Honorverse ramblings and musings

[edit: and I see SWM posted much of this while I was composing my response ]

cthia wrote:

SWM wrote:Think back to Blackbird. It was not an anomaly. Remember the missiles that were fired from Blackbird? They were much bigger than capital missiles, and had much longer range. The text specifically states that ground-based missiles could be much bigger and more powerful than ship-board missiles.

Even 1900, launching these missiles from the moon could defend the planet from any ships approaching the planet, long before they could range on the moonbase itself.

Planet defense! I knew I was missing something. But even then, if you know the phases of the enemy's moon why can't you attack holding the planet between you and the defending moon?

And how does a moon defense control such long legged missiles? Especially in the early days of moonbase defenses?

Long Legged is a relative thing. We've got enough numbers on the ground-based missiles at Blackbird base to recontruct a reasonable flight profile; but even without that Honor gives us their expected terminal velocity and max range.

So we know that they've got roughly 1.21x more powered range than shipboard missiles of that era; and are about 1.56x their speed at burnout. But 8.2 million km at 0.39c is still pretty short ranged by later EDM standards, much less DDMs or MDMs. And ships were able to control pods of those without major refits.


Now you've got a point that you can schedule or set up attack so you come in with the planet screening you from the moon's sensors and missles. A moon base shouldn't be the whole defenses of a planet. But it's a tougher, more dug in, target than even a fort. So it complicates the attackers plans. And with some coordination a fort, or even ship, on the side of the planet could control missiles fired 'round the planet by the moon.

But even without that an attacker couldn't set up in low orbit around the planet until they'd dealt with the moon's launchers. Therefor one reading of the Eridani Edict is that you probably aren't considered to be holding control of the orbitals until you've neutralized the moon. And attacking the surface prior to securing the orbitals would then be a violation of that Edict - causing the SLN to come out and remove your government! (Assuming they heard about it)


So again, while not the end all of orbital defenses there do appear to be some advantages to providing part of a planets defense from deeply dug in lunar missile bases.

Jonathan_S wrote:[edit: and I see SWM posted much of this while I was composing my response ]

cthia wrote:

SWM wrote:Think back to Blackbird. It was not an anomaly. Remember the missiles that were fired from Blackbird? They were much bigger than capital missiles, and had much longer range. The text specifically states that ground-based missiles could be much bigger and more powerful than ship-board missiles.

Even 1900, launching these missiles from the moon could defend the planet from any ships approaching the planet, long before they could range on the moonbase itself.

Planet defense! I knew I was missing something. But even then, if you know the phases of the enemy's moon why can't you attack holding the planet between you and the defending moon?

And how does a moon defense control such long legged missiles? Especially in the early days of moonbase defenses?

Johnathan_S wrote:Long Legged is a relative thing. We've got enough numbers on the ground-based missiles at Blackbird base to recontruct a reasonable flight profile; but even without that Honor gives us their expected terminal velocity and max range.

So we know that they've got roughly 1.21x more powered range than shipboard missiles of that era; and are about 1.56x their speed at burnout. But 8.2 million km at 0.39c is still pretty short ranged by later EDM standards, much less DDMs or MDMs. And ships were able to control pods of those without major refits.


Now you've got a point that you can schedule or set up attack so you come in with the planet screening you from the moon's sensors and missles. A moon base shouldn't be the whole defenses of a planet. But it's a tougher, more dug in, target than even a fort. So it complicates the attackers plans. And with some coordination a fort, or even ship, on the side of the planet could control missiles fired 'round the planet by the moon.

But even without that an attacker couldn't set up in low orbit around the planet until they'd dealt with the moon's launchers. Therefor one reading of the Eridani Edict is that you probably aren't considered to be holding control of the orbitals until you've neutralized the moon. And attacking the surface prior to securing the orbitals would then be a violation of that Edict - causing the SLN to come out and remove your government! (Assuming they heard about it)


So again, while not the end all of orbital defenses there do appear to be some advantages to providing part of a planets defense from deeply dug in lunar missile bases.

Thanks all.

Now I am trying to remember if the tactic of firing on Honor from around the moonbase was used. They could have surprised her with a volley coming straight into her teeth from the opposite direction. I'll have to reread that for a second time.

cthia wrote:Now I am trying to remember if the tactic of firing on Honor from around the moonbase was used. They could have surprised her with a volley coming straight into her teeth from the opposite direction. I'll have to reread that for a second time.

It wasn't the ground-based missiles, but Theisman sneaking around Blackbird(?) with his destroyer(?) to flank Honor's task force.

I wonder about the history of the Thornton missile base. It does provide a relatively cheap and powerful form of near-planet defense. But it is also somewhat vulnerable (militarily, economically, and politically), and subject to changes in technology.

