what about escort CLACs?

On 2008-03-01, Offbreed
allegedly proclaimed to alt.books.david-weber:
> wrote:
>> But, the Manties and Andies have a lot of
>> new space to patrol in Silsia, it might be useful to have a few very
>> fast ships that could poke big holes in under armored pirates. They
>> can be in more places at one time,and with the BC-CLAC they can also
>> go from system to system.
>
> Or, one hold of a cargo ship adapted to the new LACs, a sort of Q ship.
> Or, tractor a couple of LACs to the hull of a freighter as dismountable
> weapon pods.

Or a Pod-firing LAC-carrying Q-ship?

Wait. We already done that one...

An updated _Wayfarer_ might be a reasonable anti-piracy platform.

--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

wrote in message

> I've been reading the Honorverse stories for a while, and after
> reading the last few, with the effective nature of LACs, I thought of
> a few uses for an "escort CLAC"
>
> The Andies and the Manties both built BC(P) type ships, i wondered if
> people would start building Battle Cruiser sized CLACs that could only
> hold a dozen to two dozen LACs
>
> Im sure the idea would be stupid for big powers like the Havinties,
> Andies, and Manites for wall battles. you'd just be throwing your ship
> and crews down the drain. But, the Manties and Andies have a lot of
> new space to patrol in Silsia, it might be useful to have a few very
> fast ships that could poke big holes in under armored pirates. They
> can be in more places at one time,and with the BC-CLAC they can also
> go from system to system.
>
> Im sure the smaller navies in the area would like them too, if you
> cant afford the umpteen billion for a full sized CLAC, cut the cost in
> half and at least get some sort of LACs in your order of battle.
>
> Any comments?



Having a few LACs around could be handy. They did with the Q-ships in HAE.

An escourt carrier with a half dozen LACs would be a good addition to convoy
escourt groups. You could also add a LAC bay or two to new construction
smaller ships meant for lone patrols or convoy escourts to allow them to
carry their own 'escourts' and patrol craft. This would make dealing with
pirates much easier I imagine. The LAC should be able to reach attack range
before the normal pirate crew would spot them coming,and after that grazer
hits, the LAC should have little trouble leaving safely. Should it be seen,
the bow-wall, then sternwall, should let it coast by safely while the pirate
is distracted by the LACs mothership.

Looking at the size diagrams, you might even find it worthwhile to add some
tonnage to a new destroyer design and provide space for one LAC and it's
support systems. Ten percent more tonnage or so. That grazer carried by the
LAC might equal the punch of the destroyers entire battery of lasers.

Another thought would be mounting the LACs on the hull along with some of
the Andies-style missle pods. The pods on the hull might wind up being safe
from proximity kills due to the ships shielding fields and not need to be
used right away. Carry them until you really need to fire a larger volley.
Might give a small ship a chance to get away from a larger opponet while
it's busy worrying about the forty or fifty missles headed it's way. I
imagine they would have to be fired in waves from a destroyer or light
cruiser to prevent fratricide but they cound be sent in very rapid
succession because there would be no tube-reloading delay. While your at it,
add some pods of anti-missle missles in case your on the receiving end of
such a volley.

Maybe Bolthole will come up with this first and do some serious
commerice-raiding and cripple Manticore's wormhole income. Seeing as both
Manticore & Haven lost a lot of SDs in the battle of Manticore, the smaller
ships might be the men-of-war for a while.

