Aurora 4x
VB6 Aurora => Bureau of Ship Design => Topic started by: justleroy on July 18, 2013, 02:33:58 PM
-
I recently encountered what I think is a precursor race in the Alpha Centauri system and designed FACs and a tender to counter them, hopefully. I want to be sure I haven't forgotten anything before I start building these ships as they are going to be big and expensive. Please look this design over and give me your ideas for what I forgot or can improve.
Essex class FAC Tender 39,000 tons 612 Crew 5799.2 BP TCS 780 TH 960 EM 0
2461 km/s Armour 3-102 Shields 0-0 Sensors 84/84/0/0 Damage Control Rating 35 PPV 43.02
Maint Life 4.61 Years MSP 10323 AFR 486% IFR 6.8% 1YR 790 5YR 11846 Max Repair 360 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 60 months Flight Crew Berths 59
Hangar Deck Capacity 5250 tons Cargo 5000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 5
MPD 240/10/120ThS Plasmag Drive (8) Power 240 Fuel Use 124.01% Signature 120 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 10,325,000 Litres Range 38.4 billion km (180 days at full power)
R4.5/C3 Quad Mount Meson Cannon Turret (2x4) Range 45,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-12 RM 4.5 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
PDS04 40-16000 H50 Point Defense Fire Control (2) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
Stellarator Fusion Reactor 120Tw/1k/10/5 (1) Total Power Output 120 Armour 0 Exp 5%
MR234-R60 Active Search Sensor (1) GPS 12960 Range 234.2m km Resolution 60
MR95-R10 Active Search Sensor (1) GPS 2160 Range 95.6m km Resolution 10
MR30-R1 Anti-missile Search Sensor (1) GPS 216 Range 30.2m km Resolution 1
TH6-84 Thermal Imaging Sensor (1) Sensitivity 84 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 84m km
EM6-84 EM Detection Sensor (1) Sensitivity 84 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 84m km
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
Strike Group
9x FAC-100 Crow Fast Attack Craft Speed: 16410 km/s Size: 7.8
4x FAC-102 Raven Fast Attack Craft Speed: 7619 km/s Size: 8.4
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
FAC-100 Crow class Fast Attack Craft 390 tons 5 Crew 172.2 BP TCS 7.8 TH 64 EM 0
16410 km/s Armour 1-4 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 1.8
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 78% IFR 1.1% 1YR 12 5YR 175 Max Repair 54 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 months Spare Berths 2
Magazine 12
MPD 32/1/16ThS (4) Power 32 Fuel Use 280.02% Signature 16 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 0.8 billion km (13 hours at full power)
Size 3 Box Launcher (4) Missile Size 3 Hangar Reload 22.5 minutes MF Reload 3.7 hours
FC47-R10 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 47.8m km Resolution 10
Road Runner Anti-ship Missile (4) Speed: 21,300 km/s End: 10.1m Range: 12.9m km WH: 5 Size: 3 TH: 106/64/32
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
FAC-102 Raven class Fast Attack Craft 420 tons 14 Crew 211.8 BP TCS 8.4 TH 32 EM 0
7619 km/s Armour 1-4 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 1
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 84% IFR 1.2% 1YR 44 5YR 664 Max Repair 144 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 3
MPD 32/1/16ThS (2) Power 32 Fuel Use 280.02% Signature 16 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 0.8 billion km (27 hours at full power)
G4-8 Coilgun (2x4) Range 40,000km TS: 7619 km/s Accuracy Modifier 8% RM 4 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
PDS04 40-16000 H50 Point Defense Fire Control (1) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
-
General terminology seems to be that FACs are craft between 500-1000 tons (and generally fairly self-contained as far as fuel and support goes, though short ranged) whereas ships <500 tons that aren't meant to spend more than a few days undocked are considered fighters. So generally I'd consider your design a Carrier and fighters rather than a FAC tender and FACs.
As for the ships themselves, they look pretty good. The missile platforms have a much longer fire control range than their missiles can reach, but this might be considered future proofing as you can switch out more advanced missiles later. I'm also a fan of using railguns instead of Gauss on Point Defense fighters, but that depends on your tech. Lastly, you might consider a scout fighter with active sensors that can paint targets for the missile fighters, so you can make long range strikes.
