Saturday, 20 January 2018

The Richelieu/ Tallyrand Type Battleship


The Richelieu/ Tallyrand in GDW books is problematic. It looks a lot like there was some bad editing after the design was written. The obvious example is the ships armour value, which appears to be 10 or 20 rather than 0. This is an attempt to square the intent with NAM rules as I interpret them.

BTW: The Richelieu drawing was originally (in 1st edition) the SSV-21  - see 1st edition GM manual p. 31. That's why the darned thing has no weapons mounts in the pictures.

1. Conceptualization

This Richelieu is a battleship. The idea of the 3,200 crew and a whole brigade of infantry carried is written off as a bad edit. My theory is the Richelieu had a crew (inc. troops) of 320, and some editor added a zero. The Richelieu is built around a large hangar bay capable of accommodating 12x 280m3 vessels at three times volume, and the flight control systems for such. This gives the Richelieu six fighters, with the possibility of twelve. In the SC scenarios the Sainte Jeanne d'Arc carried 8 Martels to Tithonus.

In terms of weapons systems the write-up of the Richelieu implies that in her current configuration she has 46 turrets, each with a double mount and UTES. We'll go with 51 to use all power.

For launched weapons she has 8 remote pilots. The number of missiles is an interesting question. Unlike a cruiser or destroyer the Richelieu has a far better way to deliver a nuclear warhead in the shape of her fighters. The numbers of missiles carried is very disparate, but the truth is that a missile is a very poor weapons system against a well defended target. A salvo is missiles may be devastating against a lone cruiser, but a battlegroup will lay down such heavy defensive fire that few if any survive to attack.

Previously, whilst examining the French building program, I concluded that rather than "as well as" cruisers etc., what the Richelieu is is the next development in heavy warship. I wrote that the Ypres was the great leap forward of fusion powered warships. This made all previous warships obsolescent. Eventually as fusion drives became more available the idea of making a much larger vessel with either two fusion plants or one really big one becomes a good one. Hence you get the "big ship" or rather "la grande frégate". Once you've made that plunge, the next one seems like a good one, go to 3x reactors (or two larger ones). This is basically what the Richelieu is. She's the prototype warship with an insane amount of power output, which happens to coincide with the introduction if ultra-lightweight armour etc.

On the foreign responses - IMC I have pre-revolution Germany ordering 2 large 450 MW battleships, but only building one before the revolution, with the engineering for the second one (each a 150 MW fusor) instead parceled out to a pocket battleship to make the Bismarck. The British basically follow the French suit, and have built their first round of 2-3 BB and are in the middle of their second round. America in 3W basically opted for the German route, but this made many players unhappy. I think opting for building a large 450 MW BB might be reasonable, but the other two follow-ups mentioned may be further behind.

2. Power Plant

The oddity of the listed 415 MW plant is that it doesn't exist. The listed PP hits can be used to determine the vessel had a 16,500 ton plant, which equates to a single 500 MW plant. If multiple plants were installed then the extra mass would work and 2x 225 MW would be perfect. However, I opt for a simple 3x 150 MW fusion to save money and give more redundancy at the cost of extra mass.

3 and 4. Fuel and Thrusters

The Richelieu is a nuke ship and needs no fuel. She will never land and so has no thrusters. Fuel for the small craft is carried as cargo rather than in a central tank.

5. Drive

A 300 MW New Military Drive is installed.

In house rules I have the OC tech drive as having a single engine core, the OM/NC as having two and the NM as having three. Each core is a separate item for damage purposes. If you don't have similar rules you might consider having an extra drive. A drive hit is absolutely crippling, and the ability to bring a backup online would be really useful in combat. Even an "eggbeater" type get you home affair might be useful. Even a Ritage missile drive would move the Richelieu at warp 0.25, providing her the possibility of reaching home.

6. Crew and Workstations

I assume the 3,200 crew is a typo for 320.

The Richelieu sheet is spread over two sheets, and I'll rate her as having a backup bridge, and take the crew from the sheets thus:

2x Command, 2x Navigation, 2x Helm, 2x Communications, 9x Engineer and 7x Computer (multi-role)

The Tactical Action Centre is configured for the installed tactical systems. I followed the sheets and gave her 2 full active and passive sensors, both with redundant systems. The power available was all utilised to ultimately give 51 gunners rather than 46.

