Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: penny and 110 guests

THE C R U S H E R

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:49 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

The E wrote:
cthia wrote:
I would imagine that there are field trips scheduled as well during matriculation, certainly for LAC jockeys where they "push the envelope."


Except that LAC flying never involves doing low-level flight over mountainous terrain. There are no maneuvers an LAC can pull that are as dangerous as that.

I can think of a couple maneuvers that LACs could make that would be at least as dangerous as nap of the earth flying. The difference is that those maneuvers normally provide no military benefits to the LAC so you'd never have reason to practice or perform them.

Redlining a LAC to 100% military power, or even trying to ride the compensator's safety margin to momentarily exceed 100% power (an Honor did on the CA HMS War Maiden during an emergency in Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington would be very dangerous) But also not something you'd ever be allowed to do in training.

Here's the bit I was referring to.
Changer of Worlds: Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington wrote:HMS War Maiden's inertial compensator protested its savage abuse. More alarms howled as the load on the heavy cruiser's impeller nodes peaked forty percent beyond their "Never Exceed" levels. Despite her mangled after impeller ring, War Maiden slammed suddenly forward at almost five hundred and fifty gravities.


Another very dangerous maneuver would be to fly too close to the impeller wedge of a starship. Go just too close and the wedge interaction turns your LAC into a glowing ball of plasma - at least as lethal as failing to dodge a mountainside.
But again, terrain following as a way to avoid radar, SAMs, or interceptors means that it has military benefits that can outweigh it's very real risks -- flying too close to a bigger ship doesn't really have those same benefits; so it's just dangerous to no purpose (except in the the most extraordinary circumstances)
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by WLBjork   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:33 am

WLBjork
Commander

Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:45 am

Jonathan_S wrote:Redlining a LAC to 100% military power, or even trying to ride the compensator's safety margin to momentarily exceed 100% power (an Honor did on the CA HMS War Maiden during an emergency in Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington would be very dangerous) But also not something you'd ever be allowed to do in training.

Here's the bit I was referring to.
Changer of Worlds: Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington wrote:HMS War Maiden's inertial compensator protested its savage abuse. More alarms howled as the load on the heavy cruiser's impeller nodes peaked forty percent beyond their "Never Exceed" levels. Despite her mangled after impeller ring, War Maiden slammed suddenly forward at almost five hundred and fifty gravities.


Depends. If the "never exceed" limit was about 70% of max, then 140% of that takes you to about 98% of max.

Although I thought they limited themselves to 80% of max under normal circumstances.

On the other hand, "never exceed" may have been intended as max, although that would require something distinctly...unusual for WM to achieve without the compensator blowing.
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 10:34 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

WLBjork wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:Redlining a LAC to 100% military power, or even trying to ride the compensator's safety margin to momentarily exceed 100% power (an Honor did on the CA HMS War Maiden during an emergency in Ms. Midshipwoman Harrington would be very dangerous) But also not something you'd ever be allowed to do in training.

Here's the bit I was referring to.
>>>HMS War Maiden's inertial compensator protested its savage abuse. More alarms howled as the load on the heavy cruiser's impeller nodes peaked forty percent beyond their "Never Exceed" levels. Despite her mangled after impeller ring, War Maiden slammed suddenly forward at almost five hundred and fifty gravities.<<<


Depends. If the "never exceed" limit was about 70% of max, then 140% of that takes you to about 98% of max.

Although I thought they limited themselves to 80% of max under normal circumstances.

On the other hand, "never exceed" may have been intended as max, although that would require something distinctly...unusual for WM to achieve without the compensator blowing.

Yeah, back in the day 80% max was the normal safe limit, so I can't see why never exceed would be 70%. In ceasefire-era or newer ships that's been raised to 90% as war experience pushing the limits showed that modern compensators were safer than though under higher than normal max accel.

But taking the approach that never exceed might mean 80% we start to do some number crunching.
We know that she peaked at 540 gees at 140% of never exceed, so that puts the never exceed accel at 385.7 gees. And if that's 80% then her full accel would be 482.1 gees. That's very low for a CA - the lowest we know about in the RMN is the much later, larger, Star Knight-class at 509.3 gees...
On the other hand she had taken compensator damage, so speculating that she'd lost 7-8% of her accel before Honor called for emergency power from the remaining nodes isn't totally out of line.

If we assume that it really is 40% above 100% power then she'd have had to take a lot more impeller damage to manage "only" 540 gees. A small CA should have a book max accel of around 512-515 gees; so she'd have had to have suffered a 25% acceleration loss in order for a 140% of max power to result in just 540 gees.

