Post by: welchbloke on February 17, 2009, 02:54:30 PM
Code: [Select]
Ironsides class Gunboat 1000 tons 114 Crew 141 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 30
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 1-200 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 4% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 176 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
Alpha R200/10 Shields (1) Total Fuel Cost 10 Litres per day
12cm C2 Visible Light Laser (1) Range 32,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 4-2 RM 2 ROF 10 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S01 16-2400 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 2400 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 6 Armour 0 Exp 5%Code: [Select]
Locust class Gunboat 1000 tons 91 Crew 190 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 119 MSP Max Repair 96 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor S96-R14/100 (1) GPS 1344 Range 13.4m km Resolution 14The idea was to create hunter groups of FACs (Ironsides) each group would have a dedicated scout FAC (Locust). I know the tech is a little mismatched but I'm using what was random;y generated when this race was created. I was trying to keep the ship size down and have common fleet speed; I may have made them a little too light though....
Post by: Beersatron on February 17, 2009, 03:16:57 PM
Would this create a bottleneck wherein the lasers will only be effective at 2400?
Post by: waresky on February 17, 2009, 04:01:42 PM
Are a classic "newbee" design same mine first...e.g. only last month ive understand the powerful and better effort to Missile Anti-Missile,than Gauss range.
At last ur FAC r interesting,BUT better raise up ur TS of Fire control (target speed).
Post by: welchbloke on February 17, 2009, 04:11:37 PM
Quote from: "waresky"
Interesting naval doctrine,and yes,the FC at 2400km/s created a bottleneck,laser are more faster.Bugger! How did I miss the FC speed
Are a classic "newbee" design same mine first...e.g. only last month ive understand the powerful and better effort to Missile Anti-Missile,than Gauss range.
At last ur FAC r interesting,BUT better raise up ur TS of Fire control (target speed).
I'll design some better FC and see where that leads me. I was intending to have other specialist FACs to meet other requirements (ie a missile FAC and a PD FAC). I was also think about a tender design (think SFB PFT).
Post by: mavikfelna on February 17, 2009, 06:46:56 PM
--Mav
Post by: waresky on February 18, 2009, 12:04:31 AM
Because on battle u can lost very fast an PowGen,from hits,and have more r different between live and death..
Edit: Obviously NOT 1 single power..but 2 or 3 PowerGen:D
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 18, 2009, 07:15:29 AM
The 2 basic sensor techs so that you don't have to use oversized FC's and the engine tech to help you get in close enough for the first strike without being detected on thermal passives.
As has already been pointed out, you can also downsize the reactor since you only need one that gen's 2 points per 5 sec's. If you have already researched internal armor you might beable to add a point or 2 after downsizing.
Since the Locust looks to be intended for stand off detection you might consider a standard engine instead of a GB engine. Yes it cuts speed in half, but it also reduces your thermal signature. This helps also long as the opfor hasn't got good EM suites for finding active scans at range or strong actives for finding small TCS's at range.
Post by: jfelten on February 18, 2009, 07:23:24 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Since the Locust looks to be intended for stand off detection you might consider a standard engine instead of a GB engine. Yes it cuts speed in half, but it also reduces your thermal signature. This helps also long as the opfor hasn't got good EM suites for finding active scans at range or strong actives for finding small TCS's at range.
How would that compare against running the current engine at half throttle? Wouldn't you then have the lower thermal emission as well as the sprint ability if needed?
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 18, 2009, 09:10:29 AM
Quote from: "jfelten"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"Since the Locust looks to be intended for stand off detection you might consider a standard engine instead of a GB engine. Yes it cuts speed in half, but it also reduces your thermal signature. This helps also long as the opfor hasn't got good EM suites for finding active scans at range or strong actives for finding small TCS's at range.
How would that compare against running the current engine at half throttle? Wouldn't you then have the lower thermal emission as well as the sprint ability if needed?
Loiter time is segnificantly increased.
Post by: Hawkeye on February 18, 2009, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: "waresky"
Generated more power r ever better than have same them..why?
Because on battle u can lost very fast an PowGen,from hits,and have more r different between live and death..
Edit: Obviously NOT 1 single power..but 2 or 3 PowerGen:D
I would agree if the desing would be at least a heavy cruiser.
A FAC, however, once the armor is breached, is pretty much dead anyway. No use to keep the guns powered, when the ship is allready falling apart around you.
FACs, IMO, are throwaway ships (yes, the crews realy don´t like that designation) if they are armed with relative short range weapons. At the range the low-tech lasers work, there is not a large chance for them to stay undetected, and once targetet and locked, they probably don´t live long anyway. Better they deal as much damage during that timespan as possible, than trying to keep a criple shooting.
Post by: jfelten on February 18, 2009, 11:32:36 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Quote from: "jfelten"Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"Since the Locust looks to be intended for stand off detection you might consider a standard engine instead of a GB engine. Yes it cuts speed in half, but it also reduces your thermal signature. This helps also long as the opfor hasn't got good EM suites for finding active scans at range or strong actives for finding small TCS's at range.
How would that compare against running the current engine at half throttle? Wouldn't you then have the lower thermal emission as well as the sprint ability if needed?
Loiter time is segnificantly increased.
I thought fuel usage fell when you decreased speed.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 18, 2009, 11:46:48 AM
Quote from: "jfelten"
I thought fuel usage fell when you decreased speed.
GB engines still burn at a higher rate than standard engines (x10). So even if you reduce the operational speed of the GB engine the equivelent of a standard engine the standard will still have a greater loiter time.
You do make a good point about the available reserve speed and equivelent thermal signature.
Post by: jfelten on February 18, 2009, 11:58:53 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Quote from: "jfelten"
I thought fuel usage fell when you decreased speed.
GB engines still burn at a higher rate than standard engines (x10). So even if you reduce the operational speed of the GB engine the equivelent of a standard engine the standard will still have a greater loiter time.
You do make a good point about the available reserve speed and equivelent thermal signature.
10x fuel consumption is certainly a factor then.
Post by: waresky on February 18, 2009, 01:26:38 PM
1400 km/s Armour 12-54 Shields 4-400 Sensors 30/30/0/0 Damage Control Rating 58 PPV 26
Annual Failure Rate: 64% IFR: 0.9% Maintenance Capacity 2583 MSP Max Repair 140 MSP
Magazine 560
GE Ion Engine H2 E5 HighPower (7) Power 60 Efficiency 0.50 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5% Hyper Capable
Fuel Capacity 330,000 Litres Range 79.2 billion km (654 days at full power)
Gamma R400/10 Shields (2) Total Fuel Cost 20 Litres per day
Gauss Cannon R2-100 (1x2) Range 20,000km TS: 6400 km/s Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 2 ROF 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S05 64-3000 H40 (1) Max Range: 128,000 km TS: 3000 km/s 92 84 77 69 61 53 45 37 30 22
Borneo 3 Launcher 02-020 (10) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 20
Borneo Anti-Ship FC60-R14/100 (2) Range 25.2m km Resolution 14
Borneo 2 (280) Speed: 8400 km/s End: 41.7 minutes Range: 21m km Warhead: 4 MR: 12 Size: 2
Borneo Active Sensor S140-R16/100 (1) GPS 2240 Range 22.4m km Resolution 16
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-30/100 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
NOTE:ive been made an BIG mistake on set an FC linked to Gauss..the TS of them..3000..
a very newbee error.Fatal on middle of the Battle.Lucky ive another Class-ships joined ever at the Cruiser.AN classic CLE-Cromwell 61 (older but in battle prove a decent PointDef coverage)
________________________________________________________________________________
ELSAS Race
Krivak class Cruiser Armored 11300 tons 1027 Crew 2044 BP TCS 226 TH 360 EM 0
1592 km/s Armour 5-44 Shields 0-0 Sensors 24/33/0/0 Damage Control Rating 27 PPV 90
Annual Failure Rate: 60% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 2922 MSP Max Repair 205 MSP
Nuclear Pulse Engine E6 (9) Power 40 Efficiency 0.60 Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range 66.3 billion km (482 days at full power)
Single 250mm C3 Near Ultraviolet Laser Turret (4x1) Range 80,000km TS: 10000 km/s Power 16-3 RM 3 ROF 30 16 16 16 12 9 8 6 5 0 0
Gauss Cannon R4-100 (1x3) Range 40,000km TS: 1600 km/s Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 4 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 40k-6400kms (5) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 6400 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
Pebble Bed Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-4 (3) Total Power Output 36 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S8-R1/100 (1) GPS 8 Range 80k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH24 (1) Sensitivity 24 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 24m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM33 (1) Sensitivity 33 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 33m km
ECCM-3 (1)
This 2 Cruisers have fought a valiant but fast battle..the thikest Sharnhost Armor stopp 90% of Lasers HC's damage.
otherwise the Borneo 2 crush easy the HC armor and destroy and kill interior of them..