-
This is ironic, considering what I posted on the Academy yesterday. ;D
You are right, though. These are technically fighters. I went with FAC for one reason (and a role playing reason, at that): the number of crew. Fighters (at least in the sense I am familiar with) generally have one or two crew - a pilot and a navigator/tac officer). Larger craft, such as bombers, AWACS, etc. , are usually too large and slow to be considered fighters. I may be able to play around with the deployment time to get the number of crew down, but I'm happy with these designs.
Thanks for your input! 8)
-
Just some things I noticed, though they are mostly a personal preference:
a) I agree on the sensor fighter. Your fighters have ca. 400mkm combat range, your sensor can only see to 200mkm. Plus, if you use it, the enemy knows where your mothership is, and your anti-missile defense isn't that good.
b) Speaking of which, why don't you take CIWS on it instead of meson cannons? Sure, it can then only defend itself, but it's going in alone anyway.
c) Deployment time: Your FACs have 0.3 months deployment time, but only 13 hours of fuel. If you cut it to... 0.1 or 0.01 months (not sure which), you'll get a further reduction in crew to 2 or so people. Could be worth it.
d) Your missiles seem way, way too slow. Your FACs/Fighters are nearly as fast as the missiles they're firing. Plus, the to-hit seems abysmal, considering your engine tech. I'd say cut the warhead to 4, and get the rest into engines.
e) Wait, what? I just noticed you have 5000 cargo, plus cargo transfer. What's that for? Missiles are stored in magazines, of which you (by gthe way) don't have any. So, cut the cargo space, and get missiles in it. For the same tonnage, you should be able to pack about... 600 or so missiles. Which is something like 36 salvoes, so cut it further and increase the hangar size. You're launching 9x4 = 32 missiles per fighter launch, for a total of 160 damage. Any serious PD by more than ten thousand tons will almost certainly remain undamaged.
And that's what I just noticed. Apologies if I sound inconcise and/or rude. I hope it helps.
-
I can't figure out where all the space on the FAC tender went. I have a carrier with 6000T of hangar space that's only 20kT and has room for lots of fuel, missiles, and maintenance supplies, as well as 5 or 6 layers of armor (at least). Somehow I suspect most of your tonnage is engines which are only there to push around your massive tonnage of engines, and you wouldn't lose too much speed by dropping them.
For this role, a slow FAC tender is as good as a fast one. Your only defense is a good offense. Your design has to be intended to spot the enemy as far away as possible, send out fighter-bomber waves to pulverize them with enough time to come back and reload for a second or third volley before the enemy close in to energy range. If the spoilers reach your carrier they'll kill it whether it's 20kT or 40kT and 1kkm/s or 3kkm/s. (Unless you can direct the whole fight with your carrier sitting on the jump point for a quick escape, but I think that's unlikely.) You've got excellent sensors and that's good. Maybe a little too good -- how many tons are they? It's nice that you've got one for FACs, too. Point defense is good in case the enemies have good sensors and can fire their missiles before your missiles hit them. As somebody has mentioned, drop the cargo pod and add magazines.
I would try to get those Crow fighter-bombers smaller if at all possible, so you can carry more of them in your hangar. With box launcher tech, which you have, it is usually possible to get 2-3 missiles and maybe 4 on a fighter under 250T. 2HS are engines, 1HS is fire control, and 2HS are for missile launchers, fuel tank, and crew quarters. Set the intended deployment time to 0.1 months (aka 3 days) and your crew requirements will be cut down to 1 or 2. Remove the bridge and engineering spaces if they are still on there by default.