Now if we go back to your speculation that never exceed was actually 70% on War Maiden then her actual 100% power accel would have to be 551 gees - way more than any known CA with pre-Grayson compensators.
In fact using the accel curve derived from the data points in HoS that max power accel would be impossible; extending the curve all the way down to 0 tons only reaches 550 gees. (And that's before you factor in whether she might have had acceleration loss from impeller damage)


I tried looking up what class HMS War Maiden actually was, to get her official stats, and while the wiki claims that HMS War Maiden is a Warrior-class CA (227,250 tons, 513.0 G max accel) the texts and pearls don't state her class; so I treat that wiki entry as suspect. And while I can't find anything in the story that actually directly contradicts known facts about the Warrior-class, I have a hard time thinking that a ship 92% the size of a then modern Prince Consort would described as "either an awfully big light cruiser or decidedly on the small size for a heavy".


Anyway back to the math, we can rule out 70% as never exceed, 100% as "never exceed" requires too much impeller damage to get the observed final result for me to be comfortable with (not to mention making it damned miraculous that the compensator didn't instantly pack in and kill everyone. David did say in the Compensator Failure infodump that "The sump is a little elastic, which is how you can at least try to take a compensator beyond its rated top limit and maybe survive, as Honor did on her middy cruise. The odds of doing so are… poor." But 40% past does now seem extra crazy; especially on damaged nodes.

Which leaves us with 80% as "never exceed" which seems plausible (though required exceeding the compensators theoretical maximum; up to 112% of max, at least briefly). It'd be a stronger case if 540 had been 112% of the roughly 513-515 gees you might expect a small CA to make at 100% power; but the known impeller damage could account for that...

Anyway this was a fun little diversion of research and number crunching :D
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by munroburton   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:14 pm

munroburton
Admiral

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

Jonathan_S wrote:I tried looking up what class HMS War Maiden actually was, to get her official stats, and while the wiki claims that HMS War Maiden is a Warrior-class CA (227,250 tons, 513.0 G max accel) the texts and pearls don't state her class; so I treat that wiki entry as suspect. And while I can't find anything in the story that actually directly contradicts known facts about the Warrior-class, I have a hard time thinking that a ship 92% the size of a then modern Prince Consort would described as "either an awfully big light cruiser or decidedly on the small size for a heavy".


I had a read through MMH. The only definite answer I can find is when War Maiden delivers the fatal stroke - "Six grasers scored direct hits on the aftermost quarter of PSN Annika."

Even the Star Knight and Saganami-A doesn't have six grasers on any side. Only Warrior had six, until the Saganami-B came along.
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:48 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

munroburton wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:I tried looking up what class HMS War Maiden actually was, to get her official stats, and while the wiki claims that HMS War Maiden is a Warrior-class CA (227,250 tons, 513.0 G max accel) the texts and pearls don't state her class; so I treat that wiki entry as suspect. And while I can't find anything in the story that actually directly contradicts known facts about the Warrior-class, I have a hard time thinking that a ship 92% the size of a then modern Prince Consort would described as "either an awfully big light cruiser or decidedly on the small size for a heavy".


I had a read through MMH. The only definite answer I can find is when War Maiden delivers the fatal stroke - "Six grasers scored direct hits on the aftermost quarter of PSN Annika."

Even the Star Knight and Saganami-A doesn't have six grasers on any side. Only Warrior had six, until the Saganami-B came along.
That was part of what I was thinking of when I said I didn't find anything incompatible with a Warrior.
6 grasers in a broadside - that matches.

The missile mount numbers (when it says things like "Heavy casualties in Missile Two" aren't so high as to be incompatible with a Warrior's 6 missile broadside. "Missile Eight" is the highest number mentioned and if (as I seem to recall) odd mounts are to port and evens to starboard then missile 8 would be the 4th tube on the starboard broadside...

No mention of War Maiden firing lasers.

But she seems too big in tonnage...
So I'm wondering if War Maiden is actually a member of some class that predated the Warrior. Maybe RFC just oversold her smallness in the story and she easily could be a Warrior class.
I'm just leery of totally accepting an unsourced statement to that effect in the wiki when I can't find anything in the text or RFC's posts to back it up.



RFC may have envisioned Warriors as being smaller than Ad Astra / BuShips ended up deciding they were for HoS (or for the printed SITS materal; I think their tonnage would be listed there since Warrior-class is in the summary table marked "classified" in the PDF SITS ship books)
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by munroburton   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:43 pm

munroburton
Admiral

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

Jonathan_S wrote:That was part of what I was thinking of when I said I didn't find anything incompatible with a Warrior.
6 grasers in a broadside - that matches.

The missile mount numbers (when it says things like "Heavy casualties in Missile Two" aren't so high as to be incompatible with a Warrior's 6 missile broadside. "Missile Eight" is the highest number mentioned and if (as I seem to recall) odd mounts are to port and evens to starboard then missile 8 would be the 4th tube on the starboard broadside...

No mention of War Maiden firing lasers.