Post by: welchbloke on February 18, 2009, 05:30:42 PM
Code: [Select]
Ironsides class Rev A Gunboat 1000 tons 108 Crew 123 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 30
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 1-200 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 77 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
Alpha R200/10 Shields (1) Total Fuel Cost 10 Litres per day
12cm C2 Visible Light Laser (1) Range 32,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 4-2 RM 2 ROF 10 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%The reactor is now 0.5 HS in size hence the power 3 not 2. I'm deliberately designing these as attrition units (the NPR is a Tyranny and not averse to losing people). The only reason the Locust has a GB engine is due to role playing decisions on my part. The NPR has gone with a single FAC hull and will specalise them for different roles (I've been heavily influenced by the PF and Interceptor fluff from SFB in this).
Post by: Brian Neumann on February 19, 2009, 06:23:09 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
OK, I've fiddled around with the Ironsides Class without increasing the tech(I'm trying to create a viable FAC for the NPR I've encountered). The range is *extremely* limited and as a result I'm definately going to have some kind of PFT design; I'm currently undecided about whether I'm going to go with a parasite carrier or a straight tender with fuel/maintenance/sensor support for the flotilla.
The reactor is now 0.5 HS in size hence the power 3 not 2. I'm deliberately designing these as attrition units (the NPR is a Tyranny and not averse to losing people). The only reason the Locust has a GB engine is due to role playing decisions on my part. The NPR has gone with a single FAC hull and will specalise them for different roles (I've been heavily influenced by the PF and Interceptor fluff from SFB in this).
You might want to see how much space an extra point of armor would take. I think at this tech level a point of armor would be around 1HS. Two points of armor is probably going to protect the ship better than a point of shields and 1 point of armor would.
Brian
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 19, 2009, 08:29:10 AM
Quote from: "Brian"
Quote from: "welchbloke"OK, I've fiddled around with the Ironsides Class without increasing the tech(I'm trying to create a viable FAC for the NPR I've encountered). The range is *extremely* limited and as a result I'm definately going to have some kind of PFT design; I'm currently undecided about whether I'm going to go with a parasite carrier or a straight tender with fuel/maintenance/sensor support for the flotilla.
The reactor is now 0.5 HS in size hence the power 3 not 2. I'm deliberately designing these as attrition units (the NPR is a Tyranny and not averse to losing people). The only reason the Locust has a GB engine is due to role playing decisions on my part. The NPR has gone with a single FAC hull and will specalise them for different roles (I've been heavily influenced by the PF and Interceptor fluff from SFB in this).
You might want to see how much space an extra point of armor would take. I think at this tech level a point of armor would be around 1HS. Two points of armor is probably going to protect the ship better than a point of shields and 1 point of armor would.
Brian
I had not noticed the shields in the orginal design. I agree that in such a small ship the tonnage is better used on armor.
If you go with a tender with hanger bays I'd consider dropping the engineering space as well. Maybe even replacing the full size fuel tank with a small one. Operate the GB's as fighters from carriers instead of small long range craft.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 19, 2009, 09:08:46 AM
Code: [Select]
Lexington C class Sloop 1000 tons 90 Crew 120.5 BP TCS 20 TH 63 EM 0
4200 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 5
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Magazine 55
GB Nuclear Pulse Engine E99 (1) Power 84 Efficiency 9.90 Signature 63 Armour 0 Exp 21%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (5 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC5-R20/100 (1) Range 3.0m km Resolution 20
SSM mk1 (55) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Post by: Brian Neumann on February 19, 2009, 10:30:11 AM
Code: [Select]
Akagi class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 123 Crew 235 BP TCS 20 TH 48.3 EM 0
6900 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 6
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 73 MSP Max Repair 60 MSP
GB Ion Engine E91 (1) Power 138 Efficiency 9.10 Signature 48.3 Armour 0 Exp 36%
Fuel Capacity 30,000 Litres Range 5.9 billion km (9 days at full power)
10cm C3 Near Ultraviolet Laser (1) Range 90,000km TS: 6900 km/s Power 3-3 RM 3 ROF 5 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 0
R4.5/C3 High Power Microwave (1) Range 45,000km TS: 6900 km/s Power 3-3 RM 4.5 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 48-6400 gb (1) Max Range: 96,000 km TS: 6400 km/s 90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 9 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S10-R20/100 (1) GPS 200 Range 2.0m km Resolution 20
A couple of notes. I actually prefer meson's on gunboats because of their ability to ignore shields and armor. Given that the gunboat is probably not going to have the firecontrol to make full use of any heavier weapons, the range disadvantage of the meson is mostly negated. The armor is taking up 1hs per level of armor approximately. The engineering is from a small engineering facility. As this cuts the failure rate down from 200% anual it it worth the 1/2hs for gunboats that are going to be guarding colony worlds. It gives them a better endurance on station with minimum support. The tech in this case is pretty much under 8000rp, some of it at 8000. The only thing that is above the 8000 mark was the armor type (10000).
I am not sure if the microwave weapon ignores the shields or not. I have not actually used one exept in a nebula. If it does ignore the shield then it is well worth it as a few of these gunboats will probably blind most escorts in one firing pass.
Brian
Post by: Cassaralla on February 19, 2009, 11:31:31 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
This is the latest GB I'm using in my campaign. It's operating from a 40K ton tender in groups of 10. The engine is designed with 5% power increase, fuel efficiency 9, and thermal reduction 75%. The missiles are still using the previous generation of drive. It has the same fire power of the 3K ton corrvette I'm using for system patrol without endurance. So far this race has not discovered jump technology, but that is soon going to change.Code: [Select]Lexington C class Sloop 1000 tons 90 Crew 120.5 BP TCS 20 TH 63 EM 0
4200 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 5
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Magazine 55
GB Nuclear Pulse Engine E99 (1) Power 84 Efficiency 9.90 Signature 63 Armour 0 Exp 21%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (5 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC5-R20/100 (1) Range 3.0m km Resolution 20
SSM mk1 (55) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
This design lacks sensors. Does your Tender have long range sensors to support them or do you have a dedicated EW gunboat class?
Post by: welchbloke on February 19, 2009, 02:10:10 PM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
This is the latest GB I'm using in my campaign. It's operating from a 40K ton tender in groups of 10. The engine is designed with 5% power increase, fuel efficiency 9, and thermal reduction 75%. The missiles are still using the previous generation of drive. It has the same fire power of the 3K ton corrvette I'm using for system patrol without endurance. So far this race has not discovered jump technology, but that is soon going to change.Code: [Select]Lexington C class Sloop 1000 tons 90 Crew 120.5 BP TCS 20 TH 63 EM 0
4200 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 5
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Magazine 55
GB Nuclear Pulse Engine E99 (1) Power 84 Efficiency 9.90 Signature 63 Armour 0 Exp 21%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (5 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC5-R20/100 (1) Range 3.0m km Resolution 20
SSM mk1 (55) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Do you intend to keep the 40k tender when the race discovers Jump Tech? I would have thought that a low tech race would struggled to build a vessel with a 4ok jump drive.
Post by: welchbloke on February 19, 2009, 02:42:03 PM
) I have revised the Ironsides class to the design below:Code: [Select]
Ironsides class Gunboat 1000 tons 100 Crew 122 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
12cm C2 Visible Light Laser (1) Range 32,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 4-2 RM 2 ROF 10 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%I've also designed a Meson armed GB:Code: [Select]
Snake class Gunboat 1000 tons 93 Crew 127 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 40 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
R1.5/C2 Meson Cannon (1) Range 15,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 3-2 RM 1.5 ROF 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%The smaller size of the meson has allowed me to add an extra fuel tank and double the endurance compared to the Ironsides class.I'm keen to design a missile boat so I'm off to the drawing board.
Post by: waresky on February 19, 2009, 03:02:53 PM
Code: [Select]
Bird of Prey class Fast Attack Craft 1750 tons 176 Crew 512 BP TCS 35 TH 160 EM 0
4571 km/s Armour 1-12 Shields 0-0 Sensors 30/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 2
Annual Failure Rate: 24% IFR: 0.3% Maintenance Capacity 183 MSP Max Repair 280 MSP
Magazine 32
GB Magneto-plasma Drive E40 (1) Power 160 Efficiency 4.00 Signature 160 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres Range 5.1 billion km (13 days at full power)
Borneo Missile Launcher 02-015 (1) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 15
Borneo Anti-Ship FC60-R14/100 (1) Range 25.2m km Resolution 14
Borneo II 2 (16) Speed: 14400 km/s End: 41.7 minutes Range: 36m km Warhead: 6 MR: 14 Size: 2
Cruise 2 Active Sensor S160-R20/40 (1) GPS 3200 Range 32.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
My newest FAC,based on newly Magneto plsm drive and some news on sensors and FC,Armor new Ceramic Composite.Medium Range capability,planet range Def purpouse
Post by: waresky on February 19, 2009, 03:08:21 PM
Code: [Select]
Oregon 78 class Pinnace 1350 tons 123 Crew 269 BP TCS 27 TH 160 EM 60
5925 km/s Armour 1-10 Shields 2-400 Sensors 10/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2
Annual Failure Rate: 29% IFR: 0.4% Maintenance Capacity 62 MSP Max Repair 96 MSP
Magazine 102
GB Magneto-plasma Drive E40 (1) Power 160 Efficiency 4.00 Signature 160 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 40,000 Litres Range 13.3 billion km (26 days at full power)
Gamma R400/18 Shields (1) Total Fuel Cost 18 Litres per day
Arbalest Missile Launcher 01-010 (2) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
A-Ship Missile FC6-R14/2.52Mkm (1) Range 2.5m km Resolution 14
Arbalest II 1 (102) Speed: 18200 km/s End: 3.3 minutes Range: 3.6m km Warhead: 3 MR: 19 Size: 1
Arbalest 2 Active Sensor S96-R1/100 (1) GPS 96 Range 960k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH10 (1) Sensitivity 10 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km
Strangely the Pinnace Class are more fast than a FAC..but it's mereley for different concept design and purpouse..depend on sensor array of Fire Control capability,pinnace born on Close Assault,FAC medium Range Engagment
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 08:09:14 AM
Quote from: "Cassaralla"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"This is the latest GB I'm using in my campaign. It's operating from a 40K ton tender in groups of 10. The engine is designed with 5% power increase, fuel efficiency 9, and thermal reduction 75%. The missiles are still using the previous generation of drive. It has the same fire power of the 3K ton corrvette I'm using for system patrol without endurance. So far this race has not discovered jump technology, but that is soon going to change.Code: [Select]Lexington C class Sloop 1000 tons 90 Crew 120.5 BP TCS 20 TH 63 EM 0
4200 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 5
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Magazine 55
GB Nuclear Pulse Engine E99 (1) Power 84 Efficiency 9.90 Signature 63 Armour 0 Exp 21%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (5 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC5-R20/100 (1) Range 3.0m km Resolution 20
SSM mk1 (55) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
This design lacks sensors. Does your Tender have long range sensors to support them or do you have a dedicated EW gunboat class?
