My first fighter design in 6.1

[Paul Tankersley (OP)]

Hi all.  This is my first fighter design.  I am concerned about the size, but with mesons I don't know how to get it smaller.  Also, I went through a bunch of engine designs before finding something that could move this along but wasn't too large.  Happy with the speed, but I think my Arc Royal class carrier is going to have to be pretty big.  Question: Do I need 5 extra berths for each fighter crew when I design the carrier? I assume the hanger space provides maintenance so long as I bring enough supplies. . .

Code: [Select]

Shrike class Fighter    410 tons     5 Crew     203.8 BP      TCS 8.2  TH 36  EM 0
18292 km/s     Armour 1-4     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 82%    IFR 1.1%    1YR 22    5YR 329    Max Repair 150 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 5   

Griffon 150-2 Drive (1)    Power 150    Fuel Use 381.92%    Signature 36    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 15,000 Litres    Range 1.7 billion km   (26 hours at full power)

R9/C3 Meson Cannon (1)    Range 90,000km     TS: 18292 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 9    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Shrike Meson FC S00.7 72-1500 (1)    Max Range: 144,000 km   TS: 1500 km/s     93 86 79 72 65 58 51 44 37 31
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (3)     Total Power Output 3    Armour 0    Exp 5%

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

Any suggestions as to this design, or what I might consider for the carrier will be GRATEFULLY recieved!

[tryrar]

Well, one thing, if your max range is only 90k for the meson, you can reduce size a little by building a fire control that comes a bit close to max range. Also, is that tracking speed 15k or really 1500?! because that's a HUGE difference, and one that will very likely bite you in the ass when your fighters can't hit the broad side of a barn.(remember that designating a beam fc fighter only automatically gives it a free 4x, so no size increase needed to track targets).

I wouldn't call a 15-20k carrier all that large really, and that's about the size design I usually end up with when designing a fighter of similar size(I usually have 1 strikegroup of 10 fighters, but you can have any size/number of strikegroups, as long as you are prepared to build a carrier to hold them all!)

[Conscript Gary]

And yes, you'll want an extra berth for each fighter crewman on your carrier unless you want them bunking in their cockpits

[Paul Tankersley (OP)]

I guess I'm a little confused about Fire Control.  I thought that for hit chances you got the better of either your craft's speed (assuming no turrets) OR the tracking speed on your FC sensor, and with the high speed of the fighter I'd be OK.  Thus I intentionally lowballed the FC sensor tracking speed.  I gather this may not be the case?. . .

Thanks!

BTW, I have been improving armour tech and had brought the weight down to 390 Tons so far.  That's starting to get expensive though.  This in turn allows me to lower hanger size on the carrier, which leads to savings in a bunch of other areas.

[Vynadan]

The tracking speed of non-turreted weapon is equal to the speed of the design it's attached to, but this is the property of the weapon itself, not the fire control. The fire control has a seperate tracking speed that you set when in its own component design process - Think of the weapon component's tracking speed as the mobility of the weapon attached to your fighter, while the tracking speed of the fire control is the computer power of your targeting software. From your design:

Code: [Select]

R9/C3 Meson Cannon (1)    Range 90,000km     TS: 18292 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 9    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Shrike Meson FC S00.7 72-1500 (1)    Max Range: 144,000 km   TS: 1500 km/s     93 86 79 72 65 58 51 44 37 31
You'll notice that the Meson Cannon itself has a TS of 18,292 km/s (equal to your fighter's speed) while the FC only has 1500 km/s. While your fighter is agile enough to effectivly engage targets at a speed of 18,292 km/s, your fire control doesn't provide a firing solution for objects moving faster than 1500 km/s. For the best performance, those two should match as closely as possible.

[Paul Tankersley (OP)]

Ahhh! Thanks.  Back to the Lab then. . .

[Charlie Beeler]

Paul,

What tech systems did you actually research for this fighter?  And is this fire control a reduced size version perchance?

[Paul Tankersley (OP)]

Charlie,  the main research push was engine technology, meson focusing and lately armour upgrades.  My basic plan is always to develop a weapon then build a delivery system, so I have this 144,000 km range meson cannon that is strapped to a fighter which now goes in the 19000 km/h range (thanks to weight reductions through better armour) The sensor research was ignored after I got basic EM strength to 22 or 28- something like that.  My confusion over how this actually worked meant that I ignored FC tracking speed, thinking my fast fighter would keep a lock easily.  Would have been my REAL bad if I hadn't posted the design for feedback.  Now my boffins are cranking out breakthroughs in sensor tracking speed- working on 4000, but I have a way to go naturally.  I can't remember if this is a reduced size FC or not, and I'm away from Aurora at the moment.  Is this something to consider? I was after a range that worked with my weapons- giving myself some range headroom in case of ECM- and pretty much nothing else.  What are the advantages/ disadvantages of reduction in sensor size?