But she seems too big in tonnage...
So I'm wondering if War Maiden is actually a member of some class that predated the Warrior.

Or maybe RFC just oversold her smallness in the story.

After all House of Steel didn't publicize her tonnage until well later - but it appears the Saganami Island Tactical Simulator books probably had it (but the pdf versions just have the summary table that includes Warrior; which lacks the tonnage or full details. I think that might have been in the printed game material; which I don't have). So he may have envisioned her as being smaller than BuShips ended up deciding she was...


Aye, I'm not ruling any slight retcons or adjustments out. The point about there being six grasers is, no other RMN heavy cruiser in service at the time could possibly have fired that broadside. Warrior is the answer by the process of elimination.

Just a few additional points...

The Warrior also had chase grasers and tubes, these would be incorporated into the numbering scheme somehow(eg, the bow graser could be number 1, number 13 or even simply graser A, whereas the stern graser could be number 2, number 14, graser B or graser Z).

Steel mentions the Warrior/Truncheon's precedessor by name - the Acherner-class. It implies these were retired not long after the Truncheons were commissioned, which would have been decades before War Maiden's deployment to Silesia.

As for her size - there's no denying the Warrior is the second smallest of the RMN's listed heavy cruisers. I'm pretty sure that reference was a more generalistic one, encompassing cruisers built by other nations. For example, Warrior was smaller than Annika(an ex-IAN heavy cruiser) and the Prince Consorts were smaller than the contemporaneous Havenite Sword-class(from what I can find, anyway).
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:36 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

munroburton wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:That was part of what I was thinking of when I said I didn't find anything incompatible with a Warrior.
[snip]

But she seems too big in tonnage...
So I'm wondering if War Maiden is actually a member of some class that predated the Warrior.

Or maybe RFC just oversold her smallness in the story.
[snip]


Aye, I'm not ruling any slight retcons or adjustments out. The point about there being six grasers is, no other RMN heavy cruiser in service at the time could possibly have fired that broadside. Warrior is the answer by the process of elimination.

Just a few additional points...

The Warrior also had chase grasers and tubes, these would be incorporated into the numbering scheme somehow(eg, the bow graser could be number 1, number 13 or even simply graser A, whereas the stern graser could be number 2, number 14, graser B or graser Z).

Steel mentions the Warrior/Truncheon's precedessor by name - the Acherner-class. It implies these were retired not long after the Truncheons were commissioned, which would have been decades before War Maiden's deployment to Silesia.

As for her size - there's no denying the Warrior is the second smallest of the RMN's listed heavy cruisers. I'm pretty sure that reference was a more generalistic one, encompassing cruisers built by other nations. For example, Warrior was smaller than Annika(an ex-IAN heavy cruiser) and the Prince Consorts were smaller than the contemporaneous Havenite Sword-class(from what I can find, anyway).

Good points. Looking at the average of all known CA's prior to Star Knight the Warrior-class is 89% the average size of a CA; and the second smallest period, not just of the RMN (with the 3 foreign CAs all being larger than average).

Average of the 8 known CAs is 254,875 tons.
Average of the 12 known CLs is 125,916 tons.

I'd have expected something that might be confused for a very small CA or a very big CL to be towards the middle of that gap, say around 175,000 - 205,000 tons; not 227,000 tons. (That's 180% the size of an average CL and, as stated before, 89% the size of an average CA. Hard to see why someone might think it could be an exceptionally large CL).

Still that's probably too much straining at gnats. The balance of info leans towards War Maiden being a Warrior-class.


But I still wouldn't flat out claim she was in the wiki without text ev or author's statement to back that up. (And that's really what started this whole aside :D)
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Theemile   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 9:30 pm

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5068
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

The SITS data page for the Warrior class states a model of the class was named War Maiden. The last of the Warriors were given to Grayson in 1904, so they definitely were in use for HONOR'S midie cruise.
******
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
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:42 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8308
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Theemile wrote:The SITS data page for the Warrior class states a model of the class was named War Maiden. The last of the Warriors were given to Grayson in 1904, so they definitely were in use for HONOR'S midie cruise.

Ah, thanks. Wish the shipbook pdfs hadn't redacted that page - glad you had access to the full material to confirm.
Top
Re: THE C R U S H E R
Post by Eyal   » Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:31 am

Eyal
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:09 pm
Location: Israel

As Manticore had been at peace for quite a while at the point Young (and Santino, for that matter) went through the Crusher, it's possible the instructors had gotten lazy and that at least some of the tests and simulations were being recycled, at least in broad strokes. So someone who knew what to expect (and naval connections would be of help here, especially if such details were supposed to be kept secret) would know what to prepare for (even if they didn't know specifics, knowing roughly what they could be facing would help) might find it easier.
Top

Return to Honorverse