Actually, there is a scout class sloop that can be serviced by the tender and is part of the overall task group.
Code: [Select]
Spruance B class Sloop Scout 1000 tons 93 Crew 144 BP TCS 20 TH 31.5 EM 0
2100 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 25/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 3% IFR: 0% Maintenance Capacity 225 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9.9 (mil) (1) Power 42 Efficiency 0.99 Signature 31.5 Armour 0 Exp 7%
Fuel Capacity 75,000 Litres Range 136.4 billion km (751 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor S20-R20/100 (1) GPS 400 Range 4.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5-25/100 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
The Federation found an abandoned alien city on Mars. One of the techs recovered was compressed fuel cells. That's how such a small ship can carry so much fuel. The intended role is to seekout targets, wait for the Lex's to get into firing position, lightup the targets with actives just long enough for the missiles to track in, then shut down and move to a new position. None of this is battle tested yet.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 08:12:26 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"This is the latest GB I'm using in my campaign. It's operating from a 40K ton tender in groups of 10. The engine is designed with 5% power increase, fuel efficiency 9, and thermal reduction 75%. The missiles are still using the previous generation of drive. It has the same fire power of the 3K ton corrvette I'm using for system patrol without endurance. So far this race has not discovered jump technology, but that is soon going to change.Code: [Select]Lexington C class Sloop 1000 tons 90 Crew 120.5 BP TCS 20 TH 63 EM 0
4200 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 5
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 26 MSP
Magazine 55
GB Nuclear Pulse Engine E99 (1) Power 84 Efficiency 9.90 Signature 63 Armour 0 Exp 21%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.8 billion km (5 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC5-R20/100 (1) Range 3.0m km Resolution 20
SSM mk1 (55) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Do you intend to keep the 40k tender when the race discovers Jump Tech? I would have thought that a low tech race would struggled to build a vessel with a 4ok jump drive.
That's something the Federation will have to tangle with when the time comes. 10K jump drives with base tech is rough enough I agree. They have just completed research into fighter engines so that may be thier solution.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 08:42:58 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Based on the advice I've had so far (thanks everyoneCode: [Select]Ironsides class Gunboat 1000 tons 100 Crew 122 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0I've also designed a Meson armed GB:
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
12cm C2 Visible Light Laser (1) Range 32,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 4-2 RM 2 ROF 10 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%Code: [Select]Snake class Gunboat 1000 tons 93 Crew 127 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0The smaller size of the meson has allowed me to add an extra fuel tank and double the endurance compared to the Ironsides class.
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 40 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
R1.5/C2 Meson Cannon (1) Range 15,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 3-2 RM 1.5 ROF 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%
I'm keen to design a missile boat so I'm off to the drawing board.
Much better. Your fire controls are excellent matches to the weapons systems. They look like good high speed knife fighters. I'm interested in how they actually perform on combat.
Post by: welchbloke on February 20, 2009, 09:13:20 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
*SNIP*Thanks; I'll provide an after action report once my Player race and these NPRs but heads.
Much better. Your fire controls are excellent matches to the weapons systems. They look like good high speed knife fighters. I'm interested in how they actually perform on combat.
Post by: welchbloke on February 20, 2009, 09:43:39 AM
Code: [Select]
Transgressor class Gunboat 1000 tons 97 Crew 155 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 48 MSP Max Repair 48 MSP
Magazine 33
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (3) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC48-R20/100 (1) Range 28.8m km Resolution 20
GB Missile #2 (33) Speed: 8000 km/s End: 56.2 minutes Range: 27m km Warhead: 1 MR: 14 Size: 1
Post by: Hawkeye on February 20, 2009, 12:26:30 PM
On the other hand, your missile control system is able to engage other FACs, which my own usually can´t do. I am using them more like the PT boats of WW2, trying to hit larger ships.
This is a design I have thrown together rather fast, but it reflects the way, I usually build my FACs
Tech is:
Active Grav Sensor 16
Nuclear Pulse Engines
High Density Duranium Armor
Levitated Pit Implosion Warhead
Power Increase 10%
Reduced Size Launcher 25%
Thermal Reduction 50%
Gepard class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 88 Crew 162 BP TCS 20 TH 44 EM 0
4400 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 8
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 51 MSP Max Repair 48 MSP
Magazine 32
FAC Type 88 NP-Engine (1) Power 88 Efficiency 9.60 Signature 44 Armour 0 Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 30,000 Litres Range 5.6 billion km (14 days at full power)
LAC Class-2 Missile Launcher (16) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 6000
LAC Missilecontrole Mk. I (1) Range 31.2m km Resolution 65
Skylark Class LAC Missile (16) Speed: 15200 km/s End: 37 minutes Range: 33.7m km Warhead: 3 MR: 10 Size: 2
LAC Radar Suit Type 48/65 (1) GPS 3120 Range 31.2m km Resolution 65
I am allways torn between giving each FAC its own active sensor, or building a dedicated scout FAC.
Without the active sensors, I could squeeze 22 missile launchers in.
On the other hand, I usually form 6 unit FAC-Squadrons, so with the one above, I have a total of 96 launchers all together.
If I go with the "blind" FACs and include one scout FAC, I have 110 launchers in the squadron, but if the scout is taken out early, the whole squadron goes blind.
The miniaturized launchers have a ROF of 6000 (I am useing loading rate 1, as even a ROF of 2000 with loading rate 3 is pretty much useless IMO) so reloading during a battle is not an option. I am going for a big one-time-salvo instead.
There is neither active nor passive defenses present, as those FACs are designed to get in, hit the enemy and get the hell out of dodge.
Post by: welchbloke on February 20, 2009, 01:01:19 PM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
Your missile seem awfully weak in terms of payload and also rather slow, which means quite a few will be shot down by PD, if your enemy mounts any.The race I've designed the FAC for does not have reduced launcher technology; hence they are lumbered with normal sized launchers. I'm starting to think that this race doesn't have the tech to produce a viable missile FAC design.
On the other hand, your missile control system is able to engage other FACs, which my own usually can´t do. I am using them more like the PT boats of WW2, trying to hit larger ships.
This is a design I have thrown together rather fast, but it reflects the way, I usually build my FACs
Tech is:
Active Grav Sensor 16
Nuclear Pulse Engines
High Density Duranium Armor
Levitated Pit Implosion Warhead
Power Increase 10%
Reduced Size Launcher 25%
Thermal Reduction 50%
Gepard class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 88 Crew 162 BP TCS 20 TH 44 EM 0
4400 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 8
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 51 MSP Max Repair 48 MSP
Magazine 32
FAC Type 88 NP-Engine (1) Power 88 Efficiency 9.60 Signature 44 Armour 0 Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 30,000 Litres Range 5.6 billion km (14 days at full power)
LAC Class-2 Missile Launcher (16) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 6000
LAC Missilecontrole Mk. I (1) Range 31.2m km Resolution 65
Skylark Class LAC Missile (16) Speed: 15200 km/s End: 37 minutes Range: 33.7m km Warhead: 3 MR: 10 Size: 2
LAC Radar Suit Type 48/65 (1) GPS 3120 Range 31.2m km Resolution 65
I am allways torn between giving each FAC its own active sensor, or building a dedicated scout FAC.
Without the active sensors, I could squeeze 22 missile launchers in.
On the other hand, I usually form 6 unit FAC-Squadrons, so with the one above, I have a total of 96 launchers all together.
If I go with the "blind" FACs and include one scout FAC, I have 110 launchers in the squadron, but if the scout is taken out early, the whole squadron goes blind.
