kzt wrote:SWM wrote:People have extrapolated far too much from the vague description of the Nat Turners. Yes, they are described very loosely as being like two Shrikes end-to-end. But that just a comparison of their weapons design. It does not mean that they are powered by fission reactors. David has stated that hyper-capable ships require too much power for fission reactors.
There is a post somewhere where David talks about regretting how his description was interpreted. It's a lot more that complex than a lot of people seem to think.
Exactly. The fission-fusion tradeoff isn't that simple. IIRC, the big problem with the Shrikes is that they're power-limited - they don't have enough power for both the wedge and the graser at the same time without using stored power, which affects their cycle time significantly. On the other hand, the fission pile means they don't need a lot of volume for hydrogen bunkerage.
I'd assumed that the Nat Turners had two of those fission reactors, not one, which would go along with the original description of them being two Shrikes end-to-end. That goes along with the two grasers and the additional magazine capacity, and it also goes along with the Hauptman Cartel being able to design a completely new frigate class without the years of work that would usually be done by a star nation's weapons design department. Now obviously a Nat Turner isn't just a pair of Shrikes bolted together, but that design approach is a whole lot simpler than either starting with a blank sheet of paper or trying to upgrade a conventional frigate design. It also gives Hauptman another export line - or at least it did before Oyster Bay.
With all that, I would be highly surprised if the Nat Turners didn't have significant weaknesses beyond what you would expect in a frigate.