Missile Launchers on Ships

[phavoc]

One thing that has always bugged me was the strict limitation on the mounting of weaponry on a starship - especially how Traveller has always treated missiles.

Taking up precious turret space with a missile launcher is just insane. The easiest way to create a launching system IMHO is to go with a VLS (vertical launch system) that would allow you to launch as many missiles as required (or that you can control if you are using terminal guidance and control from the launching ship). So a Free Trader going into somewhat risky territory (greedy bastards! looking at risk to increase profit margins) might mount say 12 cells of missiles to port and 12 cells to starboard. These should be sufficient to ward off most poorly-equipped pirates. There's no actual need to split up your missile battery, except for the idea of damage taking out your entire battery. Firing the missile at a target should be quite simple - eject the missle and either have onboard thrusters fire to orient towards the target before lighting off your motor, or attaching a small device at the bottom of the missile that does the same thing (similar to say an ASROC torpedo). I don't think under any of the Traveller systems that missile launching mechanisms accelerate the missile out of the tube before firing its on onboard motor.

Reloading the missiles is something that could only be done out of combat, perhaps even at a shipyard for non-military ships, but its a relatively straightforward task. Most merchants aren't going to be running around with a large missile magazine anyways (well, cept for PC controlled traders...).

 

[Gentleman John]

I've always treated the rules in Traveller that hardpoints represent available surface area to mount a weapons array and fire director, complete with power lines and comms leads, while turrets are merely the machinery and weaponry. What they look like is up to the referee/players.

So, a laser turret is merely a couple of lasers on a traversing mount, while a missile turret is more akin to the traversing missile launchers seen on naval destroyers or (for a more sci-fi bent) on the SHADO mobiles or the God Phoenix. If you want your missile turret to look like a set of VLS bins, that's fine. Some gearheads might object on the grounds that it would require too much surface area, even though the volume of the missiles would be the same. But, if it can still only launch up to 3 missiles per turn (for a triple turret) then there is no real mechanical difference, imo.

Personally, I think a missile bay is closer to a VLS as it also gives the increased firepower and takes up more volume/dtonnage than a turret, but that's my take on things.

Whatever reduces the density of your transport below the density of the medium in which it travels.

 

[phavoc]

Actually the idea is to be able to launch MORE missile's per turn, up to the maximum number that you could control. So if you had 2 sets of 12 VLS launcher cells, you could ripple-fire the entire cell, so instead of 3 missiles per turn incoming towards your target you now have 24. It is more like a Ticonderoga class cruiser today (the 2nd version), where all missiles onboard are housed in a compact VLS launch section. So while more deck space is taken up, the amount of space is the same, or less, since you no longer have to worry about a feeding mechanism.

There should be plenty of hull area on most ships to mount your sensors. The actual surface space is relatively small, since the missiles theirselves do not have much of a surface area head-on.

I've always treated the rules in Traveller that hardpoints represent available surface area to mount a weapons array and fire director, complete with power lines and comms leads, while turrets are merely the machinery and weaponry. What they look like is up to the referee/players.

So, a laser turret is merely a couple of lasers on a traversing mount, while a missile turret is more akin to the traversing missile launchers seen on naval destroyers or (for a more sci-fi bent) on the SHADO mobiles or the God Phoenix. If you want your missile turret to look like a set of VLS bins, that's fine. Some gearheads might object on the grounds that it would require too much surface area, even though the volume of the missiles would be the same. But, if it can still only launch up to 3 missiles per turn (for a triple turret) then there is no real mechanical difference, imo.

Personally, I think a missile bay is closer to a VLS as it also gives the increased firepower and takes up more volume/dtonnage than a turret, but that's my take on things.

Whatever reduces the density of your transport below the density of the medium in which it travels.

 

[Patron Zero]

I fully agree with the VLS deployment, much simpler to allocate 'dead space' to house missile packs as well as locate such such to more damage control- friendly areas of a ship.

One example of lost-unused space is on the CT Gazelle Class Close Escort, if one looks at the aft section there are two parallel 'gaps' between the ship's hull and the drive hulls. All too easy to fit in two banks of VLS missiles and upgrade the vessels offensive-defensive capacities with just such a minor refit.

Also I see such missile packs being loaded for specific mission ordnance, such as anti-missile configured local defense projectiles of 'chaff' or ECM packages or even bomblet dispensing rockets.

Not to simplify such sophisticated systems but I think of missile packs and their respective ordnance as one might consider the variety of shells available to a modern day shotgun. Some loads work better in specific situations than others and the more exotic the load, the less such will be effective in broad usage.

 

[Paladin]

Actually the idea is to be able to launch MORE missile's per turn, up to the maximum number that you could control. So if you had 2 sets of 12 VLS launcher cells, you could ripple-fire the entire cell, so instead of 3 missiles per turn incoming towards your target you now have 24. It is more like a Ticonderoga class cruiser today (the 2nd version), where all missiles onboard are housed in a compact VLS launch section. So while more deck space is taken up, the amount of space is the same, or less, since you no longer have to worry about a feeding mechanism.