The miniaturized launchers have a ROF of 6000 (I am useing loading rate 1, as even a ROF of 2000 with loading rate 3 is pretty much useless IMO) so reloading during a battle is not an option. I am going for a big one-time-salvo instead.
There is neither active nor passive defenses present, as those FACs are designed to get in, hit the enemy and get the hell out of dodge.
Post by: Erik L on February 20, 2009, 01:10:32 PM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
I've had a go at designing a missle GB; missile combat is an area I'm very inexperienced at and any pointers would be very useful.Code: [Select]Transgressor class Gunboat 1000 tons 97 Crew 155 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 48 MSP Max Repair 48 MSP
Magazine 33
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (3) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC48-R20/100 (1) Range 28.8m km Resolution 20
GB Missile #2 (33) Speed: 8000 km/s End: 56.2 minutes Range: 27m km Warhead: 1 MR: 14 Size: 1
Those are not shipkillers. They look more like PD/Anti-fighter/GB missiles. I think you'll find in a fight against ships (2000+ ton), they will fare poorly.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 03:48:06 PM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
I've had a go at designing a missle GB; missile combat is an area I'm very inexperienced at and any pointers would be very useful.Code: [Select]Transgressor class Gunboat 1000 tons 97 Crew 155 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 48 MSP Max Repair 48 MSP
Magazine 33
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 9.0 billion km (17 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (3) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
Missile Fire Control FC48-R20/100 (1) Range 28.8m km Resolution 20
GB Missile #2 (33) Speed: 8000 km/s End: 56.2 minutes Range: 27m km Warhead: 1 MR: 14 Size: 1
Most of this looks fairly good. I'd make some adjustments with the missiles though, they're way too slow. As you can see with mine, I tend to use missile armed GB's right on the edge of energy beam max range. By sacraficing endurance you can gain speed. With missiles that only travel about 1m km you can use smaller a FC as well and maybe be able to add an extra launcher or 2. I wouldn't worry about the light warhead, you can make that up with volume fire from the flotilla to overwelm defenses. As you advance the warhead tech, and launcher sizes and speed, this kind of tactic will improve.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 03:53:48 PM
Quote from: "waresky"
Strangely the Pinnace Class are more fast than a FAC..but it's mereley for different concept design and purpouse..depend on sensor array of Fire Control capability,pinnace born on Close Assault,FAC medium Range Engagment
Nothing strange about it. Your FAC is larger than the Pinnace. Frankly, they are both to big. GB's are intended to be a max 1000 tons. That is why there is breakpiont there to allow the removal of the bridge.
Gunboats and fighters are meant to be lean and fast.
Post by: Erik L on February 20, 2009, 04:09:23 PM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Quote from: "waresky"Strangely the Pinnace Class are more fast than a FAC..but it's mereley for different concept design and purpouse..depend on sensor array of Fire Control capability,pinnace born on Close Assault,FAC medium Range Engagment
Nothing strange about it. Your FAC is larger than the Pinnace. Frankly, they are both to big. GB's are intended to be a max 1000 tons. That is why there is breakpiont there to allow the removal of the bridge.
Gunboats and fighters are meant to be lean and fast.
I thought it was 1500 tons?
Post by: waresky on February 20, 2009, 05:02:52 PM
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 20, 2009, 06:06:55 PM
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"Quote from: "waresky"Strangely the Pinnace Class are more fast than a FAC..but it's mereley for different concept design and purpouse..depend on sensor array of Fire Control capability,pinnace born on Close Assault,FAC medium Range Engagment
Nothing strange about it. Your FAC is larger than the Pinnace. Frankly, they are both to big. GB's are intended to be a max 1000 tons. That is why there is breakpiont there to allow the removal of the bridge.
Gunboats and fighters are meant to be lean and fast.
I thought it was 1500 tons?
I think it was originally. But now when I design a ship, as soon as I cross 1000 I get the bridge required message on the design screen.
Post by: Erik L on February 20, 2009, 08:02:43 PM
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 04:15:16 AM
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 04:51:29 AM
the (hopefully) finalised FAC designs are:Code: [Select]
Ironsides class Gunboat 1000 tons 98 Crew 122 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 38 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
12cm C2 Visible Light Laser (1) Range 32,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 4-2 RM 2 ROF 10 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%Code: [Select]
Locust class Gunboat 1000 tons 89 Crew 190 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 119 MSP Max Repair 96 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 150,000 Litres Range 27.0 billion km (52 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor S96-R14/100 (1) GPS 1344 Range 13.4m km Resolution 14Code: [Select]
Snake class Gunboat 1000 tons 95 Crew 124 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 2/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 78 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
R1.5/C2 Meson Cannon (1) Range 15,000km TS: 6000 km/s Power 3-2 RM 1.5 ROF 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Thermal Sensor TH0.5-2/100 (1) Sensitivity 2 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 2m kmCode: [Select]
Transgressor class Gunboat 1000 tons 123 Crew 143 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 7
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 89 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP
Magazine 22
GB Ion Engine E100 (1) Power 120 Efficiency 10.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 18.0 billion km (34 days at full power)
Missile Launcher 01-030 (7) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 30
GB Missile Fire Control FC12-R20/100 (1) Range 7.2m km Resolution 20
GB Missile #3 (22) Speed: 11000 km/s End: 13.6 minutes Range: 9m km Warhead: 1 MR: 13 Size: 1I'm going to work on optimum flotilla mixes and TTPs. I'm also going to start on a tender/carrier design, I'm still undecided whether I;m going to go with a carrier or not.
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 05:27:25 AM
ive right now completely revolutionizing my Carrier design.BUT only in ur FIRST hostile encounter u understand how damned many thing goes bad in ur persnonel design..and when (IF) ur remains return to home..if ur lucky,u return very hurry at Design Board:)..
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 05:40:13 AM
Quote from: "waresky"
Carrier Naval doctrine r very interesting area.Are a good and deep field of war-designer experience.Absolutely, no plan (or design) survives first contact with the enemy. THese FACs look OK on paper but we'll see how they do in actual combat.
ive right now completely revolutionizing my Carrier design.BUT only in ur FIRST hostile encounter u understand how damned many thing goes bad in ur persnonel design..and when (IF) ur remains return to home..if ur lucky,u return very hurry at Design Board:)..
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 07:06:53 AM
Code: [Select]
Sharnhost III class Missile Cruiser 15000 tons 1236 Crew 2214.4 BP TCS 300 TH 420 EM 120
1400 km/s Armour 12-54 Shields 4-400 Sensors 30/30/0/0 Damage Control Rating 58 PPV 26
Annual Failure Rate: 64% IFR: 0.9% Maintenance Capacity 2583 MSP Max Repair 140 MSP
Magazine 560
GE Ion Engine H2 E5 HighPower (7) Power 60 Efficiency 0.50 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5% Hyper Capable
Fuel Capacity 330,000 Litres Range 79.2 billion km (654 days at full power)
Gamma R400/10 Shields (2) Total Fuel Cost 20 Litres per day
Gauss Cannon R2-100 (1x2) Range 20,000km TS: 6400 km/s Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 2 ROF 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S05 64-3000 H40 (1) Max Range: 128,000 km TS: 3000 km/s 92 84 77 69 61 53 45 37 30 22
Borneo 3 Launcher 02-020 (10) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 20
Borneo Anti-Ship FC60-R14/100 (2) Range 25.2m km Resolution 14
Borneo 2 (280) Speed: 8400 km/s End: 41.7 minutes Range: 21m km Warhead: 4 MR: 12 Size: 2
Borneo Active Sensor S140-R16/100 (1) GPS 2240 Range 22.4m km Resolution 16
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-30/100 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
and DDG Alien..(Patrol Cruiser Class for Alien..)
Code: [Select]
Kresta class Patrol Cruiser 6000 tons 588 Crew 1234.6 BP TCS 120 TH 280 EM 0
2333 km/s Armour 5-29 Shields 0-0 Sensors 24/33/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 8
Annual Failure Rate: 48% IFR: 0.7% Maintenance Capacity 772 MSP Max Repair 480 MSP
Magazine 185
Nuclear Pulse Engine E6 (7) Power 40 Efficiency 0.60 Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 170,000 Litres Range 85.0 billion km (421 days at full power)
10cm Railgun V2/C3 (1x4) Range 20,000km TS: 2333 km/s Power 3-3 RM 2 ROF 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 40k-6400kms (1) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 6400 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
Missile Launcher 01-010 (5) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC96-R8/100 (1) Range 23.0m km Resolution 8
M1W1MrASp14k (185) Speed: 14000 km/s End: 17.8 minutes Range: 15m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S480-R20/100 (1) GPS 9600 Range 96.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH24 (1) Sensitivity 24 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 24m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM33 (1) Sensitivity 33 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 33m km
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 09:14:08 AM
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 09:47:48 AM
There r very many good Naval Designers than me..but my FAC and Gunboat r mainly for System Defence Squadroon pourpouse,so am not build..a "dedicated" tender for this class,ive 3 mainly Squadroon (with tender):
Cruiser,Carrier,Escort.
