Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 105 guests

KEYHOLE REFIT

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Theemile   » Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:18 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5068
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Jonathan_S wrote:IIRC a CruRon is 4 divisions, each of 4 cruisers; so 16 ships. Deploying 16 LAC sized platforms means 13% of more of the CLAC's bays are carrying 'Keyhole Minus' rather than Shrikes, Ferrets, or Katanas.

IIRC a BatCruRon is smaller, just 2 divisions, each of 4 battlecruisers, so 'only' 8 ships. (Same as the size of the old BatRons before they got downsized to only 6 ships). 6.5% or more of the CLACs bays isn't as bad; though BCs normally have some cruisers around to help out; so if you provided 'Keyhole Minus' to all BCs and CAs in a raid that'd cut more deeply into your LAC stowage than just a cruiser raid.


Just an update on 1905 unit sizes (From Jayne's RMN)

Destroyer Division DesDiv 3-4 DD Commander
Destroyer Squadron DesRon 3-4 DesDiv 9-16 DD Captain (sg)
Destroyer Flotilla DesFlot 2-3 DesRon 18-48 DD Commodore
Light Cruiser Division CruDiv 3-4 CL Captain (jg)
Light Cruiser Squadron CruRon 4 CruDiv 12-16 CL Captain (sg)
Heavy Cruiser Division CruDiv 2-3 CA Captain (sg)
Heavy Cruiser Squadron CruRon 4 CruDiv 8-12 CA Commodore
Battlecruiser Division BatCruDiv 2-3 BC Commodore
Battlecruiser Squadron BatCruRon 4 BatCruDiv 8-12 BC Rear Admiral
Battle Division BatDiv 2 DN or SD Commodore
Battle Squadron BatRon 4 BatDiv 8 DN or SD Rear Admiral
Task Group TG (varies) Vice Admiral
Task Force TF (varies) Admiral
Fleet (varies) Fleet Admiral
******
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: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Jonathan_S   » Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:46 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Theemile wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:IIRC a CruRon is 4 divisions, each of 4 cruisers; so 16 ships. Deploying 16 LAC sized platforms means 13% of more of the CLAC's bays are carrying 'Keyhole Minus' rather than Shrikes, Ferrets, or Katanas.

IIRC a BatCruRon is smaller, just 2 divisions, each of 4 battlecruisers, so 'only' 8 ships. (Same as the size of the old BatRons before they got downsized to only 6 ships). 6.5% or more of the CLACs bays isn't as bad; though BCs normally have some cruisers around to help out; so if you provided 'Keyhole Minus' to all BCs and CAs in a raid that'd cut more deeply into your LAC stowage than just a cruiser raid.


Just an update on 1905 unit sizes (From Jayne's RMN)

Destroyer Division DesDiv 3-4 DD Commander
Destroyer Squadron DesRon 3-4 DesDiv 9-16 DD Captain (sg)
Destroyer Flotilla DesFlot 2-3 DesRon 18-48 DD Commodore
Light Cruiser Division CruDiv 3-4 CL Captain (jg)
Light Cruiser Squadron CruRon 4 CruDiv 12-16 CL Captain (sg)
Heavy Cruiser Division CruDiv 2-3 CA Captain (sg)
Heavy Cruiser Squadron CruRon 4 CruDiv 8-12 CA Commodore
Battlecruiser Division BatCruDiv 2-3 BC Commodore
Battlecruiser Squadron BatCruRon 4 BatCruDiv 8-12 BC Rear Admiral
Battle Division BatDiv 2 DN or SD Commodore
Battle Squadron BatRon 4 BatDiv 8 DN or SD Rear Admiral
Task Group TG (varies) Vice Admiral
Task Force TF (varies) Admiral
Fleet (varies) Fleet Admiral

Thanks.
Sources are better than my faulty memory :D
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Relax   » Fri Jul 15, 2022 11:41 pm

Relax
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3106
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:18 pm

Theemile wrote:
Relax wrote:Keyholes are tranceivers bud. Computers? No.


The only problem is if you need 1 honking big antenna/item..