The concept is logical, but then the game turns into Robotech anime with swarms of missiles resulting a ridiculous amount of money being spent on ammo/point defense/and dramatically "unfun" results when your ship is blasted to smithereens in a single round of combat.

 

[phavoc]

Haha! Too True! Imagine Rick hunter in a Fat Trader kited out with 120 tons of missiles!!! However, I think that common sense and some keeping up with the concept of reasonableness by the GM would eliminate most of that. Civilian ships should never pack them into the hull plates are bursting - but a few would make sense for the merchant going into a dangerous zone.

Though with High Guard coming out, such a lauch system does make more sense for "missile" cruisers.

But think of it this way - having missile swarms finally makes having lots of 10-ton fighters around make lots of sense. They are your first line of defense against missile attacks.

Actually the idea is to be able to launch MORE missile's per turn, up to the maximum number that you could control. So if you had 2 sets of 12 VLS launcher cells, you could ripple-fire the entire cell, so instead of 3 missiles per turn incoming towards your target you now have 24. It is more like a Ticonderoga class cruiser today (the 2nd version), where all missiles onboard are housed in a compact VLS launch section. So while more deck space is taken up, the amount of space is the same, or less, since you no longer have to worry about a feeding mechanism.

The concept is logical, but then the game turns into Robotech anime with swarms of missiles resulting a ridiculous amount of money being spent on ammo/point defense/and dramatically "unfun" results when your ship is blasted to smithereens in a single round of combat.

 

[tneva82]

but a few would make sense for the merchant going into a dangerous zone.

And how few you are thinking that triple turret with three missile launchers isn't sufficient enough representation while not resulting in missile slugfest?

 

[Patron Zero]

I think a good referee should be able to sort out practical considerations for a vessel's offense-defense needs from the well given example of a Macross missile slugfest !

 

[phavoc]

I'd say about a dozen missiles would be adequate for a free trader in such an area. Being able to put out a heavy missile salvo would tend to keep all but the most interested corsair away from you. It would also free your own turrets up so they could be beam/sand, giving you more defensive options.

but a few would make sense for the merchant going into a dangerous zone.

And how few you are thinking that triple turret with three missile launchers isn't sufficient enough representation while not resulting in missile slugfest?

 

[hdrider67]

I'm more of a tube launch guy, so VLS makes sense to me.

Just because you have a 12 missile VLS, doesn't mean you necessarily have to swarm all of them in a round. It's bad practice to fire your entire inventory in a single round. What if you screwed up the fire solution and your entire missile inventory missed the target, leaving you defenseless?


Still, getting 12 missiles out of a 2 hardpoint ship seems to be hard to justify since it would unbalance the system a bit. If you're going for a salvo of twelve, it's going to require bay weapons IMTU.

I'm going to offer tubed fire but the hardpoints will represent the fire control available for max launches. A 100dT ship will still only have fire control for a single launch of three missiles maximum.

Tubes decrease drag, so a turret never made perfect sense to me on a streamlined ship, anyway (save popups).

 

[SSWarlock]

..It's bad practice to fire your entire inventory in a single round. What if you screwed up the fire solution and your entire missile inventory missed the target, leaving you defenseless?

That's when a 50/50 mix of gunner-guided and "smart" missiles comes in handy.

Still, getting 12 missiles out of a 2 hardpoint ship seems to be hard to justify since it would unbalance the system a bit. If you're going for a salvo of twelve, it's going to require bay weapons IMTU.

Keep in mind missiles cost CrImps. Quite a few free trader captains would cringe at the hit to their bottom line. But I'm with you on salvos requiring a bay configuration with the caveat that if the ship's computer is acting as a gunner controlling multiple missile launchers then it can launch all such missiles under its control as a salvo. This gives a PC crew an additional tactical decision to make; i.e. have the computer fire everything in a salvo/barrage or use bio-gunners instead if they have higher gunnery skills.

Tubes decrease drag, so a turret never made perfect sense to me on a streamlined ship, anyway (save popups).

But if Traveller ships use a grav-based maneuver drive then a ballistic entry into atmo isn't necessary, making drag less of an issue. Of course, gas-giant skimming still makes drag a serious consideration.

 

[hdrider67]

I always assumed there was some form of ballistic entry, since the ability to land easily depends on being streamlined. I just assumed that turret drag would be rather undesirable in situations like that.

 

[phavoc]

I wouldn't reccomend blowing your entire missile load in one salvo, no. Unless it was the only way to live, or if you didn't he would swat them out ouf the sky.

..It's bad practice to fire your entire inventory in a single round. What if you screwed up the fire solution and your entire missile inventory missed the target, leaving you defenseless?

That's when a 50/50 mix of gunner-guided and "smart" missiles comes in handy.

Still, getting 12 missiles out of a 2 hardpoint ship seems to be hard to justify since it would unbalance the system a bit. If you're going for a salvo of twelve, it's going to require bay weapons IMTU.

