Author Topic: FAC Designs  (Read 8080 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #60 on: February 22, 2009, 12:58:35 PM »
My terran Empire (am little after ur design date (am in 2080) had built some magneto CR,CV,Fighter,FAC,CLE and DE-DDG...and FAC Carriers.
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:)
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2009, 06:17:26 PM »
Gauss Cannon need to be mounted in turrets to be effective as point defense.  

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.
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline welchbloke (OP)

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1048
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2009, 09:03:57 PM »
My NPR FAC designs had a run out in combat against my Player race today.  Unfortunately they were wiped out after causing very minor damage to the attacking fleet. This was due mainly to being significantly oumassed and I didn't effectively use the missile boats to intecept the incoming missiles.  I only had to CG, but they destroyed a significant proportion of the FACs.  Some of this was due to poor combat settings on my part; I have learnt a lot though.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2009, 04:43:25 PM by welchbloke »
Welchbloke
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #63 on: February 23, 2009, 10:38:39 AM »
Gauss point: interesting,and ty for explain,ive build some GC on Turrets,but never testing in battle (ive fought 2 at time)

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
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #64 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
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #65 on: February 23, 2009, 12:49:57 PM »
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.
 

Offline Brian Neumann

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1214
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #66 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
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #67 on: February 23, 2009, 01:12:47 PM »
Brian..am use maint in War front from 12 years.
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
 

Offline welchbloke (OP)

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1048
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #68 on: February 23, 2009, 01:15:23 PM »
Quote from: "Brian"
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
Does the colony require any population?
Welchbloke
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #69 on: February 23, 2009, 01:23:52 PM »
Friends we better use the right "topic's posts":)) otherwise we r lost in too many posts out of topic.
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
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5658
  • Thanked: 376 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #70 on: February 23, 2009, 04:28:02 PM »
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Brian"
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
Does the colony require any population?

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.

Offline Starkiller

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • S
  • Posts: 211
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #71 on: April 18, 2009, 01:10:25 PM »
Hmmm. Never noticed you could do a gunboat. They might actually be good as local 'behind the lines' patrol ships. I wonder if one could find a way
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 gunboat
tender? 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
 

Offline Hawkeye

  • Silver Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • Silver Supporter Silver Supporter : Support the forums with a Silver subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #72 on: April 18, 2009, 03:06:07 PM »
Well, in my opinion, missile armed FACs only make sense, once you have researched a couple of launcher miniaturization techs. The one below uses 25% size launchers

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 / 28

With 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.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 03:11:16 PM by Hawkeye »
Ralph Hoenig, Germany
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5658
  • Thanked: 376 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: FAC Designs
« Reply #73 on: April 18, 2009, 03:08:57 PM »
Quote from: "Starkiller"
I wonder if one could do a gunboat tender?

Yes you can.  :twisted:

Offline simon

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • s
  • Posts: 32
Re: What the FAC
« Reply #74 on: August 25, 2009, 08:14:10 AM »
Why unsupported beam FAC  should not go toe to toe with intact Heavy units
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.