Traveller, The Rise of Empire: A Naval Design, Procurement and Command Quest

[Blackangel]

I still believe trying to design a fighter or bomber now is putting the cart before the horse. We have no doctrine, no platforms (not even orbital defense hangars), and no clear idea of what comes next with this line of development.

We still have unfinished business; the lander and marine transport most clearly. We're getting distracted by the new shiny idea we got from the Aslan.

Click to shrink...

Alright yea… ok so 90 tons for the lander? If we are talking putting out a platoon on the ground in a war zone, I think 50-60 tons would be the minimum needed. 90 tons for armor, the space for the marines, equipment, and possibly ground vehicles.

Also marine transport, are we wanting a small squad of marines transported or are we talking dozens of men? What would be the primary difference between the transport and the lander?

 

[Tallhart]

[ ] BMF's submission.
[ ] PMCA's submission.

I think the above two seem to fit most closely what we want with this ship.

When it comes to the additional small craft design I think we want to select two craft with similar tonnage so that they can be serviced and maintained within the same hangar.

I'm leaning towards a more survivable fighter design than going with the bare minimum 10 ton design. Something around 15-30 tons for maximum speed.

As for the second design, I think we could do with a FLIF landing craft, with similar tonnage to the fighter. We have the 90 ton shuttle that can be used for landing a platoon or boarding. We could use a smaller dropship to land a squad.

The other thing that would be useful would perhaps be a larger landing craft that can land embarked armored vehicles for tougher targets. I imagine that may require a varient of the 90 ton shuttle or perhaps something slightly larger.

 

[Pinniped]

I consider it specialized because it can only perform those duties. It is not capable of supporting the rest of the fleet in an engagement other than as a PD ship, and can't meaningfully contribute any firepower to the battlespace.

Click to shrink...

Yes, it only has one role in a space battle, namely protecting our Cruisers and Capital ships from small crafts and missiles. This is an important role, and it performs that role well.

That said, it can support the fleet outside of an engamement by Scouting and perform a crucial role in our Empire by patrolling and protecting our trade routes.

Which means if we want another vessel that can, then we have a pilot for this vessel and then for a variant that might be capable of doing something else. Making a vessel only capable of a single limited task means more hulls overall as we find new mission parameters which means more pilots.

Click to shrink...

This logic works both ways: an 800 tonner better able to hurt large ships is much worse in a Scouting and patrolling role, and likely not as good in a PD role as well. Which means we must build other variants more suited for these tasks, which requires pilots...

In essence, I really disagree that this ship only does one thing. It does at least three things, making it just as flexible as our Cruisers, which do things like destroy enemy ships at medium-long range and orbital bombardment.

These are fleet escorts and patrol craft. They should have the weaponry they need to fulfill that role and a pure laser suite just doesn't cut it in my view, especially because missiles are a multipurpose weapon system that can attrit enemy capital ships as well as hit small craft

Click to shrink...

Well, here we disagree. Pure laser suite is fine, Fleet Escorts and patrol craft need not hurt larger ships. A patrol craft may need to survive an encounter with a larger craft in order to be able to escape and warn us off an incoming fleet. But PD lasers and high speed is perfect for surviving chance encounters!

it wouldn't help much in taking out defenses in orbit(Like defense platforms or even just shipyards), and it wouldn't give good ground support or strike utility. It's specialized in fighting fighters and that's pretty much it.

Click to shrink...

It would help against defense platforms, provided said platforms use missiles or torpedoes. It is not just specialized in fighting fighters, since it is also excellent at defending itself and allies against missiles/torpedoes.

I agree with @Briefvoice that perhaps some exercises and simulations may be in order before we do further hull construction

Click to shrink...

On this I kind of agree. But we need to build ships of different roles before we can do real testing. Can we build prototypes of at least BMF's submission and PMCA's submissions, and then test those in wargames with our other ships?

 

[Rat King]

Alright yea… ok so 90 tons for the lander? If we are talking putting out a platoon on the ground in a war zone, I think 50-60 tons would be the minimum needed. 90 tons for armor, the space for the marines, equipment, and possibly ground vehicles.

Also marine transport, are we wanting a small squad of marines transported or are we talking dozens of men? What would be the primary difference between the transport and the lander?

Click to shrink...

The idea for a marine landing vehicle is to carry a platoon of FLIF toops (45 men and women) into a hot LZ or into a boarding action.

@4WheelSword can we get that capability with 50 tons?

 

[Artificial Girl]

This logic works both ways: an 800 tonner better able to hurt large ships is much worse in a Scouting and patrolling role, and likely not as good in a PD role as well. Which means we must build other variants more suited for these tasks, which requires pilots...

Click to shrink...