51x Fire Control, 2x Active Operators, 2x Passive Operators, 8x Remote Pilots and 12x Flight Controllers

The Engineering section calculates at 64 engineers (2x 32 man shifts), which is well short of the implied 192 from the sheet. The hangar staff is 12 maintenance crew for the carried fighters and their 12 crewmen. The Science section remains at 20, the stewards at a mere 5 (very busy people!) and 10 medical staff aboard.

There are now a mere 50 Marines aboard, i.e. 5 sections (platoons) including a command/ sustainment section. They are essentially a half-batallion under a commandant with 2 peletons (companies, the original meaning of a platoon was a tactical body of ca. 100 men) each under a capitaine each of 2 sections (platoons) of 10 walkers under a subaltern. They all have combat walkers.

There are 12 spare slots. I will provide a workstation to each and assume flag staff.

7. Accommodations

I will accommodate 320 people.

The text in NAM is pretty clear that the formula for the mass of a unit of accommodation is 10+(vol/10) tons. The example moved the 10+ from a "unit" to the whole of the accommodations. Backengineering has shown both formulae being inconsistently applied. Even I applied the second version. Here I will apply the proper version, and note mass changes.

As an aside, doing it "properly" adds 990 tons to a Kennedy. Of course, realistically at war loads the Kennedy is ca. 10,000 metric tons and closer to warp 4.0 anyway. There was an argument made in the 1990's that the Kennedy could run away from enemy missiles, but this effectively assumed infinite missile spam.

I will provide retractable spin modules (2%) and oxygen for 320 men for 180 days. More can go in the cargo for longer missions. As a note, "life support" in NAM is just bottled oxygen at the rate a human consumes it (ca. 1 kg per day).

8. Sensors

I'll provide the full range of survey and navigation sensors - navigation radar (i.e. civilian spec active), DSS (i.e. civilian spec passive), gravitational, and advanced life and cartographic sensors.

For tactical sensors I provide a pair of each the best humanity has, with a redundant array.

Two side-notes. Firstly DSS really is just a downrated tactical passive, and has no place on a warship. Secondly, in my house rules a lot of thought was spent on how sensors should actually work. Sadly they really need a GM because it needs truly hidden movement. The passive sensor is basically a sky scanning telescope array, and it makes "black globes". The immediate issue is that having a real detection of an object requires hidden movement. When you've two "hidden" objects moving to contact range neither sides player will know to ping the other to place a black globe - hence the need for a GM.

Conversely the active sensor simply can't scan. What it can do is track and determine range (which the passive can't really do). What an active sensor does is interrogate a black globe and place the model/ counter on the board. Once there it can be fired upon by ships. Each active can only interrogate once per turn. To make things easier on the players I allowed the active to interrogate an area but that's not important.

9. Weapons

9.1. Guns

Simply dividing spare power by 2 I get 51 double mounts powered. The ships form really doesn't allow for many to face fore or aft and so the jack mounts are basically broadside. She's like an old line-of-battle ship.

GDW 2k3 (and Mongoose) don't really allow for much larger arrays. However, I experimented with increasing weapons size.  With such house rules the Richelieu would be a superdreadnought type with 15 m diameter x6 mounts, each replacing 3 conventional double mounts with a single large double mount (since I won't power both sides in a long range laser duel). I will not discuss this further as the system really needs phased movement to have a tactical benefit of increased range, and then how quickly you allow ships to turn makes a huge difference.

That aside, the question is x1 or x2? Now, the core SC rules have no difference in penetration, and a house rule was quickly suggested that maybe x2 weapons get +1 penetration, x3 get +2 etc.. This is nonsense. Twice as much energy equate to twice the penetration - a x2 should simply roll 2d10 for penetration.

If you play with that variant having heavier guns becomes far more advantageous, because x2 or x3 (PBWS or laser) is essentially untroubled by the hull of a Bismarck or Suffren. Whilst said ships have reasonable protection against x1's they are almost naked against x3's.

However, here I stick with 51 x1+1dbl jack turrets with UTES.

