Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Dauntless, Google [Bot], Imaginos1892, Loren Pechtel, Lunan, Snejbjerg, Theemile and 9 guests

BC(C) (Spoiler Within)

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by Somtaaw   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:56 am

Somtaaw
Commodore

Posts: 994
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

kzt wrote:So from the point where the LACs start shooting CMs, how long have the last 5 or so fleet actions taken to the point where the battle is over?


Well I still answered that, Gaston, Chantilly, Solon and BoMa. 4 battles where both attack missiles, and CMs were flying for extended periods of times.

And Solon, and First BoMa are particularly notable for being truly extended battles. LAC's were definitely shooting themselves almost entirely dry, and even podnoughts were shooting themselves dry in those battles.

Considering how much of an anti-missile boost a mere LAC provides, over an all-up destroyer, an in-action collier actually does make sense to keep them in action longer.


Edit: And since I missed some of the later conversation, you're right that deeper magazines can help. But really, unless you start building the LAC's even bigger, they're already rather ammo limited.

Building them bigger means the RMN will have absolutely no choice but to adopt the Havenite style SD sized CLAC, just to maintain a sufficient squadron density. They're already cramming a pretty high number of LAC's into their DN sized hulls.

And CM's are getting larger and larger, and it's even worse on Katana's since the Vipers outmass even the CM-31's they're based on. The CM's seem to be at the point where further miniaturization isn't going to happen for a few decades, so they're only going to keep increasing in size.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by kzt   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:32 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8807
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Solon was a couple of squadrons of cruisers with 2 SDs, right? Not exactly an integrated fleet missile defense envelope and terribly light on firepower because reasons.
3rd fleet:"But the range was only 41,700,000 kilometers, and that meant Chin could keep Kuzak's ships under fire for eleven minutes before Third Fleet could run out of range."
Home fleet:"The battle no one had been able to adequately envision was over in 11.9 minutes from the moment the first missile launched."

The actual time during which CMs are in range is shorter.
So once again, please explain in what fleet action would reloading LACs in 10 minutes have been of sufficient use that it would make it a high priority construction priority?

In addition, to od a 10 minute reload means the LACs are inside the main fleet CM envelope, not a separate missile defense layer, which is supposedly much more effective.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by Somtaaw   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:23 pm

Somtaaw
Commodore

Posts: 994
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:36 am
Location: Canada

kzt wrote:Solon was a couple of squadrons of cruisers with 2 SDs, right? Not exactly an integrated fleet missile defense envelope and terribly light on firepower because reasons.
3rd fleet:"But the range was only 41,700,000 kilometers, and that meant Chin could keep Kuzak's ships under fire for eleven minutes before Third Fleet could run out of range."
Home fleet:"The battle no one had been able to adequately envision was over in 11.9 minutes from the moment the first missile launched."

The actual time during which CMs are in range is shorter.
So once again, please explain in what fleet action would reloading LACs in 10 minutes have been of sufficient use that it would make it a high priority construction priority?

In addition, to od a 10 minute reload means the LACs are inside the main fleet CM envelope, not a separate missile defense layer, which is supposedly much more effective.



Solon had 2 SD for Honor, but it was Giscard's 6 (or was it 8?) podnoughts that shot themselves entirely dry. For obvious reasons, that sort of deep-strike operations you aren't going to have concentrated fleet action.


But Giscard's podnoughts fired 11 normal salvo's, and 1 super salvo, before Moriarty fired. 11 salvo's, each coming in 5 or 6 minutes apart, each comprising of thousands of missiles? Of which, your average Katana has an estimated couple hundred Vipers? They'd be totally dry on everything but PDLCs by salvo 3 if they ration, or they could flush everything before salvo 2 arrived.

Obviously, Honor couldn't know about the Moriarty afterwards, but that single battle lasted for upwards of 4 hours, with a pretty steady rate of CM expendature, before "The Big One".


And prior to the return of pods, where in a single launch you could launch those multi-thousand strong salvo's, missile duels would easily last a few hours. A good point, Honor's defense of Grayson, even if it's weakened by the 'stupid' Masadans, that single engagement lasted well over 12 hours alone.


The only thing pods do, is enhance the nature of "flush all the CMs". If you stagger LAC squadrons flushing all CMs, with combat reloading you could always have some LAC's flushing everything they have on every salvo.


Although, to acknowledge your point in 'why bother?', with Haven and Manticore allied, the Andermani in a pretty fair neutral-ally, and the minor point of the SLN being totally inept without any even remotely close weapons.... yeah combat reloading is entirely pointless. But that doesn't mean the concept is truly pointless, eventually everyone's going to wind up with similar weapon ranges & performance.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by robert132   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:19 pm

robert132
Captain of the List

Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Somtaaw wrote:
Although, to acknowledge your point in 'why bother?', with Haven and Manticore allied, the Andermani in a pretty fair neutral-ally, and the minor point of the SLN being totally inept without any even remotely close weapons.... yeah combat reloading is entirely pointless. But that doesn't mean the concept is truly pointless, eventually everyone's going to wind up with similar weapon ranges & performance.


