Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 14 guests

Revisiting a Gryphon refit.

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by fester   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 12:46 pm

fester
Captain of the List

Posts: 666
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:33 pm

munroburton wrote:
Whitecold wrote:No one said there is a reason to build DN(P)'s, only that this would be better than refitting Gryphons. Neither idea is a good investment of resources compared to building SD(P)'s


What do you call a DN(P)? A SD(P) with a half load of pods.

It's probably a little more complex than that, but the ship is still going to need a pair of keyholes, armoured pod core(since BC(P)s have demonstrated the necessity for these), broadside and chase weapons, sensors, sidewalls, external armour and so on. When you build that much warship, you might as well go the whole hog.


Exactly -- a DN-P is 20% lighter than a same generate SD-P, needs the same base defensive suite and offensive fire-control, and manpower has broken from scaling with displacement, so it might be 15% to 20% faster to build, but 90% as expensive to run on manpower basis, and only has 70% to 80% of the sustained fighting power of a same generation SD-P while only being 10% cheaper than its bigger brother (KH2 costs are the same for either ship etc)
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by drothgery   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:57 pm

drothgery
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1974
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:07 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

munroburton wrote:What do you call a DN(P)? A SD(P) with a half load of pods.

It's probably a little more complex than that, but the ship is still going to need a pair of keyholes, armoured pod core(since BC(P)s have demonstrated the necessity for these), broadside and chase weapons, sensors, sidewalls, external armour and so on. When you build that much warship, you might as well go the whole hog.
You can probably ditch one keyhole; the second one is only for redundancy, so not needed in an economy platform. Which doesn't mean I disagree. I mean, I can see scenarios where a star nation would build DN(P)s - you can build them faster, and it may be easier to confuse others as to what you're actually building with a 7 MT ship (which is bigger than an SLN SD, but I'd still call one a DN) rather than an 8.5 MT one. But if you already are building SD(P)s, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by Dafmeister   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 2:49 pm

Dafmeister
Commodore

Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:58 am

drothgery wrote:
munroburton wrote:What do you call a DN(P)? A SD(P) with a half load of pods.

It's probably a little more complex than that, but the ship is still going to need a pair of keyholes, armoured pod core(since BC(P)s have demonstrated the necessity for these), broadside and chase weapons, sensors, sidewalls, external armour and so on. When you build that much warship, you might as well go the whole hog.
You can probably ditch one keyhole; the second one is only for redundancy, so not needed in an economy platform. Which doesn't mean I disagree. I mean, I can see scenarios where a star nation would build DN(P)s - you can build them faster, and it may be easier to confuse others as to what you're actually building with a 7 MT ship (which is bigger than an SLN SD, but I'd still call one a DN) rather than an 8.5 MT one. But if you already are building SD(P)s, it doesn't make a lot of sense.



The second Keyhole platform also provides a lot of anti-missile coverage with its PDLCs, as well.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by The E   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:22 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2299
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Dafmeister wrote:The second Keyhole platform also provides a lot of anti-missile coverage with its PDLCs, as well.


Yeah, I don't think anyone is seriously considering using less than two Keyhole platforms on any capital ship.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by kzt   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 11:16 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 10086
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

The E wrote:Yeah, I don't think anyone is seriously considering using less than two Keyhole platforms on any capital ship.

Given that it was stated that you only need one KH2 per squadron I think it would make a lot of sense to replace one of the KH2 with multiple dedicated defensive platforms. Which should also be a lot cheaper.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by Lord Skimper   » Wed Mar 26, 2014 11:35 pm

Lord Skimper
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1736
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Calgary, Nova, Gryphon.

How many missiles can a SD(P) fire and control per wave? 200? A SD Gryphon could double stack with off bore firing 184 missiles. Add in a pair of CDC bottom mounted and you can keep your wedge imposed. The Gryphon can fire 60 waves of missiles and besides not using Apollo, they can hit just as hard.

The Mk41 cost less than the Mk23.

The only ship close to this Gryphon is the excellent BC L Nike. But it can't hit very hard and it can't fire as heavy a missile load nor does it have as much missile versatility.

Mk16 is a lightweight compared to the Mk41. Great for small ships like the Roland and Saganami series. But not for the Nike.

Finally with capacitor tech the Mk41 should be cheaper than the Mk16 and much cheaper than the Mk23. Plus it can hit harder. Modern fire control and EW should be similar or the same.