-
I think your engines are darn fuel hogs :)
I have thrown together the carrier below (also magneto plasma engines)
Exeter class Carrier 38,600 tons 735 Crew 5230.1 BP TCS 772 TH 2052 EM 0
2658 km/s Armour 3-101 Shields 0-0 Sensors 220/220/0/0 Damage Control Rating 59 PPV 0
Maint Life 6.14 Years MSP 4996 AFR 202% IFR 2.8% 1YR 228 5YR 3414 Max Repair 220 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 60 months Flight Crew Berths 95
Hangar Deck Capacity 13000 tons Magazine 1105
Parsons Type 228 Military Magneto-Plasma Drive (9) Power 228 Fuel Use 44.86% Signature 228 Exp 9%
Fuel Capacity 5,000,000 Litres Range 52.0 billion km (226 days at full power)
BAC Sea Skua Mk. IV (276) Speed: 40,000 km/s End: 29.2m Range: 70.1m km WH: 5 Size: 4 TH: 173/104/52
Watson-Watt Type 220 Thermal Sensor (1) Sensitivity 220 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 220m km
Watson-Watt Type 220 EM Sensor (1) Sensitivity 220 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 220m km
Strike Group
30x Swiftsure Fighter-bomber Speed: 13714 km/s Size: 7
6x Hermes Fighter-Scout Speed: 13812 km/s Size: 6.95As you can see, I haven´t any PD on this baby (mainly, because my carrier doctrin says: Don´t let the carrier get spotted, let the fighters do the fighting)
My engines are very likely to be larger than yours (mine are 750 tons each), but you have to consider this:
I have 5000 tons of fuel plus 6750 tons of engines on board for a total of 11,750 tons
You have 10,350 tons of fuel alone aboard, so my larger, less powerfull engines more than make up for this fact by the increased fuel efficiency.
Yes, fuel is needed to refuel the fighers carried, but you carry 13 FACs with 5,000 liters fuel each for a total of 65,000 liters of fuel. Even if you use them for 10 sorties, this would be only a drop in the bucket of your fuel supply, so your 10 million liters are obviously needed to keep the carrier going.
Because my fuel/engine part use so much less mass/space, I can put a whooping 13,000 ton hanger deck in, about two and a half the size of yours. If you think your strike group can take on the enemy fleet, think what _my_ strike group could do.
You might also notice, that I don´t have any active sensor on the carrier, but two huge (1000 ton each) passives. This is to get the general area where the enemy is and then send in the strikegroup, which will include a few recon fighters (see carrier doctrin above)
And here my fighters (also thrown together and not realy optimized)
Swiftsure class Fighter-bomber 350 tons 2 Crew 92.8 BP TCS 7 TH 96 EM 0
13714 km/s Armour 1-4 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 1.8
Maint Life 32.08 Years MSP 83 AFR 1% IFR 0% 1YR 0 5YR 2 Max Repair 21 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 8
Magazine 12
32 EP Magneto-plasma Drive (3) Power 32 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 32 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.5 billion km (31 hours at full power)
Sea Skua VLS System (3) Missile Size 4 Hangar Reload 30 minutes MF Reload 5 hours
High Angel Control System Type 53/60 (1) Range 53.7m km Resolution 60
BAC Sea Skua Mk. IV (3) Speed: 40,000 km/s End: 29.2m Range: 70.1m km WH: 5 Size: 4 TH: 173/104/52
Size 4 missiles, because that is what I am using in my game and way too much maintenance, but I don´t have the tiny enigneering space researched yet. I also don´t have the tiny crew quarters, which is why there are lots of spare berths on my fighers. With those two items researched, my fighters would probably approach the speed of your missile FACs
Hermes class Fighter-Scout 348 tons 3 Crew 119 BP TCS 6.95 TH 96 EM 0
13812 km/s Armour 1-4 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 20.69 Years MSP 107 AFR 1% IFR 0% 1YR 0 5YR 7 Max Repair 58 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 7
32 EP Magneto-plasma Drive (3) Power 32 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 32 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres Range 1.5 billion km (31 hours at full power)
Active Search Sensor MR69-R120 (1) GPS 6930 Range 69.6m km Resolution 120
The eyes of the strike package.
A carrier would have three squadrons of 10 Swiftsure and 2 Hermes each.
-
For what it's worth, here's my carrier design. Note that it doesn't have a FAC detector or missile detector, as it is meant to be in a fleet with ships that provide those capabilities.