This is straight up a false assumption. A smaller vessel is not inherently better at scouting and patrolling. In fact, it's probably worse because it's sensor suite is likely to be less powerful and less comprehensive.

 

[Pinniped]

[X] Plan Wargames
-[X] Write-in: Start building prototypes of BMF's submission and PMCA's submission. Also reach out to the Aslan (preferably to several clans if possible) and offer to buy one of their fighters for studying, testing and reverse-engineering. Once the prototypes are ready, test them in exersices, mock battles and war games with our other ships.
-[X] A 10-ton, bare minimum fighter, akin to the Aslan design.
-[X] A 30-ton armoured fighter at maximum speed.

Here is a plan involving some exersices. I also realized that the fragmented and warlike nature of the Aslan might mean they would be willing to sell one of their fighters. It's worth a try in my opinion.

 

[4WheelSword]

The idea for a marine landing vehicle is to carry a platoon of FLIF toops (45 men and women) into a hot LZ or into a boarding action.

@4WheelSword can we get that capability with 50 tons?

Click to shrink...

Yeah almost certainly. The 90 ton assaulter has like... 30 tons cargo.

 

[Pinniped]

This is straight up a false assumption. A smaller vessel is not inherently better at scouting and patrolling. In fact, it's probably worse because it's sensor suite is likely to be less powerful and less comprehensive.

Click to shrink...

I disagree, although you have a point about the sensors, which is why the original plan for this was that it should include the best possible sensors we have.

Smaller crafts are used for patrolling by most real world navies and armies, you don't patrol your borders with battleships or aircraft carriers. One reason they are better is due to generally higher speed, allowing to cover ground more quickly and due to using much less fuel. Since patrolling ships are constantly moving, using less fuel is a big advantage.

A smaller ship can also be built in bigger numbers, which means each scout has to cover a smaller area, which migitates the issue with sensors. This is especially important due to our pilot shortage: two 500 tonne patrol craft using one pilot each can absolutely cover a larger area than one 800 tonne patrol craft with two pilots. This frees up pilots for other duties.

 

[Blackangel]

The idea for a marine landing vehicle is to carry a platoon of FLIF toops (45 men and women) into a hot LZ or into a boarding action.

@4WheelSword can we get that capability with 50 tons?

Click to shrink...

Yeah almost certainly. The 90 ton assaulter has like... 30 tons cargo.

Click to shrink...

Ok so 50 tons works, but I would like it to be able to defend itself, mostly from missiles and such, but also the idea that it lands and acts as a pop up base is very attractive to me. It lands and starts using its turrets to shoot at nearby enemy forces, as the platoon deploys under supporting fire.

Also still, what's the difference between a lander and a marine transport. What's the marine transport do that would make it different from the lander.

 

[Rat King]

Ok so 50 tons works, but I would like it to be able to defend itself, mostly from missiles and such, but also the idea that it lands and acts as a pop up base is very attractive to me. It lands and starts using its turrets to shoot at nearby enemy forces, as the platoon deploys under supporting fire.

Also still, what's the difference between a lander and a marine transport. What's the marine transport do that would make it different from the lander.

Click to shrink...

The transport carries the lander to the planet and deploys it.

And the idea behind the 50 tonner is that it will likely carry a missile racks or two and maybe a pulse laser to provide fire support on the way in or out.

[X] A 50-ton FLF assault ship

 

[Blackangel]

Smaller crafts are used for patrolling by most real world navies and armies, you don't patrol your borders with battleships or aircraft carriers. One reason they are better is due to generally higher speed, allowing to cover ground more quickly and due to using much less fuel. Since patrolling ships are constantly moving, using less fuel is a big advantage.

A smaller ship can also be built in bigger numbers, which means each scout has to cover a smaller area, which migitates the issue with sensors. This is especially important due to our pilot shortage: two 500 tonne patrol craft using one pilot each can absolutely cover a larger area than one 800 tonne patrol craft with two pilots. This frees up pilots for other duties.

Click to shrink...

I'd also like to point out that it doesn't need powerful sensors. It's not trying to survey deep space, only the system it's in. It's trying to figure out(Military setting) what numbers and configurations that the enemy forces have. The sensor equipment that could fit in the 500 tons compared to the 800 ton would have no meaningful difference in this capability.

There's also something that I think would be good to keep in mind. Upkeep costs and building space. We need multiple of these ships, especially if we plan on using them against pirates or as scouts. Our budget was cut not too long ago, so I would like to keep the costs down at least somewhat. If increasing the cost of a vessel doesn't give any meaningful improvement, then I'd rather we just save money on it.

The transport carries the lander to the planet and deploys it.

And the idea behind the 50 tonner is that it will likely carry a missile racks or two and maybe a pulse laser to provide fire support on the way in or out.