As a further aside, in the core rulebook a targeting computer was an add-on per mount. SC was ambiguous, but the Kennedy example simply had one TC. Here I have installed a TC per mount (or rather per targeting array, which is the same as the number of mounts with UTES). Under such a system you'd either put 10 TC's on the Kennedy, or rule that the TC can only deal with one target and the player must nominate.

9.2. Missiles

The Richelieu has 8 remote pilots and is listed as carrying 16 missiles.

Now, in the original starship combat rules before Star Cruiser each communicator could control 2 missiles. In SC this was reduced to one. Yes, the original "Fast Missile Carrier" explicitly fired salvos of 10.

However, I've designed her missiles around 16 "universal" cells. These are R-2 width and R-1 length and can fit either a single Ritage-2 or 4 Ritage-1's (including a nuclear variant, probably with a 5x2). They have a volume/mass of 40 tons/ m3.

As a sneaky git, I'd probably never detonate the Ritage-2 in a fight. I'd keep them in close company with the battleship (so no range penalties if you use house rules like me) and then the enemy I am bringing into turret range is faced with the choice - do at the battleship or the missiles. The majority of the time the enemy will opt for the missiles and the threat is likely so great that I could get several turns blasting away with turret weapons before they're all gone. The Star Cruiser equivalent of having cavalry force infantry into squares and then blowing them away with horse artillery.

10. Screens

Screens-6

11. Hangar

I'll construct the ship around a tight hangar (3 volumes) for 12x 280m3 (20 dTon) small craft and two doors.. This means:

First launch - requires 5 turns and launches 2 vessels
Second launch - still requires 3 turns and launches 2
Third launch - requires 3 turns
Fourth launch - requires 2 turns
Fifth launch - requires 2 turns
Sixth launch - requires 1 turn

Or 16 turns to scramble 12 fighters.

The assumption is a 6 m diameter fighter/lander for a door (lift) size of 144 m2.

12. Hull Masking

The radiated signature is 7, which implies basic hull masking. This I have included.

Why not go to advanced? With the hull I've used there simply isn't enough area.

13. Hull

I took a ruler to the picture and scaled roughly. The hull I'm using is:

Rear section = 2x 30 m diameter cylinders and 5x 24 m diameter cylinders
Central spine connecting rear and fore over which spin habs fold = 5x 12 m diameter cylinders (unarmoured)
Forward = 5x 12 m diameter cylinders
The spin habitats = 4 modules each 40 m long, 15 m wide and 5 m tall


This gives me 60,025 m3 volume, which is more than enough.

Here I will provide endcaps for the cylinders (i.e. 2x 30 m diameter caps). I will build the outer hull of the spin sections as armoured, but the inner surfaces and the cylinder they fold over as unarmoured.

The material value, including endcaps, is 241 for the armoured parts and 63 for the unarmoued.

Now, the effectiveness of advanced composite in SC is a typo. The boxed set calculated to an armour multiplier of x2, not x1. I will provide armour 10 at this value, which is armour 20 and the erroneous value.

The hull is by far the most expensive component.

14. Streamlining and Thruster Fuel

Nil.

15. Cargo Space

SC lists 21,728.3 m3 = ca. 21,950 m3 with bracing. The early versions I made had exactly this, but with multiple reactors this is reduced to ca. 18,000 m3 available.

16. Pylons

Nil.

Evaluation

1. Mass

The sum of components is 39,509.6 tons.

If built as per the Kennedy example the mass would drop to ca. 32,000 tons.

2. Drive Efficiency

Her speed, running light, given the above mass and a 300 MW NM drive is 3.44, and with a reasonable load an small craft remains above 3.25. Hence her tactical speed is 7.

3. Fire Statistics and 11. Firing Aspects of Weapons Mounts

She has 51 double mounts. Each is a x1+1dbl in a jack mount connected to its own target computer and equipped with UTES.

The arcs are set up thus:

One mount is placed in the nose as a chaser with the arcs forward (128)
Eight mounts are placed at the corners of the rear section. They are set up to fire rearwards (back four) or superfire over the accommodations section (front four). They thus resolve as 2x 123, 2x 345, x 567 and 2x 178.
The remaining 42 mounts are 21 per side. I'll place 7 along each side of the forward section and 2 banks of 7 each side of the rear section. Thus the arcs are 21x 234 and 21x 678.