Valiant-B class Carrier 20,000 tons 263 Crew 2662.4 BP TCS 400 TH 960 EM 0
2400 km/s Armour 10-65 Shields 0-0 Sensors 40/40/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 0
Maint Life 2.16 Years MSP 1499 AFR 533% IFR 7.4% 1YR 430 5YR 6447 Max Repair 160 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Flight Crew Berths 35
Hangar Deck Capacity 6000 tons Magazine 960 Cryogenic Berths 200
64 EP Military Magneto-plasma Drive (15) Power 64 Fuel Use 38.06% Signature 64 Exp 8%
Fuel Capacity 1,700,000 Litres Range 40.2 billion km (193 days at full power)
Firebrand-3A (192) Speed: 49,000 km/s End: 38.3m Range: 112.6m km WH: 4 Size: 5 TH: 179/107/53
10HS Ship Detector Gen2 MR166-R170 (1) GPS 27200 Range 166.9m km Resolution 170
5HS Thermal Sensor Gen2 TH5-40 (1) Sensitivity 40 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 40m km
5HS EM Detection Sensor Gen2 EM5-40 (1) Sensitivity 40 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 40m km
It could carry twenty of these fighters that carry 3x size 5 missile each... in your case they could carry 5x size 3 missiles. The fighter is internal fusion drive, so your version would be a bit slower, but not incredibly so.
Mustang-C class Fighter 288 tons 1 Crew 91.6 BP TCS 5.75 TH 40 EM 0
13913 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 2.25
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 57% IFR 0.8% 1YR 6 5YR 92 Max Repair 30 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 9
Magazine 15
40 EP Internal Fusion Fighter Drive (2) Power 40 Fuel Use 336.02% Signature 20 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 0.9 billion km (18 hours at full power)
Firebrand Box Launcher (3) Missile Size 5 Hangar Reload 37.5 minutes MF Reload 6.2 hours
Mustang Anti-FAC Missile Fire Control FC15-R16 (1) Range 15.4m km Resolution 16
Firebrand-3A (3) Speed: 49,000 km/s End: 38.3m Range: 112.6m km WH: 4 Size: 5 TH: 179/107/53
-
Just some things I noticed, though they are mostly a personal preference:
a) I agree on the sensor fighter. Your fighters have ca. 400mkm combat range, your sensor can only see to 200mkm. Plus, if you use it, the enemy knows where your mothership is, and your anti-missile defense isn't that good.
(. . . )
c) Deployment time: Your FACs have 0. 3 months deployment time, but only 13 hours of fuel. If you cut it to. . . 0. 1 or 0. 01 months (not sure which), you'll get a further reduction in crew to 2 or so people. Could be worth it.
OK, taking these suggestions to heart, here is the sensor/scout fighter I came up with:
F/S-3 Scout class Fighter-Scout 240 tons 2 Crew 162.6 BP TCS 4.8 TH 32 EM 0
13333 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 48% IFR 0.7% 1YR 12 5YR 187 Max Repair 54 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 8
MPD 32/1/16ThS (2) Power 32 Fuel Use 280.02% Signature 16 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 1.3 billion km (27 hours at full power)
MR11-R5 Active Search Sensor (1) GPS 180 Range 11.3m km Resolution 5
MR39-R60 Active Search Sensor (1) GPS 2160 Range 39.0m km Resolution 60
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
I redesigned the other two, as well. They are now classed as fighters.
F-100 Crow class Fighter-bomber 240 tons 1 Crew 76 BP TCS 4.8 TH 32 EM 0
13333 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 1.8
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 48% IFR 0.7% 1YR 4 5YR 56 Max Repair 24 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 9
Magazine 12
MPD 32/1/16ThS (2) Power 32 Fuel Use 280.02% Signature 16 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 1.3 billion km (27 hours at full power)
Size 3 Box Launcher (4) Missile Size 3 Hangar Reload 22.5 minutes MF Reload 3.7 hours
FC16-R30 Missile Fire Control (1) Range 16.6m km Resolution 30
Barracuda Anti-ship Missile (4) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 8.6m Range: 16.6m km WH: 4 Size: 3 TH: 170/102/51
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
F-102 Raven class Fighter 240 tons 2 Crew 98.6 BP TCS 4.8 TH 32 EM 0
13333 km/s Armour 1-3 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 1
Maint Life 0 Years MSP 0 AFR 48% IFR 0.7% 1YR 6 5YR 95 Max Repair 36 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months Spare Berths 8
MPD 32/1/16ThS (2) Power 32 Fuel Use 280.02% Signature 16 Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres Range 1.3 billion km (27 hours at full power)
G4-8 Coilgun (2x4) Range 40,000km TS: 13333 km/s Accuracy Modifier 8% RM 4 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
S01 40-4000 H50 Fire Control (1) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
b) Speaking of which, why don't you take CIWS on it instead of meson cannons? Sure, it can then only defend itself, but it's going in alone anyway.