Erm... I thought we had Textev of FTL comms using a multitude of FTL "nodes". Said "multitude" can therefore distributes itself into smaller clusters until one gets all the way down to an RD. Trying to remember where this was discussed. Hrmm maybe as far back as HAE or WoH??? Memory is failing here.
_________
Tally Ho!
Relax
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Captain Golding   » Tue Sep 06, 2022 4:11 am

Captain Golding
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)

Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 6:55 am

I suspect that fitting in the FTL Transmitter and power source is a large part of the problem. We know that LAC's already have FTL comms but we don't know the bandwidth of that.

So a KH-lite on a LAC Hull may be possible but would have a limited bandwidth for FTL control of missiles.

Still as a KH-1 Lite acting in a pure defensive mode I could see the advantage.

In that way do CLAC's carry Keyhole ? Large valuble ships that already have a fair amount of self defense but may be needed to act as a Co-ordination hub for the LAC's and a re-arm base. A CLAC operating as part of a defensive fleet being far more likley to find it's self inside the Hyper limit than one with the attackers who can drop it's LAC's and hyper out.
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Jonathan_S   » Tue Sep 06, 2022 9:15 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Captain Golding wrote:In that way do CLAC's carry Keyhole ? Large valuble ships that already have a fair amount of self defense but may be needed to act as a Co-ordination hub for the LAC's and a re-arm base. A CLAC operating as part of a defensive fleet being far more likley to find it's self inside the Hyper limit than one with the attackers who can drop it's LAC's and hyper out.

To date none of the CLAC designs we've seen carry any kind of Keyhole.

If the RMN goes forward with their conceptual 'Assault' CLAC -- one designed to stay in the wall of battle and provide rearming service during combat -- that seems like it might need to include Keyhole as part of its greater defenses. But given their current tactics for Minotaur and Hydra-class carriers I don't see them giving up LAC capacity to squeeze in Keyholes.

(Though given the minimal offensive missile capabilities of any reasonable CLACs I'd think they'd be candidates for some new, smaller, defense only Keyhole-lite. Just strip all the offensive missile fire control links out to make it smaller; leaving it just its PDLC and its CM fire control relay links)
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Theemile   » Tue Sep 06, 2022 9:17 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5068
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Captain Golding wrote:I suspect that fitting in the FTL Transmitter and power source is a large part of the problem. We know that LAC's already have FTL comms but we don't know the bandwidth of that.

So a KH-lite on a LAC Hull may be possible but would have a limited bandwidth for FTL control of missiles.

Still as a KH-1 Lite acting in a pure defensive mode I could see the advantage.

In that way do CLAC's carry Keyhole ? Large valuble ships that already have a fair amount of self defense but may be needed to act as a Co-ordination hub for the LAC's and a re-arm base. A CLAC operating as part of a defensive fleet being far more likley to find it's self inside the Hyper limit than one with the attackers who can drop it's LAC's and hyper out.


I don't believe it ever has been mentioned, but looking at the broadside image of a CLAC, there is little space for a Keyhole to be docked.

That being said - I've been advocating for a smaller Keyhole about the size (and built on the hull of) a Ferret class LAC, allowing a CLAC to carry some in LAC bays in leu of some of their LACs with minimal upgrades.

(I've called the idea "Keyhole-", because you keep subtracting capability until you get something that fits in the desired package.)
******
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: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Somtaaw   » Wed Sep 07, 2022 2:02 am

Somtaaw
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

Jonathan_S wrote:
Captain Golding wrote:In that way do CLAC's carry Keyhole ? Large valuble ships that already have a fair amount of self defense but may be needed to act as a Co-ordination hub for the LAC's and a re-arm base. A CLAC operating as part of a defensive fleet being far more likley to find it's self inside the Hyper limit than one with the attackers who can drop it's LAC's and hyper out.

To date none of the CLAC designs we've seen carry any kind of Keyhole.

If the RMN goes forward with their conceptual 'Assault' CLAC -- one designed to stay in the wall of battle and provide rearming service during combat -- that seems like it might need to include Keyhole as part of its greater defenses. But given their current tactics for Minotaur and Hydra-class carriers I don't see them giving up LAC capacity to squeeze in Keyholes.

