FFS: Battleship Armor!

A thread of 5 messages, 6 June 1994 to 9 June 1994, in the order they were sent.

#7889 FFS: Battleship Armor!

FF&S/BL Discoveries, Part III

ARMOR RATINGS and the IMPERIAL NAVY SHIP-OF-THE-LINE

I just gained enlightenment on another shift in the rules which
should interest battle fleet naval architects.  This one is related
to starship armor factors on very large ships.

In _Brilliant Lances_, there is a design for a 1000-ton TL15
Imperial Navy DE, the _Chrysanthemum_-class.  It is a close structure
with armor factor 62, which comes out to 2.214 cm of bonded super-
dense armor at a volume cost of about 0.62 % of the ship.  I decided
to scale this percentage for a 500000 d-ton sphere, to see what sort
of armor we might expect to see on a _Tigress_-size battleship.
(It's not quite fair, since the DE loses some mass to configuration,
but that isn't really vital for this argument.)

It turns out that at 0.62 % of ship volume, the _Tigress_-size ship
can carry some 25.087 cm of bonded superdense armor, for an armor
rating of 702.  This is 2.25x the amount of armor needed to stop a
standard TL15 150MJ beam laser dead.

If one is willing to armor an expensive battleship a little better
than a DE, at 1.77 % of ship volume you can have 71.5 cm of bonded
superdense armor plating, and an armor rating of 2002.  This is just
sufficient to stop a TL15 500 kT nuclear detonation x-ray laser dead.

Note that either value is sufficient to stop any of the "pea-shooter"
class PAWS in _Brilliant Lances_.

These armor ratings are very definitely not ridiculous.  If anything,
they may turn out to be conservative.

It looks to me like the lighter weapons are really only useful for
anti-missile fire or to try and scrub the communications and sensory
antennae off a ship.  The only other thing I can think of doing with
them is to try to saturate a big ship's anti-missile defenses and get
a fusion weapon right up next to it.  So I suppose the *really* big
ships like the _Tigress_-types will depend more on what we'd currently
consider very heavy weapons to do any real damage to the enemy line.
I have no idea what sort of power the TNE equivalent to the meson-T
delivers on target, but it is probably massive.  The big ships will
need to depend on heavy bays to back up the main gun, though, since
the turrets and "pea-shooter" spinal mounts on escorts won't do much
good.  I'm not sure if the 100-ton bays can cut it; I haven't checked.

As for the _Chrysanthemum_ in a fleet action, well, I guess it really
is a cheap "tin can".  I suppose it's supposed to be an SDB hunter
and commerce cutter.

  Steve Bonneville
  [email removed]

#7896 Re: TML nightly: Msgs 7884-7889 V75#19

Please remove me from the mailing list.

Iain Fogg
[email removed]

#7894 Re: TML nightly: Msgs 7884-7889 V75#19

Steven M Bonneville ([email removed]) wrote:

> It looks to me like the lighter weapons are really only useful for
> anti-missile fire or to try and scrub the communications and sensory
> antennae off a ship.  The only other thing I can think of doing with
> them is to try to saturate a big ship's anti-missile defenses and get
> a fusion weapon right up next to it.  So I suppose the *really* big
> ships like the _Tigress_-types will depend more on what we'd currently
> consider very heavy weapons to do any real damage to the enemy line.
> I have no idea what sort of power the TNE equivalent to the meson-T
> delivers on target, but it is probably massive.  The big ships will
> need to depend on heavy bays to back up the main gun, though, since
> the turrets and "pea-shooter" spinal mounts on escorts won't do much
> good.  I'm not sure if the 100-ton bays can cut it; I haven't checked.
>
This is a good analysis.  To tell you the truth, I like the feel of being
able to armour my dreadnaughts in proper Fisher fashion.

As for tactics, would you not want to (1) engage with (relatively) light
armourment to detroy the antennas for the meson screen (I am under the
impression that cust out the meson defence) then (2) engange with the meson
armed big ships.

I have been thinking of some lighter meson armed ship ideas as well, but that
needs some development.

> As for the _Chrysanthemum_ in a fleet action, well, I guess it really
> is a cheap "tin can".  I suppose it's supposed to be an SDB hunter
> and commerce cutter.
>

Thats fine.  If there is no magic "torpedo" for frying big ships, torpedo
boats do not serve a lot of purpose.