That's kinda like asking the Navy "why bother" practicing underway replenishment of stores and refueling, when no other opposing Navy is capable of it?

Because of that most conservative of military notions ... "you never know" when that ability may save your bacon one day.

The SLN as it exists currently in these books doesn't pose the kind of threat where combat reloading would be needed, very true.

But what about "those people" who pulled off "Oyster Bay?" "It might prove VERY handy when we finally find them."
****

Just my opinion of course and probably not worth the paper it's not written on.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by kzt   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:57 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8807
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

You need to design a new ship to preform a given mission, and you have limited money, engineering talent and manpower. Do you focus the mission on trying to solve a problem that has NEVER been shown to actually occur, or perhaps you might want to focus on something useful, like having your ships survive for more than 10 minutes in a high lethality environment?

For example, the issue with LACS isn't that you need to dock and rearm them, the PROBLEM is that they run out of ammo too fast in a high intensity fleet battle. In particular, they do this when deployed in missile defense mode several million km out in front of the fleet where they most effectively contribute to fleet missile defense capabilities.

Consider that this mission does not require high acceleration, high stealth or long duration on station. What are the possible solutions?
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by Jonathan_S   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:09 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5305
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

kzt wrote:You need to design a new ship to preform a given mission, and you have limited money, engineering talent and manpower. Do you focus the mission on trying to solve a problem that has NEVER been shown to actually occur, or perhaps you might want to focus on something useful, like having your ships survive for more than 10 minutes in a high lethality environment?

For example, the issue with LACS isn't that you need to dock and rearm them, the PROBLEM is that they run out of ammo too fast in a high intensity fleet battle. In particular, they do this when deployed in missile defense mode several million km out in front of the fleet where they most effectively contribute to fleet missile defense capabilities.

Consider that this mission does not require high acceleration, high stealth or long duration on station. What are the possible solutions?
Well it does require survivability. The LACs are claimed to be quite difficult targets for MDMs - hence rarely worth trying to divert SD(P) fire at despite their contribution to missile defense. (And there are enough of them that killing a few won't make a major difference)

A larger ship with deeper CM magazines, exposed that far from the defensive umbrella of the main battle line, likely changes the equation and becomes a worthwhile initial target. So now you have to balance sending larger crews out to very exposed positions and see whether the increased anti-missile firing time (assuming they survive that long) is worth the economic and personnel costs. (On the gripping hand, just by causing the enemy to divert fire onto them they'd prolong the survival of the main battle line - as hard as being an expendable defensive unit can be on the crew)


But it's possible that that forward BARCSP (barrier combat space patrol) isn't worth doing in bigger ships, or possibly not even for LACs anymore.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by kzt   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:28 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8807
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

An obvious option is going to some sort additional supply of ammo. 3-5000 tons of vipers might be useful.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by Jonathan_S   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:18 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5305
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

kzt wrote:An obvious option is going to some sort additional supply of ammo. 3-5000 tons of vipers might be useful.
Well yes, but I still view the CUMV(L) and it's 300 pods; not to mention a LACs ability to tow one at high speed while still being stealthy, with massive disbelief :D
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by kzt   » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:11 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8807
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Jonathan_S wrote:Well yes, but I still view the CUMV(L) and it's 300 pods; not to mention a LACs ability to tow one at high speed while still being stealthy, with massive disbelief :D

Well, if you could have your LACs each sneak the entire payload of a SD(P) into a few light seconds of your target it does simplify the fleet defense situation. The RMN fleet side anyhow.
Top
Re: BC(C) (Spoiler Within)
Post by ldwechsler   » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:51 pm

ldwechsler
Commander

Posts: 205
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:15 pm

kzt wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:Well yes, but I still view the CUMV(L) and it's 300 pods; not to mention a LACs ability to tow one at high speed while still being stealthy, with massive disbelief :D

Well, if you could have your LACs each sneak the entire payload of a SD(P) into a few light seconds of your target it does simplify the fleet defense situation. The RMN fleet side anyhow.


The key thing to remember is that there are a real lot of LACs. We've heard of sending out thousands. Each of the LACs does have a limited number of missiles but nothing says they have to fire them all at once.

After all, if a thousand missiles are being sent in a salvo at Manticore ships, 1000 LACs could each send out one, maybe two countermissiles. Remember that even the SD(P)'s have a limited capacity.

This works particularly well when the ships themselves have very good countermeasures and are tossing a real lot of missiles, particularly if they are more or less out of range of the enemy.

Sending 10,000 countermissiles after 1000 missiles is a waste. I would guess Tac officers would quickly learn this in war games and that there are computer controls to handle distribution.

Note also that if the enemy's ships start to blow up, there are fewer missiles coming at you.
Top

Return to Honorverse