One day or another i try to build an "tender" who can take inside (on hangar) the entirely FAC-1000 tons class,probably become very big Class ship for those objective.
But an idea ive: Passive and Active sensors array very powerful must mount up an AEW dedicated FAC,so u can support closely ur FAC squadroon,tender MUST remain on backward,with some Close Escort,not FAC class.
in a "FAC Squadroon" my idea was putt: tender,FAC-AEWClass,5 CLE (tender's Escort dedicated) 2 tankers,10 FAC-Class boat,1 SupportVessel,1 Squadroon Collier (if ur FAC use missiles)
"Systems" are all inside various ships in this Squadroon.
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 09:58:18 AM
Quote from: "waresky"
U mean for FAC yes? (my Gunboat r some different in concept and build a normal engines,not "GB" fastest and monster-fuel consume:DD)Yes I did mean FAC
There r very many good Naval Designers than me..but my FAC and Gunboat r mainly for System Defence Squadroon pourpouse,so am not build..a "dedicated" tender for this class,ive 3 mainly Squadroon (with tender):
Cruiser,Carrier,Escort.
One day or another i try to build an "tender" who can take inside (on hangar) the entirely FAC-1000 tons class,probably become very big Class ship for those objective.
But an idea ive: Passive and Active sensors array very powerful must mount up an AEW dedicated FAC,so u can support closely ur FAC squadroon,tender MUST remain on backward,with some Close Escort,not FAC class.
in a "FAC Squadroon" my idea was putt: tender,FAC-AEWClass,5 CLE (tender's Escort dedicated) 2 tankers,10 FAC-Class boat,1 SupportVessel,1 Squadroon Collier (if ur FAC use missiles)
"Systems" are all inside various ships in this Squadroon.
. I've got a tentative carrier/tender design that can take 3 FAC into a hanger. What I'm trying to work out is, assuming that I'm not going to use the carrier as a jump tender, what the advantages of having the FACs in a hanger are.The draft tender design is:
Code: [Select]
Buccaneer class Gunboat Tender 10000 tons 795 Crew 1501.5 BP TCS 200 TH 600 EM 0
3000 km/s Armour 1-41 Shields 0-0 Sensors 5/5/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 100% IFR: 1.4% Maintenance Capacity 751 MSP Max Repair 600 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3000 tons
Ion Engine E10 (10) Power 60 Efficiency 1.00 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 500,000 Litres Range 90.0 billion km (347 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor S600-R20/100 (1) GPS 12000 Range 120.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m kmI've put a monstrous sensor on it to provide very long range detection prior to the FACs racing ahead with a Locust FAC to provide organic sensor support for the flotilla. What I don't know is if there is a way of repairing damaged FACs whilst they are docked within the tender.
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 10:14:46 AM
Code: [Select]
Bird Of Prey Type79 class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 69 Crew 179.9 BP TCS 20 TH 160 EM 0
8000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 6.6
Annual Failure Rate: 16% IFR: 0.2% Maintenance Capacity 56 MSP Max Repair 40 MSP
Magazine 50
GB Magneto-plasma Drive E40 (1) Power 160 Efficiency 4.00 Signature 160 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 30,000 Litres Range 13.5 billion km (19 days at full power)
MB Missile Launcher 04-400 (5) Missile Size 4 Rate of Fire 400
Cruise Anti-Ship FC40-R18/100 (1) Range 21.6m km Resolution 18
Cruise III (12) Speed: 16000 km/s End: 23.4 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 11 MR: 30 Size: 4
repairs,same as maintenance around orbit's planets,can with MAINTENANCE BAY (a big 1250? tons of this device..ive put 2 for maint 400tons-class my FIGHTER onboard Carriers..but for maint a 1000tons..zzz..u need 1250/200ton*5=1000tons-mainten facility..awwwwwww:DD..)
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 10:18:36 AM
Code: [Select]
Terra Mk2 class Light Carrier 28000 tons 2353 Crew 4339 BP TCS 560 TH 888 EM 0
2114 km/s Armour 1-82 Shields 0-0 Sensors 30/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 68 PPV 12
Annual Failure Rate: 130% IFR: 1.8% Maintenance Capacity 4649 MSP Max Repair 280 MSP
Flag Bridge Hangar Deck Capacity 7000 tons Magazine 1440
Maintenance Modules: 2 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 400 tons
GeneralMagneto-plsm HDrive E3.8 (16) Power 74 Efficiency 0.38 Signature 55.5 Armour 0 Exp 4% Hyper Capable
Fuel Capacity 660,000 Litres Range 111.6 billion km (611 days at full power)
10cm Railgun V3/C4 (4x4) Range 30,000km TS: 6400 km/s Power 3-4 RM 3 ROF 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railgun AM FC 48kkm-12800 (1) Max Range: 96,000 km TS: 12800 km/s 90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Arbalest II 1 (1440) Speed: 18200 km/s End: 3.3 minutes Range: 3.6m km Warhead: 3 MR: 19 Size: 1
Cruise 2 Active Sensor S160-R20/40 (1) GPS 3200 Range 32.0m km Resolution 20
Arbalest 2 Active Sensor S96-R1/100 (1) GPS 96 Range 960k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
Strike Group
3x F-Elephant X3 Fighter-Scout Speed: 5084 km/s Size: 8.85
16x F-Arbalest Mk3 Fighter-bomber Speed: 6382 km/s Size: 7.05
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 10:24:12 AM
Quote from: "waresky"
U can SHOW there teh maintenance MODULES:Duh! of courseCode: [Select]Terra Mk2 class Light Carrier 28000 tons 2353 Crew 4339 BP TCS 560 TH 888 EM 0
2114 km/s Armour 1-82 Shields 0-0 Sensors 30/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 68 PPV 12
Annual Failure Rate: 130% IFR: 1.8% Maintenance Capacity 4649 MSP Max Repair 280 MSP
Flag Bridge Hangar Deck Capacity 7000 tons Magazine 1440
Maintenance Modules: 2 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 400 tons
GeneralMagneto-plsm HDrive E3.8 (16) Power 74 Efficiency 0.38 Signature 55.5 Armour 0 Exp 4% Hyper Capable
Fuel Capacity 660,000 Litres Range 111.6 billion km (611 days at full power)
10cm Railgun V3/C4 (4x4) Range 30,000km TS: 6400 km/s Power 3-4 RM 3 ROF 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railgun AM FC 48kkm-12800 (1) Max Range: 96,000 km TS: 12800 km/s 90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Arbalest II 1 (1440) Speed: 18200 km/s End: 3.3 minutes Range: 3.6m km Warhead: 3 MR: 19 Size: 1
Cruise 2 Active Sensor S160-R20/40 (1) GPS 3200 Range 32.0m km Resolution 20
Arbalest 2 Active Sensor S96-R1/100 (1) GPS 96 Range 960k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
Strike Group
3x F-Elephant X3 Fighter-Scout Speed: 5084 km/s Size: 8.85
16x F-Arbalest Mk3 Fighter-bomber Speed: 6382 km/s Size: 7.05
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 10:31:41 AM
Code: [Select]
Eagle Mk1 class FAC Carrier Light 28000 tons 2628 Crew 5318 BP TCS 560 TH 777 EM 0
1850 km/s Armour 1-82 Shields 0-0 Sensors 30/30/0/0 Damage Control Rating 27 PPV 30
Annual Failure Rate: 232% IFR: 3.2% Maintenance Capacity 3205 MSP Max Repair 1400 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 5000 tons Magazine 540
Maintenance Modules: 5 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 1000 tons
GeneralMagneto-plsm HDrive E3.8 (14) Power 74 Efficiency 0.38 Signature 55.5 Armour 0 Exp 4% Hyper Capable
Fuel Capacity 420,000 Litres Range 71.1 billion km (444 days at full power)
10cm Railgun V3/C4 (10x4) Range 30,000km TS: 6400 km/s Power 3-4 RM 3 ROF 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railgun AM FC 48kkm-12800 (1) Max Range: 96,000 km TS: 12800 km/s 90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
TFRT PB-1 AR-3 (2) Total Power Output 48 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Cruise III (135) Speed: 16000 km/s End: 23.4 minutes Range: 22.5m km Warhead: 11 MR: 30 Size: 4
Planetary ASS-S800-R40/40 (1) GPS 32000 Range 320.0m km Resolution 40
Arbalest 2 Active Sensor S96-R1/100 (1) GPS 96 Range 960k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH5-30/40 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-30/100 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 30m km
ECM 20
In main Battle Fleet ive 3 type of tenders..(ive build 3 Tender 28000 class..for Carrier Squadroon Duty) so am well prepared for BUILD..this newly monster..