Might throw old-time admirals for a loop. No formal walls-of-battle fights
for a few years. Now it's going to be dogfights between smaller ships to
make the one above Blackbird base seem like a minor scuffle. <g>
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Mar 1, 8:18 am, "Baydlor" wrote:
> wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
> > I've been reading the Honorverse stories for a while, and after
> > reading the last few, with the effective nature of LACs, I thought of
> > a few uses for an "escort CLAC"
>
> > The Andies and the Manties both built BC(P) type ships, i wondered if
> > people would start building Battle Cruiser sized CLACs that could only
> > hold a dozen to two dozen LACs
>
> > Im sure the idea would be stupid for big powers like the Havinties,
> > Andies, and Manites for wall battles. you'd just be throwing your ship
> > and crews down the drain. But, the Manties and Andies have a lot of
> > new space to patrol in Silsia, it might be useful to have a few very
> > fast ships that could poke big holes in under armored pirates. They
> > can be in more places at one time,and with the BC-CLAC they can also
> > go from system to system.
>
> > Im sure the smaller navies in the area would like them too, if you
> > cant afford the umpteen billion for a full sized CLAC, cut the cost in
> > half and at least get some sort of LACs in your order of battle.
>
> > Any comments?
>
> Having a few LACs around could be handy. They did with the Q-ships in HAE.
>
> An escourt carrier with a half dozen LACs would be a good addition to convoy
> escourt groups. You could also add a LAC bay or two to new construction
> smaller ships meant for lone patrols or convoy escourts to allow them to
> carry their own 'escourts' and patrol craft. This would make dealing with
> pirates much easier I imagine. The LAC should be able to reach attack range
> before the normal pirate crew would spot them coming,and after that grazer
> hits, the LAC should have little trouble leaving safely. Should it be seen,
> the bow-wall, then sternwall, should let it coast by safely while the pirate
> is distracted by the LACs mothership.
>
> Looking at the size diagrams, you might even find it worthwhile to add some
> tonnage to a new destroyer design and provide space for one LAC and it's
> support systems. Ten percent more tonnage or so. That grazer carried by the
> LAC might equal the punch of the destroyers entire battery of lasers.
>
> Another thought would be mounting the LACs on the hull along with some of
> the Andies-style missle pods. The pods on the hull might wind up being safe
> from proximity kills due to the ships shielding fields and not need to be
> used right away. Carry them until you really need to fire a larger volley.
> Might give a small ship a chance to get away from a larger opponet while
> it's busy worrying about the forty or fifty missles headed it's way. I
> imagine they would have to be fired in waves from a destroyer or light
> cruiser to prevent fratricide but they cound be sent in very rapid
> succession because there would be no tube-reloading delay. While your at it,
> add some pods of anti-missle missles in case your on the receiving end of
> such a volley.
>
> Maybe Bolthole will come up with this first and do some serious
> commerice-raiding and cripple Manticore's wormhole income. Seeing as both
> Manticore & Haven lost a lot of SDs in the battle of Manticore, the smaller
> ships might be the men-of-war for a while.
>
> Might throw old-time admirals for a loop. No formal walls-of-battle fights
> for a few years. Now it's going to be dogfights between smaller ships to
> make the one above Blackbird base seem like a minor scuffle. <g>

Does BuShips have people in it who can justify redesigning an entire
class of "anti pirate" destroyer or Light Cruiser?

I wonder if this "anti pirate" DD or CL would have any use as a picket
ship or advance scout? If they could sell it as a double duty type
thing, might make the higher ups more interested. As of At all costs,
the manties and the havenites have just lost a bunch of good admirals
and a lot of tonnage.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Feb 29, 9:25 pm, wrote:
> I've been reading the Honorverse stories for a while, and after
> reading the last few, with the effective nature of LACs, I thought of
> a few uses for an "escort CLAC"
>
> The Andies and the Manties both built BC(P) type ships, i wondered if
> people would start building Battle Cruiser sized CLACs that could only
> hold a dozen to two dozen LACs
>
> Im sure the idea would be stupid for big powers like the Havinties,
> Andies, and Manites for wall battles. you'd just be throwing your ship
> and crews down the drain. But, the Manties and Andies have a lot of
> new space to patrol in Silsia, it might be useful to have a few very
> fast ships that could poke big holes in under armored pirates. They
> can be in more places at one time,and with the BC-CLAC they can also
> go from system to system.
>
> Im sure the smaller navies in the area would like them too, if you
> cant afford the umpteen billion for a full sized CLAC, cut the cost in
> half and at least get some sort of LACs in your order of battle.
>
> Any comments?


Assuming that the amount of space needed to field an LAC does not
benefit fom any economies of scale (a premise already known to be
false), six Shike can be transported by a ship one twentieth the size
of a DN-- about 300 ktons. A hypercapable LAC, a.k.a. frigate, might
be a better use of the funds