[Conscript Gary]

For beam fire controls, size modifiers map directly to either tracking speed or range. Half the size means halve one of those, halving size to halve both would get you a quarter-sized FC, and so on.
Judging from the TS of 1500 and that you're working on 4000, it's probably a half-sized for halved tracking.
It's a pretty straight tradeoff between space used and sensor capabilities.

[Charlie Beeler]

Paul,

If I were to guess, it looks like techs used in this fighters BFC are:

• Beam Fire Control 50% Range 24,000 km
• Fire Control Speed Rating 3000 km/s

From there it looks like you used ship BFC instead of fighter BFC, 3X range and 50% tracking speed.  This should net a BFC that is 1.5hs has the characteristics posted.

Here are some things to keep in mind.  Tracking speed used is based on which is greater ship speed or BFC tracking speed.  BFC tracking speed is limited to base tech tracking speed for non-turreted weapons, with the exception that fighter BFC base tracking speed is 4X racial tracking speed.  If weapons are turreted, then BFC tracking speed would only be limited by turret tracking speed.

With that said, the tracking speed actually used by your example fighter should be 18,292kps not the 1,500kps of the BFC.  In other words, you had it correct.

[Brian Neumann]

Paul,
the tracking speed actually used by your example fighter should be 18,292kps not the 1,500kps of the BFC.  In other words, you had it correct.

Not quite.  The tracking speed used when firing is the lower of the weapon tracking speed(turreted applies here) or the fire control tracking speed.  In this case the fire control tracking speed is a major limiter.  Granted he can change this pretty fast by desiging a purpose built fighter fire control (in the design screen the scroll box at the bottom labeled "Ship Type Limitations.  change to fighter only)  At the current tech of 4000km/s base tracking speed this would give him a 16,000km/s tracking speed or 8,000km/s for a half sized fire control unit.

Brian

[Charlie Beeler]

Brian is correct.  The BFC cap is a limiter.  doh!!

And I should have remembered that when writing.

[Paul Tankersley (OP)]

Gentlemen! Well now, 2 upgrades in speed- which should get me a bit past the 19K speed I'm now looking at, and I think I'm away to the races- thanks to that completely overlooked "fighter only" choice in Beam FC.  So things continue apace and here is the preliminary design for my Arc Royal carrier.

Code: [Select]

Arc Royal class Carrier    54,550 tons     897 Crew     13550.6 BP      TCS 1091  TH 1440  EM 0
5499 km/s     Armour 10-128     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 105     PPV 0
Maint Life 3.82 Years     MSP 11091    AFR 366%    IFR 5.1%    1YR 1194    5YR 17904    Max Repair 2000 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 250   
Hangar Deck Capacity 19500 tons     

2000 EP Magnetic Fusion Drive (3)    Power 2000    Fuel Use 40.48%    Signature 480    Exp 16%
Fuel Capacity 13,750,000 Litres    Range 112.1 billion km   (235 days at full power)

Active Search Sensor MR43-R100 (1)     GPS 7200     Range 43.2m km    Resolution 100

ECM 40

Strike Group
50x Shrike Fighter   Speed: 19230 km/s    Size: 7.8

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Missing are: the triple gauss turrets I'm working up- bad guys I've run into seem to throw salvos of three. . . 
                   FC for same
                   Longer range search radar- ~150m km for initial search
                   some AMM Frigates
                   . . . and?

But, never having gone down this road before, is the premise flawed? I want to be able to find the enemy early, launch fighters and move in to localize and dispatch the target.  The fast meson carrier in sufficient numbers looks a plausible system because of the varied armour and shield configurations you get- plus no ordinance manufacturing etc.  This allows a shorter supply train and thus more flexibility in deployment. . .  so how am I going to get spanked here, other than the ENORMOUS UNENDING research I seem to have to be doing?

[Charlie Beeler]

The big Achilles heel to beam only fighter use is that they can and will be engaged at ranges will beyond their ability to reply.  your only hope is to have an overwhelming supply of fighters.  Much more expensive than the missiles stocks to kill them.  YMMV

[draanyk]

The big Achilles heel to beam only fighter use is that they can and will be engaged at ranges will beyond their ability to reply.  your only hope is to have an overwhelming supply of fighters.  Much more expensive than the missiles stocks to kill them.  YMMV

I haven't fielded any fighters yet, but what about if they have good cloaking, ecm, and low-thermal drives? Is it possible to make a stealth beam fighter that can engage without getting toasted by AMM and PD?