Manticore was not always as savvy in military affairs as it is today. I can imagine that the missile base has had many ups and downs over the last five hundred years. At times, maybe it was the pride of the Navy. Other times maybe it was underfunded and obsolescent. It has probably been a pork barrel project at one time or another. Sometimes it was at the cutting edge of technology, and other times it was a place to shove unwanted officers. Maybe there have been struggles over which department it belonged to. There may have been attempts (perhaps even successful!) to turn it partially or completely over to civilian authority, like some modern-era military bases. Maybe it has been used occasionally more as a research facility than a defensive fortification. Perhaps the current base is not the original base.

Five hundred years is a long time for a military base.

SWM wrote:I wonder about the history of the Thornton missile base. It does provide a relatively cheap and powerful form of near-planet defense. But it is also somewhat vulnerable (militarily, economically, and politically), and subject to changes in technology.

Manticore was not always as savvy in military affairs as it is today. I can imagine that the missile base has had many ups and downs over the last five hundred years. At times, maybe it was the pride of the Navy. Other times maybe it was underfunded and obsolescent. It has probably been a pork barrel project at one time or another. Sometimes it was at the cutting edge of technology, and other times it was a place to shove unwanted officers. Maybe there have been struggles over which department it belonged to. There may have been attempts (perhaps even successful!) to turn it partially or completely over to civilian authority, like some modern-era military bases. Maybe it has been used occasionally more as a research facility than a defensive fortification. Perhaps the current base is not the original base.

Five hundred years is a long time for a military base.

Would not the current missile bases eventually be upgraded to be quite effective in planetary and system defense roles being replete with Apollo systems and laden with LACs? Perhaps even deemed LAC bases?

Question. Is there a ground-based variant of Apollo, even longer burn times?

cthia wrote:Would not the current missile bases eventually be upgraded to be quite effective in planetary and system defense roles being replete with Apollo systems and laden with LACs? Perhaps even deemed LAC bases?

That seems quite plausible.

Question. Is there a ground-based variant of Apollo, even longer burn times?

No idea. Maybe? Although the existing 4-stage system defense missile is already pushing things. If I recall correctly, someone here calculated that the 4-stage model could cover a good fraction of the hyper limit. And the time delays, even with Apollo, become significant.

SWM wrote:I wonder about the history of the Thornton missile base. It does provide a relatively cheap and powerful form of near-planet defense. But it is also somewhat vulnerable (militarily, economically, and politically), and subject to changes in technology.

Manticore was not always as savvy in military affairs as it is today. I can imagine that the missile base has had many ups and downs over the last five hundred years. At times, maybe it was the pride of the Navy. Other times maybe it was underfunded and obsolescent. It has probably been a pork barrel project at one time or another. Sometimes it was at the cutting edge of technology, and other times it was a place to shove unwanted officers. Maybe there have been struggles over which department it belonged to. There may have been attempts (perhaps even successful!) to turn it partially or completely over to civilian authority, like some modern-era military bases. Maybe it has been used occasionally more as a research facility than a defensive fortification. Perhaps the current base is not the original base.

Five hundred years is a long time for a military base.

Given the stealthiness, range and mobility of space based pods - the missile function of the Missile bases on Thorsten may be a thing of the past. However, that is not to say that command and control of the planetary defenses does not still reside there.

SWM wrote:

cthia wrote:Would not the current missile bases eventually be upgraded to be quite effective in planetary and system defense roles being replete with Apollo systems and laden with LACs? Perhaps even deemed LAC bases?

That seems quite plausible.

Question. Is there a ground-based variant of Apollo, even longer burn times?

No idea. Maybe? Although the existing 4-stage system defense missile is already pushing things. If I recall correctly, someone here calculated that the 4-stage model could cover a good fraction of the hyper limit. And the time delays, even with Apollo, become significant.

Well their straight-line continuously powered range would be 87.5 million km (except it wouldn't because that would imply a terminal velocity of 1.13 c. I know missiles seem to ignore relativity when accelerating, but not to the extent that they could crack the speed on light in n-space)

More realistically they'd hit 0.99c at 720 seconds and 77.1 million km (4.28 lightminutes; far short of the hyperlimit). The 1-way Apollo lag would be 4.14 seconds which is far better than the 24.3 seconds of lightspeed lag that a SDM would have at burnout.


But let's run the numbers another way. Assume we go ballistic and coast until we're within range of the far hyper limit (call it 33 lightminutes). The 1-way Apollo lag would still be only
31.9 seconds (more than an SDM, but far better than the pre-Apollo MDMs); plus any delays from the numerous relays it would have to go through to reach that far. And depending on when you set the coast phase (after the 3rd or 2rd drive) it would take around 54 - 72 minutes. You'd have to wait until the enemy committed to a vector that prevented them from breaking back across the hyper limit for that hour or so, but it could work. It just wouldn't be ideal.

For the near hyper limit (11 km) it's not as bad 27 - 31 minutes.