Smaller navies lack two things that are needed to justify any sort of
CLAC: 1) budget, and 2) LAC's worth the expense of a carrier.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

wrote in message

> On Mar 1, 8:18 am, "Baydlor" wrote:
>> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > I've been reading the Honorverse stories for a while, and after
>> > reading the last few, with the effective nature of LACs, I thought of
>> > a few uses for an "escort CLAC"
>>
>> > The Andies and the Manties both built BC(P) type ships, i wondered if
>> > people would start building Battle Cruiser sized CLACs that could only
>> > hold a dozen to two dozen LACs
>>
>> > Im sure the idea would be stupid for big powers like the Havinties,
>> > Andies, and Manites for wall battles. you'd just be throwing your ship
>> > and crews down the drain. But, the Manties and Andies have a lot of
>> > new space to patrol in Silsia, it might be useful to have a few very
>> > fast ships that could poke big holes in under armored pirates. They
>> > can be in more places at one time,and with the BC-CLAC they can also
>> > go from system to system.
>>
>> > Im sure the smaller navies in the area would like them too, if you
>> > cant afford the umpteen billion for a full sized CLAC, cut the cost in
>> > half and at least get some sort of LACs in your order of battle.
>>
>> > Any comments?
>>
>> Having a few LACs around could be handy. They did with the Q-ships in
>> HAE.
>>
>> An escourt carrier with a half dozen LACs would be a good addition to
>> convoy
>> escourt groups. You could also add a LAC bay or two to new construction
>> smaller ships meant for lone patrols or convoy escourts to allow them to
>> carry their own 'escourts' and patrol craft. This would make dealing with
>> pirates much easier I imagine. The LAC should be able to reach attack
>> range
>> before the normal pirate crew would spot them coming,and after that
>> grazer
>> hits, the LAC should have little trouble leaving safely. Should it be
>> seen,
>> the bow-wall, then sternwall, should let it coast by safely while the
>> pirate
>> is distracted by the LACs mothership.
>>
>> Looking at the size diagrams, you might even find it worthwhile to add
>> some
>> tonnage to a new destroyer design and provide space for one LAC and it's
>> support systems. Ten percent more tonnage or so. That grazer carried by
>> the
>> LAC might equal the punch of the destroyers entire battery of lasers.
>>
>> Another thought would be mounting the LACs on the hull along with some of
>> the Andies-style missle pods. The pods on the hull might wind up being
>> safe
>> from proximity kills due to the ships shielding fields and not need to be
>> used right away. Carry them until you really need to fire a larger
>> volley.
>> Might give a small ship a chance to get away from a larger opponet while
>> it's busy worrying about the forty or fifty missles headed it's way. I
>> imagine they would have to be fired in waves from a destroyer or light
>> cruiser to prevent fratricide but they cound be sent in very rapid
>> succession because there would be no tube-reloading delay. While your at
>> it,
>> add some pods of anti-missle missles in case your on the receiving end of
>> such a volley.
>>
>> Maybe Bolthole will come up with this first and do some serious
>> commerice-raiding and cripple Manticore's wormhole income. Seeing as both
>> Manticore & Haven lost a lot of SDs in the battle of Manticore, the
>> smaller
>> ships might be the men-of-war for a while.
>>
>> Might throw old-time admirals for a loop. No formal walls-of-battle
>> fights
>> for a few years. Now it's going to be dogfights between smaller ships to
>> make the one above Blackbird base seem like a minor scuffle. <g>
>
> Does BuShips have people in it who can justify redesigning an entire
> class of "anti pirate" destroyer or Light Cruiser?

Considering what was done to Honor's ship in OBS, I'd say yes. If that
brain-dead a weapon combo could get installed in a ship by Buships,
something as useful as a potently armed, stealthy LAC should be an easy
sell. <g>
>
> I wonder if this "anti pirate" DD or CL would have any use as a picket
> ship or advance scout? If they could sell it as a double duty type
> thing, might make the higher ups more interested. As of At all costs,
> the manties and the havenites have just lost a bunch of good admirals
> and a lot of tonnage.
>

It would be very useful. The LACs can make themselves nearly impossible to
see even at rather short stellar distances. Send that DD or CL into the
boondocks of a solar system to reduce the chance of it's hyperfootprint
being detected and then send a LAC in under stealth to find out whats going
on there. The LAC can laser it's data to the DD or CL so that even if it's
detected and destroyed, it's information on what's there will still get back
to base via it's mothership. If you want to watch a system, spread the
mothership and it's LAC(s) as far apart as possible, with recon drones
spread out beyond them (more relevant for the Havenites without the ftl
transmitting ability).

I wonder if a few CA's with a half dozen LACs each, and using recon drones,
could spread out along the plane of the system and cover a lot of territory?
Say placing a CA every 120 degrees around the system with five LACs spread
to the sides every 20 degrees with recon drones in between them doubling as
message relay points. The remaining three LACs to be used as replacements or
for going to check out something. If your putting this arrangment in close
enough, or were using a larger carrier, you could possible cover a fair bit
above and below the plane of the system as well.

