Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: George J. Smith, Google [Bot] and 9 guests

A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hulls

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hulls
Post by Loren Pechtel   » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:07 pm

Loren Pechtel
Captain of the List

Posts: 594
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:24 pm

One of the big factors in how close together tubes can be placed is wedge fratricide.

However, now, with delayed ignition on the missiles that can be avoided. What happens when you put in an extra set of tubes between each existing pair? Make the grav drivers in these weaker (or stronger) than the regular ones so they spread out in space before they light off.

Such tubes could only be used with delayed ignition but that's how all real battles are handled these days anyway.
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Bill Woods   » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:49 pm

Bill Woods
Captain of the List

Posts: 568
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:39 pm

Pods have missiles packed in like sardines in a can, but they can be launched as close to simultaneously as makes no difference. So obviously something like the US Navy's vertical launching system (VLS) would work.
----
Imagined conversation:
Admiral [noting yet another Manty tech surprise]:
XO, what's the budget for the ONI?
Vice Admiral: I don't recall exactly, sir. Several billion quatloos.
Admiral: ... What do you suppose they did with all that money?
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Duckk   » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:53 pm

Duckk
Site Admin

Posts: 4125
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:29 pm

Tubes are just one part of the equation. Where is the cofferdamming for containing damage? What about the magazines and the ammunition handling?

At work, I printed something off to remind me about “simple” solutions.
-------------------------
Shields at 50%, taunting at 100%! - Tom Pope
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Annachie   » Thu Aug 09, 2018 11:34 pm

Annachie
Admiral

Posts: 2436
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Duckk wrote:Tubes are just one part of the equation. Where is the cofferdamming for containing damage? What about the magazines and the ammunition handling?

At work, I printed something off to remind me about “simple” solutions.
Bah, silly Duckk.

RMN Alpha Strike has no need of cofferdamming, or follow up capability.


Actually, accepting that it would be single launch, fragile, and no doubt pointless, it's an interesting question.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by kzt   » Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:25 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 9581
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Annachie wrote:Bah, silly Duckk.

RMN Alpha Strike has no need of cofferdamming, or follow up capability.


Actually, accepting that it would be single launch, fragile, and no doubt pointless, it's an interesting question.

Well, how much did all that extend the combat effective time of Home Fleet? 30 seconds? 60 seconds?
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Kael Posavatz   » Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:47 am

Kael Posavatz
Lieutenant (Senior Grade)

Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:51 am

I would think all of those missile wedges blinding your access to Keyhole II, and that your Huge Salvo not arriving in a single time-on-target barrage, would also factor in.
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri Aug 10, 2018 7:20 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4320
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Loren Pechtel wrote:What happens when you put in an extra set of tubes between each existing pair?


A Roland-class DD has launch tubes close together so it can fit six(?) in each hammerhead. In Order to do that it was necessary to group them in threes around a single set of support systems -- reload rails, fusion drive start-up plasma, etc. The configuration make the tubes of the Roland-class very susceptible to battle damage; what would disable one missile tube on more conventional layouts would take out three tubes at once on a Roland.

I suspect a similar set-up could be applied to conventional broadside tubes but the increased vulnerability to battle damage would argue against it.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Vince   » Fri Aug 10, 2018 4:28 pm

Vince
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1547
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:43 pm

Weird Harold wrote:
Loren Pechtel wrote:What happens when you put in an extra set of tubes between each existing pair?


A Roland-class DD has launch tubes close together so it can fit six(?) in each hammerhead. In Order to do that it was necessary to group them in threes around a single set of support systems -- reload rails, fusion drive start-up plasma, etc. The configuration make the tubes of the Roland-class very susceptible to battle damage; what would disable one missile tube on more conventional layouts would take out three tubes at once on a Roland.

I suspect a similar set-up could be applied to conventional broadside tubes but the increased vulnerability to battle damage would argue against it.

Six in each hammerhead, with six launch tubes sharing one set of support equipment for each cluster of launch tubes. And a single hit could take out an entire cluster of 6 tubes:
Storm From the Shadows, Chapter 41 wrote:There were really two reasons for the Rolands' huge size compared to other destroyers. One was the fact that they were the only destroyers in the galaxy equipped to fire the Mark 16 dual-drive missile. Squeezing in that capability—and giving them twelve tubes—had required a substantial modification to the Mod 9-c launcher mounted in the Saganami-C class. The Rolands' Mod 9-e was essentially the tube from the 9-c, but stripped of the support equipment normally associated with a standalone missile tube. Instead, a sextet of the new launchers were shoehorned together, combining the necessary supports for all six tubes in the cluster. Roland mounted one cluster each in her fore and aft hammerheads, the traditional locations for a ship's chase energy weapons. Given the Manticoran ability to fire off-bore, all twelve tubes could be brought to bear on any target, but it did make the class's weapons more vulnerable. A single hit could take out half of her total missile armament, which was scarcely something Chatterjee liked to think about. But destroyers had never been intended to take the kind of hammering wallers could take, anyway, and he was willing to accept Roland's vulnerabilities in return for her overwhelming advantage in missile combat.
Italics are the author's, boldface is my emphasis.
-------------------------------------------------------------
History does not repeat itself so much as it echoes.
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:55 pm

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4320
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Vince wrote:
Weird Harold wrote:A Roland-class DD has launch tubes close together so it can fit six(?) in each hammerhead.


Six in each hammerhead, with six launch tubes sharing one set of support equipment for each cluster of launch tubes. And a single hit could take out an entire cluster of 6 tubes:
Storm From the Shadows, Chapter 41 wrote:There were really two reasons for the Rolands' huge size compared to other destroyers. One was the fact that they were the only destroyers in the galaxy equipped to fire the Mark 16 dual-drive missile. Squeezing in that capability—and giving them twelve tubes—had required a substantial modification to the Mod 9-c launcher mounted in the Saganami-C class. ...
Italics are the author's, boldface is my emphasis.


Thanx for the correction and texev.

More tubes could be squeezed into any broadside by using the same technique, but at the cost of seriously increased vulnerability to battle damage. Plus, such clusters would required better/heavier/thicker cofferdamming in bigger ships.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: A simple way to pack more missile tubes into modern hull
Post by Daryl   » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:17 pm

Daryl
Admiral

Posts: 2571
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

To keep the salvos coherent the ship would have to stop accelerating while launching, otherwise they would be spread out before ignition.
Top

Return to Honorverse