[X] A 50-ton FLF assault ship

Click to shrink...

Imagination land: Watches the 90 ton marine transport, carry the 90 ton lander and deploys it in lower atmosphere as it does a cool backflip as it lands.

Yea I was think missiles would be nice, but also I would like to maximize defenses, make sure no missiles hit it and that said defenses can be used easily on the ground. Thinking laser turrets as not only could you use them for ground support and destroying missiles, they triple as anti aircraft which is always nice.

 

[WallFly]

We can cut the size down to about 25-50 tons on a platoon lander if we make the effort, which would be good for future iterations of a landing vessel since it can carry transport for the Marines with less hangar tonnage.

Click to shrink...

Yeah almost certainly. The 90 ton assaulter has like... 30 tons cargo.

Click to shrink...

Honestly 30 tons of cargo is still awesome for the final lander, as it means it can drop off supplies as well. We have something that works fine, and going to 50 tons gets us less capability in all respects, not a tradeoff in any of them.

We still have pilot shortage so we should go for larger crafts. Swarms of small ones could be better in general but if they're not flying because there's no pilots it's a moot point.

Click to shrink...

We're not sure if that affects small craft yet.

Notice that in the update it was said that 'it would be more than possible to produce craft in the 10-30 ton scale that can operate at accelerations beyond those of larger ships'. 40 ton bomber is too heavy to achieve top speeds.

Click to shrink...

If you look right under the brackets, I state why. Speed is part of it yes (so if/when we get better engines it can be refit) but the other reason is the payload.

[X] Plan Dagger and Shields
-[X] BMF's submission.
-[X] PMCA's submission.
-[X] Something else - A 40 ton torpedo bomber, focusing on speed and payload.
-[X] A 30-ton armoured fighter at maximum speed.

Edit:
Added "and payload" to the plan

 

[Rat King]

Honestly 30 tons of cargo is still awesome for the final lander, as it means it can drop off supplies as well. We have something that works fine, and going to 50 tons gets us less capability in all respects, not a tradeoff in any of them.

Click to shrink...

The idea of a fifty ton lander is a pure boarding/combat vessel that carries FLIF at high speed, ideally with weapons and armor. Also trying to maximize space efficiency on the future FLIF interstellar transport, since space is already a bit of a premium - as noted just for a company we need 240 tons of barracks space. If we can cut needed hangar space from 270 to 200 tons (three landers + cargo/spare lander) that saves something. Or really would be 360 vs 200 if we include a spare for that one.

EDIT: also if we are going to design a strike craft, I'd favor a multi-role fighte-rbomber at something like 30 tons and carrying missiles and pulse lasers again for multiple missions.

 

[WallFly]

The idea of a fifty ton lander is a pure boarding/combat vessel that carries FLIF at high speed, ideally with weapons and armor. Also trying to maximize space efficiency on the future FLIF interstellar transport, since space is already a bit of a premium - as noted just for a company we need 240 tons of barracks space. If we can cut needed hangar space from 270 to 200 tons (three landers + cargo/spare lander) that saves something. Or really would be 360 vs 200 if we include a spare for that one.

Click to shrink...

Ok, got it. This is a difference in priorities. You are prioritizing space on the ship and economy, I'm focusing mission capability and development time.

@Pinniped, your plan is currently broken. Your write in needs a dash before the brackets.

 

[Rat King]

Ok, got it. This is a difference in priorities. You are prioritizing space on the ship and economy, I'm focusing mission capability and development time.

@Pinniped, your plan is currently broken. Your write in needs a dash before the brackets.

Click to shrink...

I'm broadly in favor of multi-role vessels, but for the lander I tend to want it to be focused on getting the infantry in and out; the cargo space adds to logistical sustainment but I'm not sure how often we plan on long term FLIF missions and something that couldn't be solved by including a dedicated cargo lander to follow up when the LZ is secured.

When do we think an infantry platoon would need to land in a hot LZ with an additional 30 tons cargo? They're not gonna be unloading that while they're in a firefight after all.

 

[WallFly]

EDIT: also if we are going to design a strike craft, I'd favor a multi-role fighte-rbomber at something like 30 tons and carrying missiles and pulse lasers again for multiple missions.

Click to shrink...

Multi-role is difficult because, again depending on how the GM plays it, you kind of have to design small craft around their capital weapons. Energy weapons require a power plant capable of powering them, which means it has to be baked into the design in the first place. And torpedo bombers don't need as big (or possibly not at all?) a power plant so they can get more capability out of their frame/have a bigger engine.

I'm broadly in favor of multi-role vessels, but for the lander I tend to want it to be focused on getting the infantry in and out; the cargo space adds to logistical sustainment but I'm not sure how often we plan on long term FLIF missions and something that couldn't be solved by including a dedicated cargo lander to follow up when the LZ is secured.