You know, this idea could make for a lot of side stories in the Honorverse.

 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

Another thought.

Pull the graser out of a LAC and put in two shuttles and lifesupport for
Marine recon or assault teams. The LAC could give orbital fire support to
the shuttles going down or coming up, using it's point defense lasers or
small missiles, and with a few mods to fire-control you could probably give
orbital fire support to the team on the ground.

Might get a few more Marine stories here.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:18:34 -0500, "Baydlor"
wrote:

>Looking at the size diagrams, you might even find it worthwhile to add some
>tonnage to a new destroyer design and provide space for one LAC and it's
>support systems. Ten percent more tonnage or so. That grazer carried by the
>LAC might equal the punch of the destroyers entire battery of lasers.
>
>Another thought would be mounting the LACs on the hull along with some of
>the Andies-style missle pods. The pods on the hull might wind up being safe
>from proximity kills due to the ships shielding fields and not need to be
>used right away. Carry them until you really need to fire a larger volley.

I think the answer to pirates is pods, not LAC's.

Make a pod designed to work on it's own--it's simply given the
coordinates, nothing more. It also has deadman fire capability--it
can be programmed to fire if it's controller goes off the air. It's
carried on-hull.

If it looks like trouble you launch the pod. You don't immediately
fire, though--no pirate in their right mind is going to stick around
when they see that pod come off. Depending on the tactical situation
it very well might allow freighters to capture pirates even. After
all, the pirate was trying to match courses, he's going to be going at
a velocity similar to the pod. Put a small drive on it so the pod can
actually match velocities.

Pirate comes in, freighter drops it's pod. The pod goes into deadman
mode and furthermore is programmed to engage if the target range
becomes too great. The pirate is trapped, the freighter can summon
help. Obviously this only works if it's a system where help can be
summoned, otherwise the freighter just uses the pod to scare away the
pirate.

The deadman nature of the control means the pirate can't shoot at the
freighter for dropping it--doing so means the pirate eats a pod full
of missiles. With the sort of craft they normally have that's
probably it for them.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

In article ,
Loren Pechtel wrote:

> On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:18:34 -0500, "Baydlor"
> wrote:
>
> >Looking at the size diagrams, you might even find it worthwhile to add some
> >tonnage to a new destroyer design and provide space for one LAC and it's
> >support systems. Ten percent more tonnage or so. That grazer carried by the
> >LAC might equal the punch of the destroyers entire battery of lasers.
> >
> >Another thought would be mounting the LACs on the hull along with some of
> >the Andies-style missle pods. The pods on the hull might wind up being safe
> >from proximity kills due to the ships shielding fields and not need to be
> >used right away. Carry them until you really need to fire a larger volley.
>
> I think the answer to pirates is pods, not LAC's.
>
> Make a pod designed to work on it's own--it's simply given the
> coordinates, nothing more. It also has deadman fire capability--it
> can be programmed to fire if it's controller goes off the air. It's
> carried on-hull.
>
> If it looks like trouble you launch the pod. You don't immediately
> fire, though--no pirate in their right mind is going to stick around
> when they see that pod come off. Depending on the tactical situation
> it very well might allow freighters to capture pirates even. After
> all, the pirate was trying to match courses, he's going to be going at
> a velocity similar to the pod. Put a small drive on it so the pod can
> actually match velocities.
>
> Pirate comes in, freighter drops it's pod. The pod goes into deadman
> mode and furthermore is programmed to engage if the target range
> becomes too great. The pirate is trapped, the freighter can summon
> help. Obviously this only works if it's a system where help can be
> summoned, otherwise the freighter just uses the pod to scare away the
> pirate.
>
> The deadman nature of the control means the pirate can't shoot at the
> freighter for dropping it--doing so means the pirate eats a pod full
> of missiles. With the sort of craft they normally have that's
> probably it for them.

Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
much by a single pod.

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

Don Sample wrote:
> Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
> much by a single pod.
>
I don't think we have a good sample size. Most of the recent pirates
discussed have been ex-military or cat's paws.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:04:02 -0500, Don Sample
wrote:

>Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
>much by a single pod.

Aren't most pirates small enough that a podload of missiles will get
through--they won't have the defenses to stop them.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message

> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:04:02 -0500, Don Sample
> wrote:
>
>>Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
>>much by a single pod.
>
> Aren't most pirates small enough that a podload of missiles will get
> through--they won't have the defenses to stop them.

