significantly farther apart than the time it takes for a single ship to actually transit, i.e., each ship somehow holds the door open? Seems weird.

A second explanation which is more likely is that after each ship is accelerating down the transit lane, each one has to initiate it's hyper drive within micro-milliseconds of each other. I can accept that that is possible and that time isn't being screwed with by the WH at that point. But there will still be some ship's that will have to "ride the clutch."

Back to Theemile's toll-booth. I can't shake real world specifics. First off, I realize it isn't a perfect analogy. Believe me, I have a lot of experience with imperfect analogies. I realize it is simply meant to get us all on the same page and right track. In that same manner, it also works just fine to illustrate my own concerns.

As in a toll booth situation there are "incidents." Let's say a ship's sail fails (akin to an engine failing in traffic), then what? All ships are launched down the transit lane and suddenly there's a failure in some ship's sails. Depending on where that ship is located in this stacked mess, there's going to be a pileup. Ships running into each other is a real concern for ACS. We've only heard about ACS's concerns specifically upon exiting, but there seems to be just as much of a possibility upon transit. Malfunctions will be out of ACS's control.

Consider the transit lane is the runway of a carrier which is 90k kilometers long and wide enough to stack a massive launch. The point that the lane bites for the runway is when the jets reach the correct speed. But, when there is a malfunction on a carrier, oftentimes the jet has to ditch into the ocean. Technology simply isn't always accommodating where it will fail at convenient times. There WILL be failures while in the transit lane. But where and how will the ship "ditch" without causing a massive pileup. Similar to exiting a formation after being hit with a missile in the middle of a battle and causing domino collisions. Do note, I did not say "abort" - but "ditch" - formation. Abort and ditch are two separate things. One cannot be achieved without the other. Turning off your hyper generator MUST be followed by ditching. But ditch where, and how, amidst this stacked mess?

It appears as it an attacker only has to target the leading ships even if they are only screening elements. Their debris could cause a massive pileup, especially if none of the ships have reached the "bite.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by Theemile   » Tue Apr 13, 2021 8:30 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5060
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

cthia wrote:Every explanation is appreciated, but in every explanation something seems off. Something very important appears to be missing.

Each single translation is instantaneous as we've discussed before. There must be a point where the transit can be initiated - which is the point where the transit lane begins to "bite" upstream. Yet, how can this happen simultaneously for each ship in a mass transit. And if it doesn't happen for each ship simultaneously, then how can each ship be part of the mass transit. Think of a 100 meter dash in the Olympics. It seems that all of the runners must cross the finish line in a "photo finish" to be a part of the mass transit.

It seems obvious that the "bite" will occur for the leading ships in the formation before the ships bringing up the rear. Which means the forward ships will be "riding the bite." (I can't shake the image of riding the clutch on a manual shift auto, thus experiencing more wear and tear. You can destroy your clutch if you ride it too long before shifting.)

One possible explanation is that once the lead ships trigger the transit, all ships in the lane will be considered as one transit even though each ship is significantly farther apart than the time it takes for a single ship to actually transit, i.e., each ship somehow holds the door open? Seems weird.

A second explanation which is more likely is that after each ship is accelerating down the transit lane, each one has to initiate it's hyper drive within micro-milliseconds of each other. I can accept that that is possible and that time isn't being screwed with by the WH at that point. But there will still be some ship's that will have to "ride the clutch."

Back to Theemile's toll-booth. I can't shake real world specifics. First off, I realize it isn't a perfect analogy. Believe me, I have a lot of experience with imperfect analogies. I realize it is simply meant to get us all on the same page and right track. In that same manner, it also works just fine to illustrate my own concerns.

As in a toll booth situation there are "incidents." Let's say a ship's sail fails (akin to an engine failing in traffic), then what? All ships are launched down the transit lane and suddenly there's a failure in some ship's sails. Depending on where that ship is located in this stacked mess, there's going to be a pileup. Ships running into each other is a real concern for ACS. We've only heard about ACS's concerns specifically upon exiting, but there seems to be just as much of a possibility upon transit. Malfunctions will be out of ACS's control.

Consider the transit lane is the runway of a carrier which is 90k kilometers long and wide enough to stack a massive launch. The point that the lane bites for the runway is when the jets reach the correct speed. But, when there is a malfunction on a carrier, oftentimes the jet has to ditch into the ocean. Technology simply isn't always accommodating where it will fail at convenient times. There WILL be failures while in the transit lane. But where and how will the ship "ditch" without causing a massive pileup. Similar to exiting a formation after being hit with a missile in the middle of a battle and causing domino collisions. Do note, I did not say "abort" - but "ditch" - formation. Abort and ditch are two separate things. One cannot be achieved without the other. Turning off your hyper generator MUST be followed by ditching. But ditch where, and how, amidst this stacked mess?

It appears as it an attacker only has to target the leading ships even if they are only screening elements. Their debris could cause a massive pileup, especially if none of the ships have reached the "bite.


1) I don't believe "ditching" is allowed, once you trigger the hypergenerator, you jump. period.

2) This is why we DON'T see many simultaneous translations. They are dangerous. If a single ship's hypergenerator is out of sync, you have a problem, if a single ship is off course, you have a problem, if your generator hiccups, you have a problem.

A common failure point in a simultaneous jump is 2 or more ships... (what was the harry potter term - Splipf?) rematerializing together and exploding. It is common enough that few dare try a simultaneous transit for that reason. If you have any maintenance issues, you have a problem. Remember, we've SEEN exactly 1 simultaneous transit mentioned in the Honorverse. Yes, it was discussed in theoretical offensive and defensive planning, but no one did it but Honor.

Yes, such an issue is probably less likely now with advanced, well maintained warships than it was in the past, or with a bunch of sketchy merchants who are notorious for saving a buck. But, remember the RMN wormhole assaults across the SL - the RMN probably has more practice (and theory) on wormhole assaults than any other navy - and they pushed through ship by ship every time, even though they didn't care if they blocked the wormhole for 10 hours. The risks of simultaneous transit when weighed against the benefits loses almost every time.

The only reason Honor did a simultaneous transit was if she waited an hour to get the rest of her ships through, Kusak's fleet was dead, and her fleet would need to fight 2 numerically superior PRH fleets alone. Kuzak needed those ships now, or 3rd fleet was dead. Honor gambled and it worked. But, she could have easily lost part or all the fleet to the transit alone.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Wormhole Assault: MA Style
Post by Jonathan_S   » Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:05 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8269
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Theemile wrote:
1) I don't believe "ditching" is allowed, once you trigger the hypergenerator, you jump. period.
Not necessarily (or at least it depends on what you mean by "trigger the hypergenerator". We saw in some of the combat in the recent books that there's a delay between when you press the button to trigger the hyper generator and when it actually moves you into hyper. We also saw that you can cancel the hyper jump during that interval (though doing so seems to discharge your capacitors so it'll be a while before you can try to jump again)

So, in theory, a ship heading down the departure lane could ditch out of transiting by hitting abort after initially triggering their hyper generator.

But then we've back to the question of what happens if a ship, under sail, tries to physically pass across the terminus interface. (Or else they better have been going so slowly that they can kill their momentum between ditching and reaching that interface.
Top

Return to Honorverse