Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 152 guests

"Marine Carrier"

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by Weird Harold   » Mon Dec 29, 2014 8:37 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Brigade XO wrote:She reported one or two road where the speed limit was posted as "Reasonable and Prudent".


There used to be about 30 States that had "Basic Rule" traffic laws. It was unusual to actually post "Reasonable and Prudent" because that was the default when you encountered an "End Of Limit" or "End of Speed Zone" sign. That ended with the national 55mph speed limit in the 70s and was only restored in a few states when Drive-55 was repealed.

The strange thing about Basic Rule laws is that you could drive 180mph one day without a problem and get a ticket for doing 45mph on the same stretch of road the next day if it was raining or foggy. :shock:
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by Hutch   » Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:28 pm

Hutch
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1831
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:40 pm
Location: Huntsville, Alabama y'all

lelder5 wrote:Back to beating the dead horse. There have been a number of military transports captured from the SLN, with marines, their small arms, and probably their ground vehicles. They have less armour and should be easier to modify than warships. I propose modification to a "jeep LAC carrier" and marine transport.


I presume you are talking about the transports carrying the 400,000 or so troops with Filareta's fleet (I don't think Crandall had any troop transports, only supply and logistics ships, IIRC).

If so, they (and the light units accompanying Filareta) apparently took a left turn at Aldebaran, because they are not mentioned at all in the chapters dealing with Filareta's arrival and eventual debacle.

Which leaves their fate a bit of a mystery....

IMHO as always. YMMV.
***********************************************
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow.

What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here! Boom. Sooner or later. BOOM! -LT. Cmdr. Susan Ivanova, Babylon 5
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by munroburton   » Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:32 pm

munroburton
Admiral

Posts: 2368
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 10:16 am
Location: Scotland

fallsfromtrees wrote:
lelder5 wrote:Back to beating the dead horse. There have been a number of military transports captured from the SLN, with marines, their small arms, and probably their ground vehicles. They have less armour and should be easier to modify than warships. I propose modification to a "jeep LAC carrier" and marine transport.

To what end. As assault shuttles, they are no doubt vastly inferior to even second line Havenite equipment, and Haven probably has all of that type of stuff required.


I wouldn't be so sure of that. Remember, the Peep shuttles they stole off Tepes was said to have components that were better suited to their roles than the equivalent Manticoran shuttles, even if the overall package was admittedly cruder.

However much a paper tiger Battle Fleet is, the Solarian Marines and OFS and Gendarmeres seem to have frequent need of shuttles to put down a pesky neobarb riot here and there in the Verge. The quality of ex-Solarian small arms and equipment sold on the black market is pretty high.

So it's more likely than not IMO that Solarian shuttles are quite adequate for the role. After all, there isn't much an assault shuttle can't do when supported by a cruiser for orbital fire support. And as crap as they are in the new missile environment, the FF ships bombing Mobius didn't have any issues in that role.

Does anyone know who had the best rowboats during the Napoleonic era? ;)
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by n7axw   » Mon Dec 29, 2014 10:22 pm

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

Weird Harold wrote:
Brigade XO wrote:She reported one or two road where the speed limit was posted as "Reasonable and Prudent".


There used to be about 30 States that had "Basic Rule" traffic laws. It was unusual to actually post "Reasonable and Prudent" because that was the default when you encountered an "End Of Limit" or "End of Speed Zone" sign. That ended with the national 55mph speed limit in the 70s and was only restored in a few states when Drive-55 was repealed.

The strange thing about Basic Rule laws is that you could drive 180mph one day without a problem and get a ticket for doing 45mph on the same stretch of road the next day if it was raining or foggy. :shock:


I grew up in Montana. The wording I remember was what is "safe, reasonable and proper." As that worked out in practice, if the highway patrol didn't like what you were doing, you didn't get a speeding ticket; instead it was for reckless driving.

Don
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by Garth 2   » Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:10 am

Garth 2
Captain of the List

Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:04 am

the RMN full appreciates that it can't support Marine operations the way it use to due to the increase in automation, that's why they are developing (though not yet deployed) the next generation of Marine transport. Its also why a couple of the newer classes emphasise Marine capability at the expense of war fighting ability.
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by n7axw   » Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:26 am

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

Garth 2 wrote:the RMN full appreciates that it can't support Marine operations the way it use to due to the increase in automation, that's why they are developing (though not yet deployed) the next generation of Marine transport. Its also why a couple of the newer classes emphasise Marine capability at the expense of war fighting ability.


Maybe it would be better stated here that the war fighting need shifted when the League instead of Haven became Manticore's primary opponent.

Don
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by Garth 2   » Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:49 am

Garth 2
Captain of the List

Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:04 am

n7axw wrote:
Garth 2 wrote:the RMN full appreciates that it can't support Marine operations the way it use to due to the increase in automation, that's why they are developing (though not yet deployed) the next generation of Marine transport. Its also why a couple of the newer classes emphasise Marine capability at the expense of war fighting ability.


Maybe it would be better stated here that the war fighting need shifted when the League instead of Haven became Manticore's primary opponent.

Don


Not really, the primary objective/function of any warship is to eliminate the enemy, everything else is secondary.

Even historically, its unlikely that anything smaller than a BC would have the manpower to carry out S&R/seize operations on multiple DNs and SDs (assuming they could mission kill them in the first place).

Though compared to the current generation of warships, yes I agree it would be easier for them to carryout a seize/S&R operation on an equivalent sized vessel but what the RMN needs is unit numbers for space control missions, after all once you control the higher orbitals it doesn't really matter what they have on the ground.

The automation solved the primary limit of the then SKM (i.e. Manpower) on building a big enough force to take the fight to Haven or, as it later turned out, the League.

What would you rather: a few vessels that can do every mission that's going to come up, or a lot of vessels that can do the primary mission (eliminate the enemy) and focused on a selection of secondary ones.
Top
Re: "Marine Carrier"
Post by Theemile   » Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:20 am

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5082
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

lelder5 wrote:Back to beating the dead horse. There have been a number of military transports captured from the SLN, with marines, their small arms, and probably their ground vehicles. They have less armour and should be easier to modify than warships. I propose modification to a "jeep LAC carrier" and marine transport.


you are still talking about some pretty serious modifications - a Assault shuttle is ~600 tons and a LAC is 20,000. That's like trying to fit a large train engine into a surburban Garage.

The Roughneck design mentioned in Jaynes (The Mil class Marine transport Honor captured at 2nd Cereberus) Was considered a warship and was heavily cofferdamned (to the point where it was difficult to carry heavy equipment in the ship because the hatches and corridors were too small to move cargo away from both the dorsal and lateral boatbays.

The 4.5 Mton design had carried ~20,000 marines and ~84 assault shuttles IIRC, as well as a CA's defensive suite.
******
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

Return to Honorverse