Any pirate will have some kind of defenses. To not have any would be *sure*
suicide if they run into anything armed.

It probably would not be very much and not operated well, but it would only
have to deal with ten missles if there was only one pod launching missles.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:41:57 -0500, "Baydlor"
wrote:

>
>"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:04:02 -0500, Don Sample
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
>>>much by a single pod.
>>
>> Aren't most pirates small enough that a podload of missiles will get
>> through--they won't have the defenses to stop them.
>
>Any pirate will have some kind of defenses. To not have any would be *sure*
>suicide if they run into anything armed.
>
>It probably would not be very much and not operated well, but it would only
>have to deal with ten missles if there was only one pod launching missles.

But it has to deal with 10 missiles all at once--something small
warships are going to have a hard time with.

It might not even have a chance. The missiles might fire and
immediately detonate.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs? 

On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 18:41:57 -0500, "Baydlor"
wrote:

>"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:04:02 -0500, Don Sample
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Many of the pirates are using war ships that aren't going to be bothered
>>>much by a single pod.
>>
>> Aren't most pirates small enough that a podload of missiles will get
>> through--they won't have the defenses to stop them.
>
>Any pirate will have some kind of defenses. To not have any would be *sure*
>suicide if they run into anything armed.
>
>It probably would not be very much and not operated well, but it would only
>have to deal with ten missles if there was only one pod launching missles.
>
Well according to the Ship Book 2 out of SITI (Saganami Island Tactical
Simulator http://www.adastragames.com/ ) the smallest thing that the
Silesians have that might had that gotten into the hands of the pirates is
their 12,250 kton Mazur Class LAC, which has 2/3 point Point Defense (PD)
batteries, but I doubt that they have many of those in other places than
the Schronienie-Type Transfer stations that have both PD and Counter
Missiles (CM). They do have the Gryf Class FG, Cheslav Class DD, Telmach
Class CA that have both PD and CM's. Don't know about the Wroclaw Class CL,
the Jarmon Class CA or the Silesia Class BC, but they all carry PD and CM
installations.

Lets see how the LAC's stand up. Salvo one pod of 10 missiles, lets wait
till 4 hexes, since 3 is their best range. Lets see what arrives. The MQL
is 7 plus the LAC's ECM of 2 plus a 2d10- (Subtract the smaller d10 from
the larger)(7-4)3 equals 15. Cross reference 15 and 10 is 5 missiles
killed. Next comes the Active defense layer, there are no CM's so the
Point Defense is the MQL plus (2d10-) or 7+(6-6) or just 7, cross index 7
and 2/3 is one more kill. Total of 6 of 10 missiles killed. Lets say there
are ten LAC's coming in. So lets find out where the damage lands. Roll
1d10 and that's the winner

These are size 16MB. So its 16 minus the Target size of 1, plus the
sidewall (-2) plus (2d10-), or for the first missile (16-1+(-2)+(5-2))=16.
Oh Yeah, these things take seven points of damage.

The ships that the LAC's can feel the safest about taking on are FG, DD and
CL as they have 3 & 4M damage missiles, which means around 3/4 damage which
gets to the missile weapons on 3 and beam weapons on 4.

Lets see against a Telmach CA, same set up (7+1+(2d10-(8-3=5))=13, that
numbers is not hi enough and we have decoys, so lets pop one for a +2,
raising the 13 to 15 and do first a cross index of 13 to 10M (4) and then
15 to 10M (4). Since both numbers are 4, the rules say that decoys attract
and kill its self with one more, so a total of five is killed, Next we have
the CM, the Telmach happens to carry one also at 2/3 so (7+(2d10-(8-6=2)=9,
so cross index and we have 0 killed and we move on to the PD batteries and
we have 1 at 1, so (7+(2d10-(6-4=2)=9, so cross index and we have 1 killed.
Another 6 of 10 missiles killed.

These are size 16MB. So its 16 minus the Target size of 4, plus the
sidewall (-3) plus (2d10-), or for the first missile (16-4+(-3)+(5-1))=13.
Oh Yeah, these things take a whole lot more damage to kill than these four
missiles.

If you really want to check out damage allocation, look at Ad Astra's web
site, download area for the Generic Superdreadnought SSD.pdf. Cross off
around 3/4 items and you'll be close to the CA. Roll 2d10+ (add them
together) that is the location. Just pick where you want to hit them from
and start marking things off, then solve the other three missiles.
 >> Stay informed about: what about escort CLACs?