d) Your missiles seem way, way too slow. Your FACs/Fighters are nearly as fast as the missiles they're firing. Plus, the to-hit seems abysmal, considering your engine tech. I'd say cut the warhead to 4, and get the rest into engines.
e) Wait, what? I just noticed you have 5000 cargo, plus cargo transfer. What's that for? Missiles are stored in magazines, of which you (by gthe way) don't have any. So, cut the cargo space, and get missiles in it. For the same tonnage, you should be able to pack about. . . 600 or so missiles. Which is something like 36 salvoes, so cut it further and increase the hangar size. You're launching 9x4 = 32 missiles per fighter launch, for a total of 160 damage. Any serious PD by more than ten thousand tons will almost certainly remain undamaged.
And that's what I just noticed. Apologies if I sound inconcise and/or rude. I hope it helps.
b, c, and d see below. As for the last point. . I got nothin'. I have no idea what I was thinking when I put in a small cargo hold instead of magazines. Well, mistake corrected. She's much more swelt now, with a much expanded strike group and reclassified as a carrier. I've also taken suggestions from other posts in the thread, so she's dropped the active sensors and boosted the em/thermal sensors greatly. I also cut the number of engines and the fuel supply. I'll just need to design a tanker and attendant supply ships to follow her around. In the process I eliminated a lot of the crew quarters, maintenance storage, and engineering spaces. I don't like having such a low maintenance life on capital ships, I'll just need to make sure to keep some maintenance supplies in my supply ships.
Essex class Carrier 24,000 tons 378 Crew 3856.7 BP TCS 480 TH 600 EM 0
2500 km/s Armour 4-74 Shields 0-0 Sensors 280/280/0/0 Damage Control Rating 20 PPV 0
Maint Life 2.84 Years MSP 6004 AFR 460% IFR 6.4% 1YR 1086 5YR 16290 Max Repair 420 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Flight Crew Berths 60
Hangar Deck Capacity 5250 tons Magazine 256
MPD 240/10/120ThS Plasmag Drive (5) Power 240 Fuel Use 124.01% Signature 120 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 5,225,000 Litres Range 31.6 billion km (146 days at full power)
CIWS-160 (5x8) Range 1000 km TS: 16000 km/s ROF 5 Base 50% To Hit
Barracuda Anti-ship Missile (85) Speed: 32,000 km/s End: 8.6m Range: 16.6m km WH: 4 Size: 3 TH: 170/102/51
TH20-280 Thermal Sensor (1) Sensitivity 280 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 280m km
EM20-280 EM Detection Sensor (1) Sensitivity 280 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 280m km
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
Strike Group
15x F-100 Crow Fighter-bomber Speed: 13333 km/s Size: 4.8
5x F-102 Raven Fighter Speed: 13333 km/s Size: 4.8
1x F/S-3 Scout Fighter-Scout Speed: 13333 km/s Size: 4.8
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 Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
I'm debating making her jump-capable. I have jump drive efficiency 10, currently, so jump drives are as bad as they could be.
-
It's looking good. I once tried to make my carrier into my jump ship, and I found it took away too much space that could have been hangar space. Now I have a "jump cruiser" that leads the fleet, and does a bit of anti-missile defense as its second job.
-
I usually find that the jump ship is such a priority target that having extra point defense and passive defenses (shields/armor) are a must. If there is any extra space left over I usually put some good passive sensors, especially thermal to keep them from being caught by small ships getting to close.
Brian
-
This is the jump tender I came up with for my carriers. I found that I really needed to fill the ship up with stuff to reach 24,000 tons, so I gave it missile racks, maint. supplies, and extra fuel to act as a collier/supply ship/tanker as well. It also has the sam EM and thermal sensors as the carriers. I figured it's going to be sitting at a jump point for perhaps weeks at a time, might be good if it could also see if there's anything approaching.
