Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 138 guests

Thinking about defensive weapons systems

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Thinking about defensive weapons systems
Post by tonyz   » Fri Oct 31, 2014 3:05 pm

tonyz
Lieutenant Commander

Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:42 pm
Location: Keene, TX

One of the things to keep in mind about independent weapons platforms is the thing everyone except actual designers usually forgets about: sensors. Warships have MUCH better sensors (longer baseline, more size, vastly more computer power) than missiles or remote platforms are going to have. Even if you got a PDC cluster on a drone, how is the drone going to find and analyze its targets?

(Keyhole platforms operate in close conjunction with the warship so this doesn't really apply to them. Notice that they're VERY large and use beamed power from the warship as well, so they can have PD clusters on board.)
Top
Re: Thinking about defensive weapons systems
Post by SWM   » Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:07 pm

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

dreamrider wrote:
SWM wrote:I don't recall any evidence that they are that big. Yes, they had to be carried externally, but the Sharks couldn't have carried capital missiles internally either. The Detweilers carry the graser torpedoes internally. I know graser missiles are bigger than capital missiles, but bigger than a pod? Do you have any evidence that they are bigger than a pod?


Why do you think that the Sharks could not have carried capital class missiles internally? I don't think there is textev for that. They DID certainly carry a number of oversized missile PODS loaded with Cataphract C, each accompanied by a bulldozer lead pod of the same size, internally. Recall that the Sharks are described as "battleship-sized".

Ah, yes, I had forgotten that the Sharks carried Cataphract-B pods internally. Thanks.
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: Thinking about defensive weapons systems
Post by n7axw   » Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:24 pm

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

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

tonyz wrote:One of the things to keep in mind about independent weapons platforms is the thing everyone except actual designers usually forgets about: sensors. Warships have MUCH better sensors (longer baseline, more size, vastly more computer power) than missiles or remote platforms are going to have. Even if you got a PDC cluster on a drone, how is the drone going to find and analyze its targets?

(Keyhole platforms operate in close conjunction with the warship so this doesn't really apply to them. Notice that they're VERY large and use beamed power from the warship as well, so they can have PD clusters on board.)


Maybe you modify the idea used with Apollo and send out a control missile with a powerful AI with each missile pod. You wouldn't need FTL to dramatically improve the performance of your missiles at extreme range.

Don
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: Thinking about defensive weapons systems
Post by stewart   » Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:43 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

n7axw wrote:Maybe you modify the idea used with Apollo and send out a control missile with a powerful AI with each missile pod. You wouldn't need FTL to dramatically improve the performance of your missiles at extreme range.

Don


--------------

Don --

I like that idea -- or possibly using Apollo / Lorelei platforms with a packaged bank (or 10) of Viper / Mk31 Counter-missiles.

-- Stewart
Top

Return to Honorverse