Click to shrink...

30 tons is A LOT of infantry equipment. Hell, HMMWVs are only 2.5 tons for reference, so 30 could bring down essentially a command post + some supporting artillery guns on its own. Or whatever was deemed useful to the immediate landing.

 

[Magnificate]

I'm concerned we're doing an awful lot of warship construction without actually having fought any real space battles.

Click to shrink...

Yes. That's a good thing, we want to build as much as we can while at peace.

Well, here we disagree. Pure laser suite is fine, Fleet Escorts and patrol craft need not hurt larger ships. A patrol craft may need to survive an encounter with a larger craft in order to be able to escape and warn us off an incoming fleet. But PD lasers and high speed is perfect for surviving chance encounters!

Click to shrink...

Hard agree. These aren't meant to engage bigger targets, we've got ICs for that.

[X] Plan Wargames
[X] Write-in: Start building prototypes of BMF's submission and PMCA's submission. Also reach out to the Aslan (preferably to several clans if possible) and offer to buy one of their fighters for studying, testing and reverse-engineering. Once the prototypes are ready, test them in exersices, mock battles and war games with our other ships.

Click to shrink...

Ehhh... I'm not so keen on wargames in this form. With just one prototype, you can't design wargames that would test what we want, that is point defense coverage for large IC/MMV formations. As for reaching out to Aslan, do we want to that in an official manner, as HSWS? Or do we give some merchant a big bag full of credits and send him to procure one fighter for us?

I'm broadly in favor of multi-role vessels, but for the lander I tend to want it to be focused on getting the infantry in and out; the cargo space adds to logistical sustainment but I'm not sure how often we plan on long term FLIF missions and something that couldn't be solved by including a dedicated cargo lander to follow up when the LZ is secured.

Click to shrink...

That, I agree with. Landers never operate alone. At this moment, MMV could be doing the logistical support when required.

At this point, I think this might be acceptable:

[X] Plan HSWS's Choice
-[X] BMF's submission.
-[x] Internal submission.
-[x] A 30-ton armoured fighter at maximum speed.
-[X] A 50-ton FLF assault ship.
--[X] The FLF assault ship must retain boarding capabilities.

 

[Pinniped]

@Pinniped, your plan is currently broken. Your write in needs a dash before the brackets

Click to shrink...

Thank you, fixed it.

[X] Plan Wargames

[X] Plan HSWS's Choice

As for reaching out to Aslan, do we want to that in an official manner, as HSWS? Or do we give some merchant a big bag full of credits and send him to procure one fighter for us?

Click to shrink...

Hmm, I did not think that far ahead. I trust our officers to come up with a decent plan, maybe doing it unofficially might be the way to go?

 

[Rat King]

[X] Plan Lander But Small
-[X] BMF's submission.
-[X] PMCA's submission.
-[X] A 50-ton FLF assault ship.
--[X] The FLF assault ship must retain boarding capabilities.
-[X] A 40-ton multi-role fighter-bomber streamlined for intra-atmospheric FLF support.

 

[Raw90]

[X] Plan Dagger and Shields
I think these are the logical choices for escorts. The navy submission is also ok, the Steenbeck one is terrible. Important that these ships be able to keep up with the cruisers on deployment.

 

[Artificial Girl]

[X] Plan Lander But Small

 

[4WheelSword]

Please make sure you're plan voting or I get v confused

 

[Tallhart]

[X] Plan HSWS's Choice
[X] Plan Lander But Small

 

[Shaara1929]

[X] Plan Dagger and Shields

 

[Doubloon]

So are we planning on having a carrier class ship to carry these guys? I'd assume so but how big would that be?

Click to shrink...

The Flotilla Supply Ship might be a good basis to build something like that on--lots of internal space. There are a lot of ideas I can see using that hull for, actually. A merchant marine supply vessel, a dedicated colony construction ship, a troop carrier...

Someone has a prison world which is strange...

Click to shrink...

I suggest we name it Piranesi, after the Italian architect who created Carceri d'Invenzione, "Imaginary Prisons." It's a series of print etching depicting these vast, structurally impossible spaces full of hellish smoke and distant tormented forms.

Spoiler: Credit Giovanni Piranesi

For the actual votes, first of all I feel happy with either Bearings or the PMCA submission. That seems to be what most everyone else is thinking, too!

For the fighter prototyping, lemme just suggest a little...

[ ] Something else - A 40-ton fighter-bomber streamlined for intra-atmospheric FLF support.

We still have yet to develop our assault carrier vessel, but when we do it might be nice to have something capable of close air support over the LZ, clearing it before troop landing and supporting breakout operations. We have our big guns from orbit, but you can't use a sledgehammer to do the job of a scalpel.