This arrangement has 5 mounts able to engage forward, 4 aft and 25 along each broadside. It fits the basic hull form.

When fighting a heavily armoured target I will direct all the battery power to one side using the overpowering lasers rule. This will allow doing double damage (and penetration if you use such rules) and the cost of a 10% chance of a mount burning out (needing a DC roll to restore to action) and a 10% chance of a burnt out laser exploding (destroyed).

4. Comfort

0 for all quarters.

5. Cost

The total cost is MLv963.99 (964). This is in line with the suggestion she's a billion livre ship. Without one TC per mount, other interpretations of hulls etc. she'd be close to the cost in SotFA.

6. Reflected Signature and 10. Target Profile

The radial profile is that of a 30 m diameter circle, 707 m2 and so the effective reflection points is 141. Visible from the front are the sensors (44 RCS points assuming you pay for the redundant array) and 5 mounts (70 RCS) assuming that only mounts that can bear reflect. This gives her 255 RCS points from the front and a frontal signature of 6. The target profile is 0.

The lateral profile is 3,900 m2 which equals 780 RCS pts. The sensors all bear (44) as do 25 mounts (350) for a total of 1,174 RCS points, which is a signature of 10. The 3,900 m2 area equates to a target profile of +3.

7. Radiated Signature

With basic masking it is 7(8). Of course once screens are engaged the signature is 13.

8. Hull Hits

The volume of hull material is 4,883 m3. If the x2 multiplier is used the hull has 2,442 hits. A minor breach is suffered after 611 hits and a major after 1,121.

That's why we often adopted variant hulls.

9. Power Plant Hits

Each plant masses (with extras) 6,000 tons and so has 120 hits. Each takes 24 hits to knock out.

12. Armour Value

Assuming a x2 multiplier the armour is 10. If the misprinted x1 is retained it's 20 (and double hull hits).

Statistics
Design Date: 2285
First Example Laid Down: 2285
First Example Completed: 2293
Fleets in Service: France
Number in Service: 8 Commissioned before end of 2301, two out of Commission by battle damage (Richelieu, Tallyrand, Sainte Jeanne d'Arc, Charlemagne, DeGaulle, Clemenceau, Metternich and Napoleon). Two approaching completion in 2302 (Mitterrand, and Trochu), One laid down late 2301 (Pompidou) and two on order for laying down 2302 (d'Estaing and Chirac)
Streamlining: None
Performance
Warp efficiency: Approximately 3.44 light, ca. 3.30 with normal loads
Power Plant: 3x 150 MW Fusion
Fuel: nil (carried as cargo)
Range: 7.7 light years
Mass: 39,510 tons unloaded
Cargo Capacity: 1,800 cubic meters
Crew: 308 (48 bridge, 75 TAC, 64 engineering, 36 small craft, 50 security/troops, 5 stewards, 20 science, 20 medical); Passengers: 12
Comfort: 0;
Emergency Power: ?
Total Life Support: 320 for 180 days
Cost: MLv964 without ordnance (including multiple TC and paying for streamlining and workstations etc.)
Ship Status Sheet
Move: 7
Screens: 6
Radiated Signature: 7(8)
Radial Reflected: 6
Lateral Reflected: 10
Target Computers: +2 (all weapons);
Radial Profile: 0
Lateral Profile: +3
Armour:10 (or 20 if wrong value of armour multplier used)
Hull hits: 2,442/1,221/611
Power Plant Hits: 3x 120/24
Active: Two arrays, both 16 and backup
Passive: Two arrays, both 12 and backup
Other: Hangar space for 12 fighters (or landers)
Weapons
51 x1+1dbl lasers in jack turrets with UTES (1x 128, 2x 123, 25x 234, 2x 345, 2x 567, 25x 678)
Ordnance Load
16 Cells, each capable of taking 1x Ritage-2 or quadpacking 4x Ritage-1 (either PB or 5x2 det-warhead variant)
Other Sensors and Electronics:
Navigation Radar
DSS
Gravitational
Advanced Gravitational
Advanced Life

Crew Hits:
Bridge: 2x Captain, 2x Navigator, 2x Helm, 9x Engineering, 2x Communications, 7x Computer
TAC: 51x Fire Control, 8 Remote Pilot, 2x Active Operator, 2x Passive Operator, 12x Flight
 