Post by: welchbloke on February 21, 2009, 10:34:54 AM
Code: [Select]
Buccaneer class Gunboat Tender 17250 tons 1485 Crew 2624.5 BP TCS 345 TH 720 EM 0
2086 km/s Armour 1-59 Shields 0-0 Sensors 5/5/0/0 Damage Control Rating 8 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 297% IFR: 4.1% Maintenance Capacity 1761 MSP Max Repair 600 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3000 tons
Maintenance Modules: 5 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 1000 tons
Ion Engine E10 (12) Power 60 Efficiency 1.00 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 500,000 Litres Range 52.2 billion km (289 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor S600-R20/100 (1) GPS 12000 Range 120.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Post by: waresky on February 21, 2009, 10:46:21 AM
..and am loving number of "Fire team" (form USA's doctrine) so my FAC group r 5 FAC's..zz..and mass speed grew up..Amen:D
Good ur design,am like it.Light,speedy,and versatile..but caution!..ive encounter 3 ALiens,2 with missiles,1 not..and 1 are hostile..ive lost an CG in Aliens Home's planet approach..because my SQuad Admiral was too stupid and too un-expert..the him Escorts r on entry jump point..and CG fall under enemy missile without defence.
try to put onboard at least 1 or 2 Railguns systems:)
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 21, 2009, 07:42:47 PM
Post by: schroeam on February 21, 2009, 10:01:26 PM
Adam.
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 21, 2009, 10:25:15 PM
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 21, 2009, 10:38:01 PM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
What systems would you consider necessary for Gunboat Tender?
Hanger space for it's complement of GB's of course.
Good fuel reserves. Ammo bunkers if the GB's are missile armed. Extra maintenance supplies.
The basic role of a tender, or carrier for that matter, is to function as a forward rearm, refuel, resupply point (FARP).
After that, if there is mass available, armor, point defense(with appropriate sensors suites). Flag bridge for task force command.
Long range detection should be done by a dedicated fleet scout class. Or at least a scout class of GB or fighter.
If and when Steve adds a system for forward repair functions, then those might be added to the basics list. Definetly belongs to the secondary list.
Post by: Erik L on February 21, 2009, 11:20:23 PM
A maintenance unit in a ship I'd relegate to a support ship, not the tender/carrier itself. Certain functions should be kept in the fleet train, bulk ammo supplies, bulk fuel, major repair facilities. The carrier/tender should carry supplies necessary for an extended combat engagement. The tankers, colliers and DSR's (deep space repair) should remain in a relatively SAFE region to be called forward.
For a good book about DSR's, check out Elizabeth Moon's Once A Hero.
Post by: welchbloke on February 22, 2009, 04:35:17 AM
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Both of you do realize that maintenance modules require a colony to use don't you? They're intended as an orbital supplemental system in the same vein as terraforming and asteroid mining modules. What they are not is a mobile shipyard. So far Steve has not added a system that will allow one ship to work on another away from colony support.The answer is, yes and no :oops:
My original intention was to have a mobile FARP so my latest revision of the GB Tender is:
Code: [Select]
Buccaneer class Gunboat Tender 14000 tons 973 Crew 1917.5 BP TCS 280 TH 720 EM 0
2571 km/s Armour 1-51 Shields 0-0 Sensors 5/5/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 24
Annual Failure Rate: 261% IFR: 3.6% Maintenance Capacity 3514 MSP Max Repair 600 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3000 tons Magazine 250
Ion Engine E10 (12) Power 60 Efficiency 1.00 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres Range 128.6 billion km (578 days at full power)
Twin Gauss Cannon R1-100 Turret (1x2) Range 10,000km TS: 10000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 1 ROF 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GB Missile #3 (250) Speed: 11000 km/s End: 13.6 minutes Range: 9m km Warhead: 1 MR: 13 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S600-R20/100 (1) GPS 12000 Range 120.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 22, 2009, 07:53:23 AM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"Both of you do realize that maintenance modules require a colony to use don't you? They're intended as an orbital supplemental system in the same vein as terraforming and asteroid mining modules. What they are not is a mobile shipyard. So far Steve has not added a system that will allow one ship to work on another away from colony support.The answer is, yes and no :oops:
My original intention was to have a mobile FARP so my latest revision of the GB Tender is:Code: [Select]Buccaneer class Gunboat Tender 14000 tons 973 Crew 1917.5 BP TCS 280 TH 720 EM 0
2571 km/s Armour 1-51 Shields 0-0 Sensors 5/5/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 24
Annual Failure Rate: 261% IFR: 3.6% Maintenance Capacity 3514 MSP Max Repair 600 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3000 tons Magazine 250
Ion Engine E10 (12) Power 60 Efficiency 1.00 Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres Range 128.6 billion km (578 days at full power)
Twin Gauss Cannon R1-100 Turret (1x2) Range 10,000km TS: 10000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 1 ROF 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 16-7200 (1) Max Range: 32,000 km TS: 7200 km/s 69 37 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GB Missile #3 (250) Speed: 11000 km/s End: 13.6 minutes Range: 9m km Warhead: 1 MR: 13 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S600-R20/100 (1) GPS 12000 Range 120.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
Electromagnetic Sensor EM5 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 5m km
I think your going to kind that design a lot more sustainable.
Your PD suite is a little light for my taste. But then again I modified my database to bring the GC's into the kind of configuration I like. As Steve designed them effective GC's are heavy.
Again just my opinion, I'd reduce the size of the actives to being support for the point defense and not long range detection (base resolution and a detection range at least 200k but no greater that 500k). The reason being you don't want to reveal the motherships location if you can help it. The role of long range detection is best served by dedicated fleet scouts that are out away from the main body. YMMV
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 22, 2009, 08:11:52 AM
Code: [Select]
Belknap class Gunboat Tender 40000 tons 3686 Crew 4884.4 BP TCS 800 TH 1260 EM 0
2100 km/s Armour 1-104 Shields 0-0 Sensors 25/25/0/0 Damage Control Rating 146 PPV 30
Annual Failure Rate: 87% IFR: 1.2% Maintenance Capacity 11141 MSP Max Repair 150 MSP
Flag Bridge Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons Magazine 1500
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9.9 (mil) (40) Power 42 Efficiency 0.99 Signature 31.5 Armour 0 Exp 7%
Fuel Capacity 1,125,000 Litres Range 51.1 billion km (281 days at full power)
Quad Gauss Cannon R1-100 Turret (6x4) Range 10,000km TS: 4000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 1 ROF 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S08 20-4000 (6) Max Range: 40,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 75 50 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SSM mk1 (1500) Speed: 9800 km/s End: 3.1 minutes Range: 1.8m km Warhead: 1 MR: 10 Size: 1
Active Search Sensor S20-R20/100 (1) GPS 400 Range 4.0m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH5-25/100 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-25/100 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
In no way is this a best design. The Federation hasn't even left it's own system yet for various role playing reasons. This beast supports 10 of the Lexington C's I posted earlier and is accompanied by 2 of the Spruance B scout sloops for long range snooping. Dedicated close escorts have not been designed/built yet as well.
I've made 2 segnificant changes to the database. The first is that turret tracking speeds have been set to 4x the same level of beam fire control speed so that turrets can match max capabilities of the fire control.
The second is to reduce the functional size of Gauss Cannons. There are no GC's greater than 1hs. The percentages of the 1hs thru 6hs GC's have been transferred to the lower sizes making 1hs GC 100%.
These changes fit the way I play and probably are not the right changes for most players. Making baseline changes like this can be very imbalancing, time will tell if it has in my came.
These changes let the Federation deploy, in my mind, effect gun fighters that can cover the GB's and the fleet. 4 10K carriers have been built that have 18 fighters each.
Code: [Select]
Iowa class Carrier 10000 tons 703 Crew 1231.4 BP TCS 200 TH 315 EM 0
2100 km/s Armour 1-41 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 20 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 80% IFR: 1.1% Maintenance Capacity 1770 MSP Max Repair 150 MSP
Flag Bridge Hangar Deck Capacity 5000 tons
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9.9 (mil) (10) Power 42 Efficiency 0.99 Signature 31.5 Armour 0 Exp 7%
Fuel Capacity 425,000 Litres Range 77.3 billion km (425 days at full power)
Strike Group
18x Forrestal Fighter Speed: 4363 km/s Size: 5.5
This also not an ideal carrier. It 's purely a mobile airfield/FARP for the Forrestal fighters.
Code: [Select]
Forrestal class Fighter 275 tons 22 Crew 27.6 BP TCS 5.5 TH 18 EM 0
4363 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2
Annual Failure Rate: 55% IFR: 0.8% Maintenance Capacity 0 MSP Max Repair 6 MSP
FTR Nuclear Pulse Engine E990 (1) Power 24 Efficiency 99.00 Signature 18 Armour 0 Exp 35%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 0.7 billion km (42 hours at full power)
Gauss Cannon R1-100 (2) Range 10,000km TS: 4363 km/s Power 0-0 RM 1 ROF 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S01 10-1000 (FTR) (1) Max Range: 20,000 km TS: 4000 km/s 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Active Search Sensor S5-R1/100 (1) GPS 5 Range 50k km Resolution 1
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes
It will be interesting to see what these can do when the Federation finally ventures out. Before that happens the close escorts will be designed and built. Probably the true fleet scout as well.
Post by: waresky on February 22, 2009, 12:58:35 PM
Am venture out..and ive prove Gauss and Rails..GAUSS are very puny toward fast missile and heavy salvo waves'..Rails prove a worthy piece of weapon.
From 2nd Battle of Elsa ive trash the gauss,ive lost 6 CLE qith this weapons system..and a stupid Pinnace Squad (4)with Rails survive toward 80 (EIGHTY) salvo of 10 missile each...
