Welcome to BookBoardz.com!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Couple of questions

 
   Book Forums (Home) -> David Weber RSS
Next:  [AAC] Speed of "FTL-communication" in t..  
Author Message
Tim Schmidt

External


Since: Mar 14, 2006
Posts: 1



(Msg. 1) Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:33 pm
Post subject: Couple of questions
Archived from groups: alt>books>david-weber (more info?)

I'm new to this group but read the FAC. A couple of things I've been
wondering about.

1. Why no turreted designs for beam weapons. Missiles seem to big but by
putting the main energy battery in turrets on the forward and aft slopes of
the hull (top and bottom), you could get better than twice the effective
battery for less than 1/2 the weapons. You could delete the bow and stern
chaser energy weapons as 1/2 your battery could fire off each end plus you
could use 1 beam weapon to take the place of 2 (one from each side).
Another advantage would be the ability to engage ships not directly abeam of
your ship without turning the entire ship to do so. When the sailing navies
figured out how to make rotating gun mounts, the fixed broadside of old was
quickly abandoned.

2. The 2nd question is when Grendlesbane was attacked at the resumption of
the war, why didn't the Manties try and escape in some of the almost
finished ships. Adm. White Haven said some were within weeks of launch so
likely only final fitting out was needed. In WW2 when France fell, they
managed to get both of their unfinished BB's to sea and escape the Germans.
I'm not suggesting the ships would be in any condition to fight, only to
escape back to Manticore (bringing many of the shipworkers with them).

Tim

 >> Stay informed about: Couple of questions 
Back to top
Login to vote
Offbreed

External


Since: Apr 13, 2005
Posts: 440



(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 6:12 am
Post subject: Re: Couple of questions [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Don Sample wrote:

> They were probably sitting in the docks with cold fusion plants, and
> nodes. It would have taken more time than they had to fuel them up, get
> the fusion plants up and running, and then get the nodes warmed up so
> they could move.

Power is always a good thing to have in a construction site, so they
would have a use for the reactors, if lighting them off is compatible
with the rest of the construction. On the other hand, the nodes are big,
expensive things so there is probably constant competition over who gets
the next available, so they might not even be installed yet.

The nanotech construction methods and the sequence of what is
installed/grown could mess things up. The ship structure will not stand
up to acceleration stresses without the gravity generators and
acceleration compensators being properly tied in with the nodes/wedges,
and calibrated. The ships would not have a useful acceleration rate if
that happens late in the construction sequence. In this universe,
anything limited to less than 200 gravities is a sitting duck. And, as
you say, the situation would be even worse if the nodes are cold. If
they are installed.

 >> Stay informed about: Couple of questions 
Back to top
Login to vote
wendal

External


Since: Aug 05, 2005
Posts: 24



(Msg. 3) Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Couple of questions [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

> 1. Why no turreted designs for beam weapons. Missiles seem to big but by
> putting the main energy battery in turrets on the forward and aft slopes of
> the hull (top and bottom), you could get better than twice the effective
> battery for less than 1/2 the weapons. You could delete the bow and stern
> chaser energy weapons as 1/2 your battery could fire off each end plus you
> could use 1 beam weapon to take the place of 2 (one from each side).
> Another advantage would be the ability to engage ships not directly abeam of
> your ship without turning the entire ship to do so. When the sailing navies
> figured out how to make rotating gun mounts, the fixed broadside of old was
> quickly abandoned.

I believe they changed over when armor made the bigger and more
powerful weapons necessary and stabilized hulls made accuracy possible
 >> Stay informed about: Couple of questions 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Book Forums (Home) -> David Weber All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]