(Though given the minimal offensive missile capabilities of any reasonable CLACs I'd think they'd be candidates for some new, smaller, defense only Keyhole-lite. Just strip all the offensive missile fire control links out to make it smaller; leaving it just its PDLC and its CM fire control relay links)


I think they might just copy from Haven for that. For an Assault CLAC that specifically stays with the SDs and provides underway replenishment with a battle fleet, the Havenites already have the Astra and Aviary-classes that were based on SD's, and therefore carried a third-again more LACs than Manticore. The Assault carriers wouldn't need Keyhole-II because they'll only ever be nearby podnoughts, a CLAC won't notably add to how many missiles a podnought alone can throw. Keyhole-I is also more defensive in nature, and notably lighter than KH2, so you'd displace less LACs without reducing how many counter-missiles and PDLCs the Keyhole platform has.


It would be better to keep the Manticoran Minotaur and Hydra-class carriers, or better yet a Gen-III based off Dreadnought hulls for a more 'raider' style CLAC. This doubles down on their emphasis on high mobility, but rarely (if ever) closing into missile range of anything. A notional Gen-III CLAC, you could then add a Keyhole-alt that has nothing but Apollo FTL links to keep the weight/size down and it goes hand in hand with how the original Minotaur fought (circa Second Hancock). This Keyhole would specifically have no built-in defenses, no decoys or jammers, JUST FTL missile fire control, which permits a DN-sized CLAC to swan around outside a hyper-limit, and still providing "over the shoulder" fire support of it's LACs without crossing the hyperlimit and removing it's ability to hop back into hyper if things go badly, or a force tries to pounce on it.

This would lead to (potentially) four major keyhole types.
  • Keyhole-I, primarily defensive in nature. Good for Battlecruisers and Assault CLACs
  • Keyhole-lite, primarily defensive. A scaled down version of KHI for smaller cruisers.
  • Keyhole-II, primarily offensive in nature. A scaled-up Keyhole-I with all the defensive goodies, but also has the Apollo links. Exclusive to pod-layers.
  • Keyhole-alt, exclusively offensive. A scaled-down Keyhole-II with only the FTL fire control. Zero/minimal defensive benefits. (Should be) Exclusive to Raider CLACs.
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Theemile   » Wed Sep 07, 2022 9:19 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5068
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Somtaaw wrote:
I think they might just copy from Haven for that. For an Assault CLAC that specifically stays with the SDs and provides underway replenishment with a battle fleet, the Havenites already have the Astra and Aviary-classes that were based on SD's, and therefore carried a third-again more LACs than Manticore. The Assault carriers wouldn't need Keyhole-II because they'll only ever be nearby podnoughts, a CLAC won't notably add to how many missiles a podnought alone can throw. Keyhole-I is also more defensive in nature, and notably lighter than KH2, so you'd displace less LACs without reducing how many counter-missiles and PDLCs the Keyhole platform has.


It would be better to keep the Manticoran Minotaur and Hydra-class carriers, or better yet a Gen-III based off Dreadnought hulls for a more 'raider' style CLAC. This doubles down on their emphasis on high mobility, but rarely (if ever) closing into missile range of anything. A notional Gen-III CLAC, you could then add a Keyhole-alt that has nothing but Apollo FTL links to keep the weight/size down and it goes hand in hand with how the original Minotaur fought (circa Second Hancock). This Keyhole would specifically have no built-in defenses, no decoys or jammers, JUST FTL missile fire control, which permits a DN-sized CLAC to swan around outside a hyper-limit, and still providing "over the shoulder" fire support of it's LACs without crossing the hyperlimit and removing it's ability to hop back into hyper if things go badly, or a force tries to pounce on it.

This would lead to (potentially) four major keyhole types.
  • Keyhole-I, primarily defensive in nature. Good for Battlecruisers and Assault CLACs
  • Keyhole-lite, primarily defensive. A scaled down version of KHI for smaller cruisers.
  • Keyhole-II, primarily offensive in nature. A scaled-up Keyhole-I with all the defensive goodies, but also has the Apollo links. Exclusive to pod-layers.
  • Keyhole-alt, exclusively offensive. A scaled-down Keyhole-II with only the FTL fire control. Zero/minimal defensive benefits. (Should be) Exclusive to Raider CLACs.