Sequoya class Jump Tender 24,000 tons 384 Crew 2733.5 BP TCS 480 TH 1200 EM 0
2500 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 3-74 Shields 0-0 Sensors 280/280/0/0 Damage Control Rating 5 PPV 0
Maint Life 2.22 Years MSP 3356 AFR 921% IFR 12.8% 1YR 917 5YR 13755 Max Repair 420 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 0
Magazine 1818
J24000(3-50) Military Jump Drive Max Ship Size 24000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
200 EP Commercial Magneto-plasma Drive (6) Power 200 Fuel Use 6.63% Signature 200 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres Range 113.1 billion km (523 days at full power)
CIWS-160 (5x8) Range 1000 km TS: 16000 km/s ROF 5 Base 50% To Hit
TH20-280 Thermal Sensor (1) Sensitivity 280 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 280m km
EM20-280 EM Detection Sensor (1) Sensitivity 280 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 280m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
-
Instead of CIWS you might want to think about some general anti-missile defenses that can protect other ships in the fleet, for example gauss turrets.
-
I just put the CIWS systems on there because I needed to get to 24,000 tons. At 385t each, I get the tonnage I need along with a decent "oh, crap, the point-defense frigates are all dead!" last line of defense.
My point-defense frigate:
Oliver H Perry class Frigate 5,000 tons 137 Crew 1538.8 BP TCS 100 TH 120 EM 0
2400 km/s Armour 3-26 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 18.28
Maint Life 1.59 Years MSP 192 AFR 200% IFR 2.8% 1YR 88 5YR 1317 Max Repair 180 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 266
MPD 240/10/120ThS Plasmag Drive (1) Power 240 Fuel Use 124.01% Signature 120 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 10.2 billion km (48 days at full power)
Twin G4-8 Coilgun Turret (6x8) Range 40,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 4 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
S01 40-4000 H50 Fire Control (6) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
Size 1/ ROF 10s Missile Launcher (10) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
FC30-R1 Anti-Missile Fire Control (10) Range 30.2m km Resolution 1
ECCM-1 (1) This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Two to four of these will accompany the jump tender, and 6 to 10 of them in the carrier group.
-
IMHO (which you are welcome to ignore), unless you are expecting large number of single missile salvos, you could reduce the size and cost of your Perry's by reducing the number of fire controls. Each fire control targets one salvo or group of weapons at one target or salvo of missiles.
My equivalent designs tend to have one fire control per quad turret or 10 missile launchers. I would also recommend more magazine space: you can go through 266 missiles in a hurry when the NPR's start using their defensive missiles in an offensive role.
-
Good point about the magazine space. The low amount of missile reloads was a concern. So, I took your advice and almost doubled the magazine space and added two more gauss cannon turrets.
Oliver H Perry class Frigate 5,000 tons 113 Crew 1096.6 BP TCS 100 TH 120 EM 0
2400 km/s Armour 3-26 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 21.04
Maint Life 1.47 Years MSP 137 AFR 200% IFR 2.8% 1YR 71 5YR 1058 Max Repair 180 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 522
MPD 240/10/120ThS Plasmag Drive (1) Power 240 Fuel Use 124.01% Signature 120 Exp 15%
Fuel Capacity 350,000 Litres Range 10.2 billion km (48 days at full power)
Twin G4-8 Coilgun Turret (8x8) Range 40,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 4 ROF 5 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
S02.24-20000 Point Defense Fire Control (2) Max Range: 48,000 km TS: 20000 km/s 79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Size 1/ ROF 10s Missile Launcher (10) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
FC30-R1 Anti-Missile Fire Control (2) Range 30.2m km Resolution 1
ECCM-1 (1) This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
-
Depending on the number and type of ships you are facing, you don't have nearly enough firepower (#ftr X #missiles X WH strength) to accomplish much, unless you intend on building multiple tenders and utilizing them as a group. Given your tech level and the amount of resources required, you might be better of with a large number of smaller missile armed ships with sufficient missile defense of their own.
Fuel range on the FAC's is a little low too.
-
Yes, I'm going to have multiple carriers. My planned battle group, for now, consists of 2 carriers (42 fighters), 10 point-defense frigates, 5 missile destroyers, a surveillance cruiser, and attendant tankers, colliers, and jump tenders. I have no idea if it will be enough, but hopefully it will still be a force to be reckoned with.