Prob r a mix between rails and a good FireControl and ive take Pinnace close each others and assign PD on "AreaDefence".
in fact am hate Gauss on PD system.
IMO all:)
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 22, 2009, 06:17:26 PM
Even with the way Steve designed GC's and turrets they can be effective, more effective than railguns since they cannot be turret mounted. You just have to be willing to use quad turrets with large gears and 4x sized fire controls. That is a lot of mass. A functional suite in a 10k ship is in excess of 25% of the available hull.
Keep in mind that GC turrets alone are not a good missile defense. Their role is to deal with leakers. Ranged intercept is the role of anit-missiles.
Post by: welchbloke on February 22, 2009, 09:03:57 PM
Post by: waresky on February 23, 2009, 10:38:39 AM
FAC point: bad news mate...hmm..ive build just one FAC Carriers and fill with 5 newly very fast (8000kms) FAC,part of an CARRION (Carrier Squadroon)..ive an hostile race on horizon..so i can testing very near.
When ive fought am return there and report situation.
See ya
Post by: Charlie Beeler on February 23, 2009, 12:28:04 PM
Quote from: "adradjool"
You are correct, but I believe that they will produce maintenance supplies, with the necessary minerals available, which will allow the ship to perform it's own repairs as long as it has a damage control unit. Smaller ships without the DC module are SOL. It's kind of a middle ground so you don't necessarily have to send all your ships back to a shipyard for repairs. At least this is how I remember they were supposed to work.
Adam.
Unless things have changed, Maint Modules do not produce maint supplies.
http://aurora.pentarch.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1296
Post by: waresky on February 23, 2009, 12:49:57 PM
Fighter r in good salute,FAC same..and ive prepared an "Survey Tender Carrier" with maintenance and hangar for an "FAC" Survey vessel..and all goes as well.
Post by: Brian Neumann on February 23, 2009, 01:04:26 PM
Quote from: "waresky"
IVE onboard in some various Carriers a maintenance Module for my Fighter and FAC..and from 2061 (now am in 2080) never one produce something..
Fighter r in good salute,FAC same..and ive prepared an "Survey Tender Carrier" with maintenance and hangar for an "FAC" Survey vessel..and all goes as well.
Maintenance modules only count as a planetary maintenance for the purpose of keeping ships in orbit without adding to their time on the clock. They will never produce any supplies. The only place that they will work is if the ship mounting them is in orbit of a "colony" The basic idea for this is that you can set up a forward base by having enough modules on various ships to support the combat ships in the area. As long as the total number of maintenance modules will cover the size ship in orbit, that ship will not add time on it's clock, and it should not have any breakdowns that would use up engineering spares. Each module will support 200tons (4hs) of ship. You will need a total of 5 modules to support a typical FAC of 1000 tons (20hs) or 25 modules to support a 5000 ton (100hs) ship. All of the modules do not need to be mounted on the same ship.
Hope this helps to clarify what the maintenance modules are for.
Brian
Post by: waresky on February 23, 2009, 01:12:47 PM
Am know very well use and limits,ty for answer,i think r for some who never use too.
Maint in frontline r strategical.
But many mates dnt use Maintenance difficult.Am love it.
Without the game seems as Arcade version:D
Post by: welchbloke on February 23, 2009, 01:15:23 PM
Quote from: "Brian"
Does the colony require any population?Quote from: "waresky"IVE onboard in some various Carriers a maintenance Module for my Fighter and FAC..and from 2061 (now am in 2080) never one produce something..
Fighter r in good salute,FAC same..and ive prepared an "Survey Tender Carrier" with maintenance and hangar for an "FAC" Survey vessel..and all goes as well.
Maintenance modules only count as a planetary maintenance for the purpose of keeping ships in orbit without adding to their time on the clock. They will never produce any supplies. The only place that they will work is if the ship mounting them is in orbit of a "colony" The basic idea for this is that you can set up a forward base by having enough modules on various ships to support the combat ships in the area. As long as the total number of maintenance modules will cover the size ship in orbit, that ship will not add time on it's clock, and it should not have any breakdowns that would use up engineering spares. Each module will support 200tons (4hs) of ship. You will need a total of 5 modules to support a typical FAC of 1000 tons (20hs) or 25 modules to support a 5000 ton (100hs) ship. All of the modules do not need to be mounted on the same ship.
Hope this helps to clarify what the maintenance modules are for.
Brian
Post by: waresky on February 23, 2009, 01:23:52 PM
Before coming Steve and change our password:)
"Colony" r a terms for describe a "land with people",friend welch.
Am deploy Automatd Mines without people in a "colony" world..but for manage them people r useless.
Srry for my bad english mate
For other purpouse people need ever.
(no?):D
Post by: Erik L on February 23, 2009, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Brian"Does the colony require any population?Quote from: "waresky"IVE onboard in some various Carriers a maintenance Module for my Fighter and FAC..and from 2061 (now am in 2080) never one produce something..
Fighter r in good salute,FAC same..and ive prepared an "Survey Tender Carrier" with maintenance and hangar for an "FAC" Survey vessel..and all goes as well.
Maintenance modules only count as a planetary maintenance for the purpose of keeping ships in orbit without adding to their time on the clock. They will never produce any supplies. The only place that they will work is if the ship mounting them is in orbit of a "colony" The basic idea for this is that you can set up a forward base by having enough modules on various ships to support the combat ships in the area. As long as the total number of maintenance modules will cover the size ship in orbit, that ship will not add time on it's clock, and it should not have any breakdowns that would use up engineering spares. Each module will support 200tons (4hs) of ship. You will need a total of 5 modules to support a typical FAC of 1000 tons (20hs) or 25 modules to support a 5000 ton (100hs) ship. All of the modules do not need to be mounted on the same ship.
Hope this helps to clarify what the maintenance modules are for.
Brian
I believe the answer would be "No" in this case. You'd just need supplies of minerals and the ship-based Maintenance units.
So your Forward Fleet Maintenance Station could be a colony (used to signify a claimed planet), some automated mines and your DSR. Or for true mobility, add a couple ships with asteroid miners on them and freighters to carry the excess mineral stock.
Post by: Starkiller on April 18, 2009, 01:10:25 PM
to do a full missle loadout. The Arachnids usually loaded them to the hilt with full sized ship killers, or FRAMs.
I wonder if one could do a gunboattender? I think I'm wondering too much. Heh. Here's mine;
Code: [Select]
Collingwood class Gunboat 1000 tons 106 Crew 354.6 BP TCS 20 TH 53.2 EM 60
7600 km/s Armour 2-8 Shields 2-300 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 222 MSP Max Repair 169 MSP
GB Magneto-plasma Drive E45 (1) Power 152 Efficiency 4.50 Signature 53.2 Armour 0 Exp 12%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 20.0 billion km (30 days at full power)
Delta R300/12.5 Shields (1) Total Fuel Cost 13 Litres per day
12cm C4 Far Ultraviolet Laser (1) Range 120,000km TS: 7600 km/s Power 4-4 RM 5 ROF 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2
Fire Control S03 60-12500 H50 (1) Max Range: 120,000 km TS: 12500 km/s 92 83 75 67 58 50 42 33 25 17
Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-0.925 AR-0 (1) Total Power Output 5.55 Armour 0 Exp 4%
Eric
Post by: Hawkeye on April 18, 2009, 03:06:07 PM
Code: [Select]
Wolf class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 78 Crew 140 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 0
6000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control 1 PPV 7.5
Annual Failure Rate: 0% IFR: 0% Maintenance Capacity 88 SP
Magazine 62
MTU Typ 120 Schnellboot-Ionentriebwerk (1) Power 120 Engine Efficiency 9.0 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Max Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 10.0 billion km (19 days at full power)
Mauser Typ 2/0,25 Sperlingsflug Mini-ASR-Werfer (15) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 2000
Zuse RFL 29 Raketen-Feuerleitsystem (1) Range 28.8m km Resolution 60
Sperling ASR-2 (31) Speed: 18,000 km/s End: 23.1m Range: 25m km WH: 3 Size: 2 TH: 96 / 57 / 28With Box Launchers, I could put in 25 to 30 launchers in every ship.
As I am usually organizing my FACs in squadrons of 6 missile boats and 2 scouts with active sensors, to provide backup, should the enemy be out of range of any larger ships or PDCs radar, this will give me a salvo strength of 150 to 180 missiles.
Systems with major colonies usually receive 2 squadrons as guards to provide a mobile defense in adition to PDCs
Edit: You can often get away with shorter ranged missiles, as the resolution of enemy radar is most often in the 40 to 90 area, so you can sneak in close enough to get into firing range.
Post by: Erik L on April 18, 2009, 03:08:57 PM
Quote from: "Starkiller"
I wonder if one could do a gunboat tender?
Yes you can.