Damage Control: 32 off shift engineers, plus 24 off-shift bridge and 5 stewards = 61

Cost Analysis
 
Now that's a battleship.
The major costs, even with paying for individual TC's etc., is the hull. The cost break down is:
 
Propulsion: MLv213.7 = 22%
Energy weapons and associated systems (inc. power): MLv238.91 = 25%
Hull and armour: MLv488.3 = 51%
Controls, sensors etc.: MLv23.05 = 2%




Thursday, 26 May 2016

Why SC missiles are not useful in major actions

Looking at the SC rules below is a table showing the probability of a missile surviving a burst of defensive fire.

Table 1: chance a missile (-4 target) survives a round of fire, based on hit bonus (crew quality, target computer and weapon accuracy) and number of turrets per incoming missile.

The upshot is any reasonably modern warship with a significant laser: incoming missile ratio will shoot down the bulk of the missiles in the fire phase. However all ships in the same hex as a detonating missile get another round of defensive fire if the missile commits to detonate. The ratios will change because in this salvo all the dead missiles are discounted.

Say your a single cruiser with a total of +5 targeting and can defend against 4 incoming missiles with 8 turrets. In the initial "normal" shots on average 25% of incoming missiles survive, leaving a single missile. This now faces a second round of fire at the 8:1 ratio, with a 0.39% chance of survival. To all intents and purposes the ship is immune to missile attack at this level.

The upshot is that in major fleet actions with significant warships missiles are almost useless. They of course force ships into close defensive formations to maximise defensive firepower, but not much more.

Now in minor actions with less gunned targets missiles do become useful. If your target is an Aconit and you shoot a pair of missiles she only has a single turret to defend against both (typically at +4), and so after the first shot there is a 40% chance both missiles are still inbound, and defensive fire in the detonation phase still has a 40% chance. There is a good chance of a missile getting through, a good chance if it does it will get hit, and a good chance if it does of wrecking the Aconit.

In a major action it's likely that you'd want to stack up and try and provoke the enemy to spend missiles attacking you whilst you put up a wall of flack. You might send out fighters to shoot down missiles etc., and try and husband yours. This is because if the missile is fired whilst the enemy is engaged in close combat then they have to choose between devoting their main fire to enemy ships or to missiles. The best use of missiles is probably to be threatening enough to force the enemy to devote their fire to them, and thus gain an advantage in the gunfight.

The best use of missile frigates like the Kennedy would thus be behind the main battlegroup, darting around, dodging missiles and throwing theirs into the fight. However, without a battlegroup fixing the enemy in a gun action the chances of inflicting damage are minimal.

Tuesday, 22 March 2016

Thoughts in French Major Combat Starship Production



When examining the “history” of 2300AD combat starship design there are turning points. One of the most significant is the development of starship fusion power and the deployment on the Ypres class (batch 1 Battle class) in 2259. Until this point everyone has been limited to fission reactors or turbine/ solar sail arrangements. The fusion reactor delivers twice the power to mass ratio of fission and requires fewer crew – it is (apparently) fully fuelled for decades and does not need reactor core changes like fission. It’s a much better technology.

Note this won’t examine low-end escort ships or fighters.

In 2259 the French have a monopoly on it. The question is how did these advances change their shipbuilding schemes. 

Let’s consider the pre-2259 warships available. The French we know built 50 MW fission powered, ca. 5-6,000 ton “destroyers” (destructeurs) and 160 MW fissioned powered “cruisers” (croiseur) of ca. 15-16,000 tons. The new fusion powered frigate (frégate) with their 150 MW fusion drives and ca. 10,000 tons are intermediates between these two ships – capable of possibly replacing both and doing the job better.

However, fusion reactors are expensive and supply is limited. If the French want to keep building numbers of hulls then perhaps it’s best to drop the “cruiser” for the new frigates, and if necessary keep building the destroyers.

