Low tech fighters

[TCD]

I am amazed that you are building fighters at such low tech, I usually go for corvettes rather than fighters at such early tech, or frigates

If you're looking for somewhere to stick your commanders while you build up a proper fleet then fighters have a very clear advantage in production time, resource costs, shipyard availability and upkeep over corvettes or frigates. They also fit nicely into many rp styles.

[Drgong (OP)]

I am amazed that you are building fighters at such low tech, I usually go for corvettes rather than fighters at such early tech, or frigates

Both RP for the game I am playing and also it to produce slots for my lowest officers.

[Drgong (OP)]

Out of interest, why didn't you go for a beam fighter instead of a missile fighter? They would then always have some value for point defense, if nothing else (and possibly JP guards as well).

I am a missile type of guy.   the next tech level I am planning to make some beam fighters. 

[Iranon]

I'd probably try to shed some weight. This can probably afford to be slower so I'd go down to a size-1 engine, 50 years of maintenance life is still excessive, the FC seems more capable than required for the missile (although I might look at a longer-ranged missile instead).

Any ton you save makes you less likely to be detected by anything other than anti-missile sensors... which will hopefully have insufficient maximum range.

[Drgong (OP)]

, the FC seems more capable than required for the missile (although I might look at a longer-ranged missile instead).

I loaded the wrong missile 

[Drgong (OP)]

Sad to say, the A-1 Spaceraiders where the only thing to get hits on some alien as it proceeded to kick my butt.  I might need to name them "Swordfish". 

[Drgong (OP)]

Code: [Select]

Swordfish class Fighter-bomber    445 tons     11 Crew     47.8 BP      TCS 8.9  TH 20  EM 0
2247 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 1.2
Maint Life 43.02 Years     MSP 67    AFR 1%    IFR 0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 12 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 1 months    Spare Berths 4   
Magazine 8   

Sims Cybernetics 10 EP Nuclear Thermal Engine (2)    Power 10    Fuel Use 98%    Signature 10    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Litres    Range 4.1 billion km   (21 days at full power)

Lane Aeronautical Size 8 Box Launcher (1)    Missile Size 8    Hangar Reload 60 minutes    MF Reload 10 hours
Burke-Daniels Missile Fire Control FC18-R100 (1)     Range 18.0m km    Resolution 100
Torp Mk 1 (1)  Speed: 5 900 km/s   End: 53.1m    Range: 18.8m km   WH: 12    Size: 8    TH: 21/13/6

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
New game, new low tech fighter concept.  This one is much more of a planetary defense concept that makes up its questionable ability by having a powerful missile.

[lennson]

Isn't it concerning to you that so little of the fighter's mass is in weapons?

The size 8 box launcher is only 60 tons out of the 445 ton craft. This seems to suggest to me that it isn't very efficient in terms of the fire power it can bring for its production cost.

[Drgong (OP)]

Isn't it concerning to you that so little of the fighter's mass is in weapons?

The size 8 box launcher is only 60 tons out of the 445 ton craft. This seems to suggest to me that it isn't very efficient in terms of the fire power it can bring for its production cost.

When you are trying to fit stuff into <500 ton package at low tech levels you do have to make a lot of odd sacrifices.   To get decent speed you must be able to build up a lot of the tonnage to build a functional ship first, then think about weapons.

For example, here is the same concept at the next generation of engine tech.

Old one with upgraded missile

Code: [Select]

Swordfish class Fighter-bomber    445 tons     11 Crew     47.8 BP      TCS 8.9  TH 20  EM 0
2247 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 1.2
Maint Life 43.02 Years     MSP 67    AFR 1%    IFR 0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 12 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 1 months    Spare Berths 4   
Magazine 8   

Sims Cybernetics 10 EP Nuclear Thermal Engine (2)    Power 10    Fuel Use 98%    Signature 10    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Litres    Range 4.1 billion km   (21 days at full power)

Lane Aeronautical Size 8 Box Launcher (1)    Missile Size 8    Hangar Reload 60 minutes    MF Reload 10 hours
Burke-Daniels Missile Fire Control FC18-R100 (1)     Range 18.0m km    Resolution 100
Torpedo Mk 2 (1)  Speed: 9 400 km/s   End: 33.1m    Range: 18.7m km   WH: 12    Size: 8    TH: 34/20/10

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

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

Code: [Select]

Swordfish Mk 2 class Cruiser    460 tons     11 Crew     61.3 BP      TCS 9.2  TH 40  EM 0
4347 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 1.2
Maint Life 41.12 Years     MSP 83    AFR 1%    IFR 0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 12 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 2 months    Spare Berths 0   
Magazine 8   

Short-Lawrence Aerospace 20 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (fighter) (2)    Power 20    Fuel Use 136.96%    Signature 20    Exp 12%
Fuel Capacity 20 000 Litres    Range 5.7 billion km   (15 days at full power)

Lane Aeronautical Size 8 Box Launcher (1)    Missile Size 8    Hangar Reload 60 minutes    MF Reload 10 hours
Burke-Daniels Missile Fire Control FC18-R100 (1)     Range 18.0m km    Resolution 100

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
you are almost at 400 tons already with just the small fuel tank, engines, and a fire control.

These are not going to be super useful with the exception that there small size means they can many times approach a target without being detected.  I could use a FAC but that uses up a shipyard while many times you have fighter plants idle for years in a conventional start. 

[lennson]

What is the justification to put so much emphasis on speed if the purpose is local system defense?

- Enemy ships shouldn't try to run away since they can't see the bombers.
- Without a local carrier is seems unlikely that the bombers could perform multiple attack runs, which I think is normally the justification for very high speed.

[MarcAFK]

I do something similar since at that tech level even slow fighters are still petty sneaky, they're cheap and disposable.
However , being disposable I would get rid of the maintenence (training them is annoying but I usually have a 1000 ton escort with a 500 ton hanger), btw they only have 15 days fuel so reduce the deployment time and get some extra tonnage.  I generally reduce the range to a bare minmum for system defence, I'll assume maybe 2 billion Km so they can get to Jupiter or Saturn and back, and I'll shove as much engine into the ship as possible to maximise strike speed. Even if it only carries a single missile a swarm of them should at least be able to take out enemy ships due to fire control issues.

[Drgong (OP)]

What is the justification to put so much emphasis on speed if the purpose is local system defense?

- Enemy ships shouldn't try to run away since they can't see the bombers.
- Without a local carrier is seems unlikely that the bombers could perform multiple attack runs, which I think is normally the justification for very high speed.

You need some speed to intercept a fleet

[DaMachinator]

Since you can (in theory) get closer to your opponent with these fighters, would they serve as viable platforms for more exotic weapons like HPM's?

[Drgong (OP)]

Since you can (in theory) get closer to your opponent with these fighters, would they serve as viable platforms for more exotic weapons like HPM's?

Yes, HPMs and fighters are a good match, but at this tech they might be too slow to survive defensive fire.

[DaMachinator]

Yes, HPMs and fighters are a good match, but at this tech they might be too slow to survive defensive fire.

Isn't the theory that defensive fire would not know where they were since they engage from outside the range of AMM's, but are too small for larger active sensors to detect effectively?