Minotaur and Hydra designs are already Dreadnaught sized - just "fatter" (wider beam) than normal to accomodate the LACs.

The Main difference between KHI and KHII was FTL comms. KHI had as many or more rf control links than the main hull did. Well, that and 70ish tons, so I would assume they have a few more PDLCs.
******
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: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by Jonathan_S   » Wed Sep 07, 2022 11:04 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Somtaaw wrote:I think they might just copy from Haven for that. For an Assault CLAC that specifically stays with the SDs and provides underway replenishment with a battle fleet, the Havenites already have the Astra and Aviary-classes that were based on SD's, and therefore carried a third-again more LACs than Manticore. The Assault carriers wouldn't need Keyhole-II because they'll only ever be nearby podnoughts, a CLAC won't notably add to how many missiles a podnought alone can throw. Keyhole-I is also more defensive in nature, and notably lighter than KH2, so you'd displace less LACs without reducing how many counter-missiles and PDLCs the Keyhole platform has.

I agree that there's little point to putting a Keyhole II on a CLAC -- they carry only a handful of tubes (all as chase armorment) and can't fire the ACMs that you want KHII to best control. But there's also little point to mounting a full up Keyhole I -- a fair amount of its size is devoted to long range lightspeed fire control relay links for handling mass missile fire; something a CLAC can't produce.

Though now that I think about it a Nike-class BC(L) can't produce anything like the volume of missiles per salvo, even with quad stacking both broadsides, a BC(P), much less an SD(P) can -- I wonder if its KHI is somewhat scaled down due to needing fewer control links. Or is it oversized to better handled towed pods or the missiles of any accompanying Sag-Cs or Rolands?


Anyway.
I assume you're right that the Astra class (mentioned only in 2 sentences of Woh Ch10) as also SD sized. Though I'm not sure why Haven would have had 30 Astra class CLACs working up at that point but already have switched to Aviary class before the war restarted in Ch 55.

But I don't see anything that says that they're build like SDs; just that they're the size of SDs. And given how many more LACs they crammed into a hull that is, after all, likely no more than 39% larger I don't think they could be.

We know a 6.1 mton Hydra can carry 112 LACs, and an "SD sized" CLAC probably can't be more that 8.5 mtons yet the Aviarys are noted as carrying "well over two hundred" [WoH] and and pair of them launched "almost six hundred light attack craft" [AAC]. So likely a bit over twice the LACs on less than 40% more displacement. That doesn't seem to leave a lot of room for SD type defenses.

Yes, WoH does say the Republic's "CLACs were visualized as primarily defensive platforms, mobile bases for the LACs intended to protect the wall of battle from long-range Manty LAC strikes. As such, there was no reason to make them any faster than the superdreadnoughts they would be protecting, and all of that lovely tonnage advantage could be put into additional LAC bays." But I'm left with the impression that despite being make no faster than the SDs their LACs are intended to screen that these are even less survivable, on a ton for ton basis, than Minotaurs or Hydras. If I'm right then they'd probably make a pretty poor basis for an "Assault" CLAC that is supposed to trade off LAC capacity for increased survivability -- as they seem to have used their extra size almost entirely to instead squeeze in extra LACs.
Top
Re: KEYHOLE REFIT
Post by kzt   » Wed Sep 07, 2022 2:03 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11352
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Captain Golding wrote:I suspect that fitting in the FTL Transmitter and power source is a large part of the problem. We know that LAC's already have FTL comms but we don't know the bandwidth of that.

So a KH-lite on a LAC Hull may be possible but would have a limited bandwidth for FTL control of missiles.

Still as a KH-1 Lite acting in a pure defensive mode I could see the advantage.

In that way do CLAC's carry Keyhole ? Large valuble ships that already have a fair amount of self defense but may be needed to act as a Co-ordination hub for the LAC's and a re-arm base. A CLAC operating as part of a defensive fleet being far more likley to find it's self inside the Hyper limit than one with the attackers who can drop it's LAC's and hyper out.

Apparently the space and power is the cooling for all the vacuum tubes and the file cabinets for the drum circle needed for guidance programing.

It's all plot and doubletalk.
Top

Return to Honorverse