Post by: simon on August 25, 2009, 08:14:10 AM
22nd October 08
Ordnance Development Board's approved missile designs as well as the sensor buoys are currently being researched in preparation for mass production.Only the Longhead autonomous missile is being currently produced and the cost of production is very high especially in terms of each missiles fuel demands standing at a staggering 5000 liters per missile, the ODB has been instructed to look into less expensive missile design with a shorter production schedule and reduced cost in case the upcoming conflict with the hostiles Aliens in Niven last longer than stocks of more sophisticated missiles.Meanwhile the First Starguard's FAC shall proceed to Shaka system at reduced speed :) . A three craft detachment will therfore attempt to draw the hostiles out and pinpoint their location after which the rest of the First Starguard will transit in support with the aim of slowing down the hostiles.The heavier second starguard is tasked with cleaning up damaged hostile units if the situtation permits but must not sustain heavy losses as they also guard the vital Shaka junction. Commanding this Operation dubbed operation Solstice is Vice Admiral Delmar Dangerfield aboard the destroyer Revenger 001 in Shaka.
Meanwhile the ICD informs as that they will soon begin manufacture of automated mines as the tranfer of mining capacity is almost compensated for by the increase in manned mining capacity, this should allow us to expand our off-world resource bas without draining our reserves, Once resources within sol are being fully exploited attention will turn to tapping the Massive resources in the Shaka system.
2nd December 08 08:01
The recon force discovers hostiles smack on top of the jumpoint[dead on arrival].Defenders consist of five vessels so close that it is immediatly apparent that the jumpoint coordinates are known. They probably include the missile combatants. The recon awaits transit surges to dampen down as the Accord waits for the Aliens to react. Analysis of IR signatures indicates that although Two have emissions lower than our warbow class cruiser the other three have signatures almost forty percent higher all have emission higher than our Timur and Revenge class beam destroyers a sobering analysis. Tactical officers postulate that the heavier units are the missile units and therefore priority targets.In Shaka Vice Admiral Delmar considers transiting to engage now that the hostiles have been located but their armament is unknown and there may be more combatants beyond FAC detection range instead the main body of the First Starguard is ordered to transit and engage.The recon force is instructed to move away from the Jumpoint to draw away the Defenders in preparation for further transit .
fire control systems aboard the FAC are yet to stabalize so all they can do is observe the defenders as they await tranist surges to subside.Meanwhile in Shaka as main body prepares to transit Vice Admiral wishes he had the Warbow missile cruisers in support with their autonomous missiles as well as sensor buoys, as it is the defender have yet to fire ten seconds into the assault so he can not yet deploy his heavier units in confidence.
With one shattering salvo the Recon force disintegrates as eleven missiles intercept and rip apart their targets with strength 13 Nuclear explosions only scorpion 005 survives the salvo she is ordered to keep closing :P Scorpion 005 is blown to pieces with enough power to kill her ten times. With the Recon force now dead the first starguard egress away from the jumppoint. :idea: In Shaka Vice Admiral Delmar modifies his plans, if the defenders can be drawn away from the jumpoint a squadron of Timur class beam destroyers will transit attempt a lightening strike on the suspected sensor outpost and deny the defenders long-range sensor capability. The First Starguard is ordered to split again and offer the defenders multiple targets in case they decide to close range once more. To the immense shock of the crew of the First starguard contacts consistent with an inbound salvo are detected closing at 23100 km\s astern salvo composition is estimated as ten missiles in two five missile salvos, enough to destroy most if not all the FAC. As the fire control systems seem still unable to lock up the missiles all the First Starguard can do is await the imminent impact.
:| If undetected missile salvos are en route to the survivors of the First Starguard Vice admiral Delmar expects their demise shortly. The next few minutes will decide the out come. :(
Numbers cannot make up for less able fire control. I think missile armed FAC are more capable offer trans-system strike over billion mile range in coordination with heavy units kind of like gunboats in the Rigellian story. I have this feeeling even with more units i would still have lost.
Post by: welchbloke on August 25, 2009, 05:03:14 PM
Quote from: "simon"
Why unsupported beam FAC should not go toe to toe with intact Heavy units
:( Have you considered having mixed flotillas of FACs with some dedicated PD units and maybe a scout design mixed in? (Sort of like the PF flotiilas in SFB if you've ever played it). I would wholeheartedly concur that FACs should not be used in WP assaults unless you have an awful lot of them and don't mind taking huge losses. I tend to use my FACs as long range strike assets or to protect the flanks of my main fleets.
Post by: Brian Neumann on August 25, 2009, 06:16:30 PM
Code: [Select]
Raider class Fast Attack Craft 1000 tons 106 Crew 373.4 BP TCS 20 TH 120 EM 60
8000 km/s Armour 3-8 Shields 2-300 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 3
Annual Failure Rate: 8% IFR: 0.1% Maintenance Capacity 233 MSP Max Repair 141 MSP
GB Magneto-plasma Drive E70 (1) Power 160 Efficiency 7.00 Signature 120 Armour 0 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 60,000 Litres Range 15.4 billion km (22 days at full power)
Delta R300/17.5 Shields (1) Total Fuel Cost 18 Litres per day
R6/C3 Meson Cannon (1) Range 60,000km TS: 8000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 6 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S03 80-9375 H70 gb (1) Max Range: 160,000 km TS: 9375 km/s 94 88 81 75 69 62 56 50 44 38
SF Reactor PB-1 AR-0 s.5 (1) Total Power Output 3 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor S14-R1 (70%) (1) GPS 14 Range 140k km Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor S56-R20 (70%) (1) GPS 1120 Range 11.2m km Resolution 20
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposesA typical missile is going about 32-36,000km/s for the above gunboat about 1/4 of the time they will stop an incomming missile. This does not sound all that good, until you think about having two 5 missile salvo's approaching a group of 8 gunboats. To me this would be an engagement between a pair of destroyers and a small FAC group. The missiles will have about a 60% hit rate against the gunboats. Two of the missiles will be shot down by the gunboats leaving three. Probably two of these hit for 6 points of damage each. This might or might not penetrate the armor depending if they hit on top of each other. If one more missile had hit then it would probably have done at least a couple of internals. Total damage from both salvo's is one gunboat having suffered enough damage to have a good chance of either hitting the engines or weapons. The other is probably without shields and most of it's armor but will require another salvo to take it out. If the point defense had not fired then the chances are that both would be out of action. If you repeat this four times the net effect is that 4 gunboats are out of action and 4 are still in action, compared to all 8 having been knocked out. Given the speed difference and small size the FAC's would have covered at least 240,000km assuming that the other ships are moving to slow the range change. If they are trying to seperate then the distance could be as much as 720,000km. Against such small targets this might be enough that they can not see/target you effectively.
There are a lot more variables to consider when using beam armed FAC's vs the missile armed FAC's. Beam armed FAC's have to be able to penetrate the missile envelope around thier target ships. If you can get into close range with an enemy, the big question is who has the greater effective energy range. A lot of the designs I have seen from the computer do not put a mid range middle speed fire control on the ships. This means that to target the FAC's the computer's ship must choose between a short range fire control with no reduction due to speed, or a long range fire control that takes a hefty penalty to speed. If the FAC's can stay out at a range where their hit chances are good (my gunboat above has at least a 50% chance at maximum range) then they will be able to rack up the damage while taking relitively less damage. It is all a balancing act. I have had a dozen FAC's with mesons take out an equal number of much larger ships. The larger ships had a narrow window where they could not see the FAC's because of the resolution on their grav sensors but the FAC's could still be in range of the ships. I picked the bigger ships apart without taking any damage. If they had a sensor that could see me I would have been toast.
A missile armed FAC has a good standoff range and with enough box launchers they can pack 7-10, launchers depending on size, It does not take many of these to put together a decent salvo. This is especially true if they can get into a shorter range for the missiles without being spotted. That will let you trade fuel for a bigger warhead or other options on the missile. My FAC's usually use the same size launchers as my battlecruisers on down. (The missile is usually a different design, but by using the same size they can always fall back on the more common missiles. Or my bigger ships can load up with a shorter range missile if it is called for.) This sort of thing makes the missile armed FAC's easier to use, but they are always limited by their amunition.
Here are the missiles that this same race uses just to compare.
Code: [Select]
Size 1 Anti-missile Missile (1) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 1.3m Range: 2.6m km WH: 1 Size: 1 TH: 309 / 185 / 92
Size 2ir Anti-missil Missile (1) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 1.3m Range: 2.6m km WH: 1 Size: 2 TH: 266 / 160 / 80
Size 4 Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 35,200 km/s End: 15.2m Range: 32.1m km WH: 5 Size: 4 TH: 176 / 105 / 52
Size 12a Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 22.3m Range: 42.8m km WH: 10 Size: 12 TH: 160 / 96 / 48
Size 12a2 Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 22.3m Range: 42.8m km WH: 5 Size: 12 TH: 160 / 96 / 48
Size 12f Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 44,800 km/s End: 0.8m Range: 2.2m km WH: 15 Size: 12 TH: 194 / 116 / 58
Size 4f Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 39,200 km/s End: 1.4m Range: 3.2m km WH: 7 Size: 4 TH: 156 / 94 / 47
Size 1 Anti-ship Missile (1) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 6.7m Range: 12.9m km WH: 2 Size: 1 TH: 138 / 83 / 41Hope my rambling on helps to put a context on the differences between the two classes of FAC's
Brian