So unless the Mk23 firing SD(P) can fire so many more missiles more than 184-276 missiles at a time. The Gryphon can do the same without the pod weaknesses. And can carry more missiles, or with Mk41's at least the same number.

In Silesia 1 refit slip could be established per system and during the 18 months each per Gryphon the conversion can take place plus over 9 years train new crews and bring 6 Gryphon upgrades per system with crew training and with 2 slips half that say 4.5-5 years.

Plus build all the Mk41's that are needed. Cheaply and fully capable.
________________________________________
Just don't ask what is in the protein bars.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by The E   » Thu Mar 27, 2014 1:51 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2299
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

Dafmeister wrote:And again we're faced with the question that you've never answered:

Why should the RMN refit a Gryphon-class ship when this will produce a ship that is still below current RMN standards, when for a fairly small extra cost in time and resources they can build an Invictus?


Please answer this, Skimper.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by wastedfly   » Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:14 am

wastedfly
Commodore

Posts: 832
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:23 am

The E wrote:
Dafmeister wrote:And again we're faced with the question that you've never answered:

Why should the RMN refit a Gryphon-class ship when this will produce a ship that is still below current RMN standards, when for a fairly small extra cost in time and resources they can build an Invictus?


Please answer this, Skimper.


Where is this brand new missile design coming from to start with? Besides, such a missile would be gigantic. But wouldn't want to bother the brain matter skimper to bother to look at the drawing at the beginning of AoV for how GIGANTIC a 3 stage CAP missile would be compared to a SDM capital missile. Or BOTHER to remind him that a 2 stage Fusion bird is only SLIGHTLY larger than single stage LERM which will still be SMALLER than an old style CAPITAL SDM missile. SO why the bloody Hell would they not simply put MK-16G's in said Gryphon as said missile head is a Capital grade missile head equivalent to what was originally SHOT OUT OF SAID SDM GRYPHONS TUBES! At least then all they would have to do is modify the launch tubes, assuming even that would be needed. More likely is that the missile que TOOOOOOO the launch tubes would need modification and the launch tubes which are encased in armor would not need modifying at all.

Effectively with little modification at all, old style Gryphons, those not already converted or turned into dust bunnies by 2 wars, will be DDM MK-16G equipped. May ship such ships to say Haven/Andies/Beowulf to get refitted. Yes, more manpower intensive than BCL, but also better than BCL.

RMN and Grayson cannot refit them as they have no yards, no yard workers, and much more pressing matters, like missile production lines, and building their basic industry.

MK-16G Gryphons will be better than anything the MALIGN will be fielding, or equivalent anyways. Of course RMN/GSN are probably strapped for navy personnel right now, so by the time they could be possibly refitted ELSEWHERE, they may have the personnel to put on them.

Don't know why no one has brought this point up. Effectively no refitting necessary to use MK-16G's as their tubes are large enough. Seems a simple stop gap, very little work needed to bring this old class up to "workable" status. There were lots of WWI BB in WWII which while seriously compromised in modern terms to modern BB equivalents, still more than held their own providing security and ########HULLS.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by The E   » Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:00 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2299
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

This assumes that there is a gap in capital ships that needs to be filled post-haste. I would submit that this is not actually the case.
Top
Re: Revisiting a Gryphon refit.
Post by munroburton   » Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:53 am

munroburton
Admiral

Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:16 am
Location: Scotland

The E wrote:
Dafmeister wrote:And again we're faced with the question that you've never answered:

Why should the RMN refit a Gryphon-class ship when this will produce a ship that is still below current RMN standards, when for a fairly small extra cost in time and resources they can build an Invictus?


Please answer this, Skimper.


Thirded.

I know things have changed in the Haven sector, as hundreds of SD(P)s have been blown apart a scant few years after they were built. But SDs were built to last for a century minimum and many lasted even longer. I can't see how SD(P)s wouldn't be the same, once a state of peace exists and they stop getting blown up(which they have now).

It might be that in 20 years, everything in commission now becomes utterly obsolete, in which case it doesn't really matter(from a long strategical view) what's built now. But if SD(P)s remain viable beyond that, up to a hundred or two years, then building SDs(however good) is highly questionable.

In the short term, they have five years before the League can possibly get any new waller design commissioned. They have four years for Manticore-built units and probably two to three years for the multinational efforts mainly shouldered by the same Havenite yards that managed to produce nearly a thousand SD(P)s in less than a decade.

So we're back to the unanswered question. What can a handful of refitted Gryphons contribute that the current fleet can't handle before all those new construction of their own completes?
Top

Return to Honorverse