Oh, and to install Apollo on a lunar base I think you might well still need a Keyhole II style remote to mount the FTL transmitters on. For whatever reason RFC seems against hull mounted FTL fire-control; and I'd guess the tech reason he's settled on would prevent planetary or lunar surface transmitters as well. That would remove a bit of the dispersed and buried nature of a lunar missile base. OTOH you've got a hell of a lot of surface area to mount redundant Keyhole II launch / data link bays on

Pardon the rambling but this is the ramblings thread.

Pardon again any failure at a cogent post, as it all isn't quite formed in my mind yet, in my head yes - mind, no. lol

Practical Planetary Defense.

I'm thinking back to the catastrophe of the Black Rock treecat clan. I always thought it odd that planetary defenses don't include tech that is actually planet based. Earth presently has the ability to see asteroids, comets, etc that may threaten Earth from far out. Surely Honorverse tech could supply them with enough advanced warning during space battles in system to detect orphan debris headed for a planetary collision. That seems to indicate contingency plans to either launch planet protecting technology in the form of LACs with grasers to intercept any possible debris. Or Star Wars laser systems with target and destroy capabilities.

I'm not sure if I'm remembering correctly that the Eridani Edict only protects planets that aren't shooting back. However, even if that's the case, neutral technology could be utilized to protect the planet against falling debris from space battles or runaway ships of either nation.

One POC (point of consideration) to planet based missiles may have been escape velocity but certainly with Honorverse tech that would no longer be an impediment. Could Honorverse missiles be launched from directly off Manticore anyway?

Moonbases could launch specialty ships, perhaps even tugs, at first detection of enemy fleets. Masses of specialty tugs and LACs meant only as debris intercepting tech.

There must be industries such as nuclear power plants, if they are being used as the primary source of power, that you wouldn't want to be impacted by falling debris.

*Update: Theemile just informed me that fusion power is used on planet. There would be no danger of a runaway fusion reaction as this is intrinsically impossible and any malfunction would result in a rapid shutdown of the plant. (Just how rapidly I can't say.)

A sidewall to protect nuclear power plants?

There are also other concerns, principally regarding the possible release of tritium into the environment. It is radioactive and very difficult to contain since it can penetrate concrete, rubber and some grades of steel. As an isotope of hydrogen, it is easily incorporated into water, making the water itself weakly radioactive. With a half-life of about 12.3 years, the presence of tritium remains a threat to health for about 125 years after it is created, as a gas or in water, if at high levels. It can be inhaled, absorbed through the skin or ingested. Inhaled tritium spreads throughout the soft tissues and tritiated water mixes quickly with all the water in the body. Although there is only a small inventory of tritium in a fusion reactor – a few grams – each could conceivably release significant quantities of tritium during operation through routine leaks, assuming the best containment systems. An accident could release even more. This is one reason why long-term hopes are for the deuterium-deuterium fusion process, dispensing with tritium.
While fusion power clearly has much to offer when the technology is eventually developed, the problems associated with it also need to be addressed if it is to become a widely used future energy source.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Curre ... ion-Power/

I'll check with Cauldron of Ghosts as Theemile indicated for perhaps an accounting of what is used in the Honorverse fusion process.

Perhaps with Honorverse medical tech peripheral dangers from nuclear power plants are no longer feared. And falling debris on the magnitude of what destroyed Black Rock clan creates its own catastrophic explosion, but I wonder if these power plants wouldn't represent a high priority to want to protect from falling debris.

Which leads me to this, surely Protector's Palace or Mount Royal Palace can benefit from planetary based shields from debris. IIRC, starship tech cannot be used on planet to create sidewalls to protect ground based concerns? Yet, can other power sources be utilized to manifest sidewalls to protect important buildings?

Of course, life is the most important and it seems to me that some sort of planetary defense should be possible with Honorverse tech to at least limit falling debris catastrophes.

Expensive, yes. But what's the price of life? Saganami Island could have been destroyed by falling debris.


What would have been the impact of the loss of Sag Island, the Crusher, etc. etc. ?

Not going to quote your whole message, cthia, but in regards to planetary defense.

IIRC, Mount Royal palace does have defensive systems on the ground, and they were used during MoH after the Oyster Bay attack to destroy portions of Hepasteus (sp) that were entering the atmosphere and endangering settled areas. From MoH:

....The Mount Royal Palace defenses destroyed the two of those pieces which might have threatened Landing, and the other four struck either uninhabited or only sparsely inhabited areas of the planet.

But apparently those are limited to the Palace and there was no mention of on-planet defense on Gryphon or Sphinx.

And thinking about it, if you have space-based systems and impeller-driven craft, you can prevent any stray rocks (which if you're spending a lot of time in space, you know about already) from impacting by placing a wedge in-between, or using a tractor beam.

As for opposing an attack from space with ground systems, this invalidates the Erandi Edict and you've left your entire planet open for attack...and I don't think you can put up sidewalls all around the planet...hmmmmmm.