Thus in the 2260’s the French stopped building large fission powered cruisers and built smaller fusion powered frigates with more capability. The first batch of five “battles” are the Ypres and in 2300-2301 these vessels are reaching the end of their lives, with only Ypres and Foudroyant remaining in French hands (the former is likely retired and sold off after the “Lone Wolf” incursion). The French continued building 150 MW frigates with a second batch (at least) of Battles (Castiglione and Austerlitz are deployed on the French Arm in summer 2301), and the Tonnant and Imperieuse (best translations being Thundering and Irresistible) follow different naming conventions to the Aconits at Aurore (Kersaint, Duperre and Vauqueiin are named after wet naval officers, Aconit is from the British Aconite, as in a British built Flower-class corvette manned by the Free French in WW1 and hence preserved).

Eventually fusion will become more available. The French Paladin class destroyers (sold off, including 3 to Ukraine as Kiev class) are roughly contemporary to the Ypres, as is Constellation class cruiser (sold off as Konstantin to Ukraine). No further cruisers were built but destroyer production continued with an upgraded version of the Paladin (Héros class) being built in parallel to the Austerlitz class. What was the Maréchal we must ask? I suggest that she was a version with a 150 MW fusion reactor built in the early 2270’s.

With fusion reactors becoming more available the French adopt the idea of a double sized frigate or grande frégate (“big ship” in English). Hence the Amiral class (of which Suffren is the lead ship of batch 1) making a huge leap in capability. Within five years of finishing the lead 300 MW frigate the French make another plunge to the “triple frigate” with the Statesman class (Richelieu being the lead ship).

Here it seems the French had need of hulls and couldn’t switch entirely over to the triple frigate – double frigate production continued apace with a second batch of Statesmans laid down during the CAW. The French government may have built a glut of these vessels as war production as at least 11 “cruisers” (i.e. double frigates) and probably 12-15 were built (assuming no CAW or WoGR losses, which is reasonable as neither could match them). If the French LD one per year from 2278 with 3 year build times then the program terminates in the early to mid-2290’s. We likely have say 3 Suffrens (pre-CAW programs, one sold to Japan and two killed at Tithonus), 3 Suffren II’s (Commissioned during the CAW) and then war lessons will cause lessons to be incorporated, along with advanced technologies (advanced composite hulls for example, a major leap akin to moving from simple steel to facehardened Krupp). Previously I’ve used the RN BC program as a guide and suggested 4 Tigre class (war program) as a solid 300 MW big frigate using full NM tech. Then a pair of Résolutions which parallel advances made with the Statemans. After this have the French go slightly crazy after observing the American Kennedy program and building a trio of superfast but unarmoured 300 MW frigates (Gloire class) in the early 2290’s (WoGR emergency program), before deciding to concentrate entirely on “triple frigates”.

Meanwhile, the destroyer program is churning out 150MW solid combat ships designed only for fighting in batches of six – 6 Soldat class, then 6 Patrie class and finally the Paris class of which 3 are in Commission in 2301 and 3 building. The next class with be Arcturus class.

The “superfrigate” by 2301 is building the third batch of five rather than three (the 3x 300 MW vessels that would have been built are instead an extra 2x 450 MW vessels), with 5 in service in summer 2301 (six built and Commissioned, one heavily damaged and effectively lost).

Reactor Production

This suggestion requires a major expansion of French fusion reactor production in the mid to late 2270’s. This is likely when production gets commercialised, and I suggest that the French reactor production didn’t expand fast enough and so with the coming of the CAW the French shared the technology with the major industrial concerns in allied states (like Trilon in America) and contracted for a lot of reactor sets.

Frigate
Program
Destroyer
Program
150 MW
Reactor equivs
2300-2305
5x new
450 MW vessels
Arcturus class
21
2295-2300
5x new
450 MW vessels
Paris class (6)
21
2290-2295
3x Gloire (300MW),
3x Richelieu (415 or 450 MW)
Patrie class (6)
21
2285-2900
Tigre (4)  and
Resolution (2)
Soldat class (6)
18
2280-2285
Suffren (6)
Marechel (6)
18 (9
per 5 yrs)
2275-2280
2270-2275
Tonnant (5)
Hero (6)
5
2265-2270
Austerlitz (5)
5
2260-2275
Ypres (5)
Paladin (6)
5

Thursday, 10 September 2015

What does a stutterwarp physically look like?

Just supporting evidence against the rewriting of the stutterwarp.





Drive bay of a French Aconit class escort



Drive on a LC-20

Drive bay of a US Hampton class escort