Les Howie
Prograph International

#7915 Re: Fleet Armor

More on Big Fleet Actions and Armor:

Les Howie [email removed] writes:

>Steven M Bonneville ([email removed]) wrote:

[part deleted]

>> As for the _Chrysanthemum_ in a fleet action, well, I guess it really
>> is a cheap "tin can".  I suppose it's supposed to be an SDB hunter
>> and commerce cutter.
>>
>
>Thats fine.  If there is no magic "torpedo" for frying big ships, torpedo
>boats do not serve a lot of purpose.

Well, as I mentioned there might be a possibility of using them in very
large numbers as nuclear missile launchers, and try for a direct hit on
the battleship.  Somehow, I doubt even factor 2000 armor would take well
to having a nuke go off next to it.  Of course, the target solution is
fairly simple once the missiles get that close, so you'd have to fire
a *lot* of them and concentrate your fire on one enemy target.

Of course, there's a counter-tactic.  For MCr12.5, you can overwhelm a
single standard 150MJ laser turret using standard power, with ten missiles.
It has an ROF of 10 in a thirty minute round, maximum.  (This assumes,
unlike normal space combat, that all shots are effective and destroy one
incoming missile in the zero hex.)  But using FF&S, it is possible to
build a rapid-fire laser with an ROF of 800 (two shots every five seconds)
which would probably nicely solve the problem.  I don't know what the
power requirements of such an anti-missile laser would be.  Arming the
little fleet escorts with "pea-shooter" meson weapons would probably be
a better bet if you're trying for serious internal damage.


  Steve Bonneville
  [email removed]

#7922 BAY WEAPONS AND DEATH STA

 "Les Howie"  writes

>

Steven M Bonneville ([email removed]) wrote:

>
> It looks to me like the lighter weapons are really only useful for
>
> anti-missile fire or to try and scrub the communications and sensory
>
> antennae off a ship.  The only other thing I can think of doing with
>
> them is to try to saturate a big ship's anti-missile defenses and get
>
> a fusion weapon right up next to it.  So I suppose the *really* big
>
> ships like the _Tigress_-types will depend more on what we'd currently
>
> consider very heavy weapons to do any real damage to the enemy line.
>
> I have no idea what sort of power the TNE equivalent to the meson-T
>
> delivers on target, but it is probably massive.

I've designed a cruiser-sized meson gun, resonably sized for that class of
ship, with a DV of 1000 (yes, one thousand).  A Tigress could sport something
even larger, possibly with a DV several times that, depending on how
specialized
you want to design the ship.

> >  The big ships will
>
> need to depend on heavy bays to back up the main gun, though, since
>
> the turrets and "pea-shooter" spinal mounts on escorts won't do much
>
> good.

>   I'm not sure if the 100-ton bays can cut it; I haven't checked.

I have, and bay weapons tend to be pretty useless except as hull-scrapers.

If a PA is operating at the maximum Mj for it's length, its penetration value
works out
to 5 times it's length in meters within it's effective range.

I don't have the exact numbers here, but for a 50-ton bay that works out to
a PV of 60, and for a 100-ton bay a PV of about 80.  Considering that cruisers
and battleships will have armor ratings in the THOUSANDS, they're only
good for blinding the enemy (a tactic which will be very popular in battles
under
BL rules, I should think.)

Bay mesons have such pitiful range they're not worth building in most cases.

Lasers should be limited to about 50 Mj/tech-level, which is an arbitrary
limit,
but is needed for game balance.  Joule for joule, lasers are more versatile
than
PA's or MG's and have a superior ability to deliver damage to the target.
Allow them to compete directly, and there rapidly becomes no point to building
PA's and MG's.  Putting a limit on them keeps them at the low end of the
weapons
spectrum, where they have traditionally been in Traveller.



>

Well, so much for the Meson armed death star -- back to the
drawing board, Darth.

>


Les Howie
>
Prograph International


- -------

P'shaw, I tried that ages ago with High Guard.  Threw in the towel when I
realized
I'd have to depopulate most of a sector just to crew the engine room.
Considering
TNE ships have a crew requirement 3 to 4 times that of HG...

That's it!  The Virus was a hoax!  All those people never died, they were
pressed
into service to crew Lucan's Death Star!

Well, I can wish, can't I?  ;-)


John Bogan