Keep in mind missiles cost CrImps. Quite a few free trader captains would cringe at the hit to their bottom line. But I'm with you on salvos requiring a bay configuration with the caveat that if the ship's computer is acting as a gunner controlling multiple missile launchers then it can launch all such missiles under its control as a salvo. This gives a PC crew an additional tactical decision to make; i.e. have the computer fire everything in a salvo/barrage or use bio-gunners instead if they have higher gunnery skills.

Agreed. Missiles aren't cheap, so players won't be blowing through them like they are nothing. combat in general is expensive. Besides, blowing up a corsair means no salvage

Tubes decrease drag, so a turret never made perfect sense to me on a streamlined ship, anyway (save popups).

But if Traveller ships use a grav-based maneuver drive then a ballistic entry into atmo isn't necessary, making drag less of an issue. Of course, gas-giant skimming still makes drag a serious consideration.

 

[Patron Zero]

Perhaps I'm wrong but I would assume there's not a 'generic' one-size-fits-all missile that's a standard size, weight, etc to be housed in said VLS systems or standard turret based launchers.

One might think that 'defensive' missiles might be smaller than a mightier, meatier 'offensive' projectile, that said would not the launcher 'magazine' hold more of said diminutive weapons ?

 

[Gentleman John]

In MT as it currently stands, there are only two types of missile: ship guided and smart. That's it. Apart from that they are identical. I haven't seen the new High Guard yet, so I can't comment on what that adds.

Previous versions of Traveller have had different missiles. CT had a modular construction system available in Mayday, TNE and GT had full construction systems with all that entails. My personal favourite was the CT modular system as that was easy to utilise, although the TNE and GT systems were more "realistic" in that there was no guarantee that one set of missiles would fit in a given missile launch system - although most manufacturers will build to a standard set of dimensions irl.

 

[Infojunky]

Sports fan y'all realize that reloading a VLS system is an IN port activity.

Also who says that the launcher in a turret mount has to be a rail mount?

Heck you call it a 9 cell launcher with a control capacity of 3 actives.

 

[starfleet]

We know from the previews that HG adds Torpedos including Nukes and Bomb Pumped X-Ray.. Plus nothing stopping you really from designing your own which is what i've been starting to do for a lot of stuff, mainly because at present (ie no High Gaurd) we don't have anything but what's in the core etc.

 

[phavoc]

It isn't a necessarily in-port activity. There are many variables that would leave the issue up for discussion. One might say loading torpedoes into a submarine would be an in-port activity, but that's been disproven during WW2. You could easily have a mechanical ejection system that would eject the missile without all the messy cleanup from propellant burn off in an enclosed space. Alternatively, you could have pre-packaged missile pods, much like a US Army MLRS system where the launcher crew can rapidly replace the missile pod by dropping it out and loading another. Though that kind of gets away from the base concept of a VLS system, its still somewhat analagous.

A VLS system allows for a rapid ripple-fire effect of your missile load. By definition a 3 space turret only allows for you to fire 3 missiles at a time.

Sports fan y'all realize that reloading a VLS system is an IN port activity.

Also who says that the launcher in a turret mount has to be a rail mount?

Heck you call it a 9 cell launcher with a control capacity of 3 actives.

 

[klingsor]

I believe the canon is for a slow, non ballistic atmospheric entry. Gravetics make so many things much simpler and this is one of them. Slower, no communication blackout, the ability to change course and less mass required for expensive, life limited heat shields. The ability to change ones mind is also pretty nice!

I would rule as a GM that standard missiles could not enter an atmosphere mostly to stop the PCs from trying to use them for this! I think it makes some sense though given the background. Legally missiles are there for ships to defend themselves with, not launch ortillrey strikes! It would be a rather harder to find purpose built missile that would be required. From orbit even a warhead might not even be necessary, ½MV^2 is all you need when you are dropping something streamlined with guidance from orbit. Such missiles might well be cheaper than ship-to-ship missiles, they need much less thrust.

Remember the hard point limit is artificial, so there is really no need or reason to argue about it despite the attractiveness of the arguments. As to a VLS system I that is pretty much how I see a missile bay. Whether it is all cells or has a reloading mechanism is just a matter of how you see it – and whether you have any cargo space allocated to reloads or not.

For small ships the hard point seems to be a turret socket to which you can add any standard turret. Presumably an old Vilani standard that has been warmed over by the Terrans ("IS-58658658-34356-36365 Starship ordnance Mounts" or whatever). This could be a slot in VLS system for a 3-missile launcher but is more likely just a turret as you can swap weapons relatively easily. Save VLS for the big boys of the navy.

 

[starfleet]

What i find intresting here is that Starfire's 3rd novel has something very simular in the last big battle against the 'Bugs' as they are called.. (first book of Stars at war II)..

The ships have basically 1 shot launchers, this means of course that once they have shot their 'Wad' so to speak they have to withdraw to reload because it has to be done manually and externally, but it also means that they can fit a ton more launchers in because you don't have to worry about the 'reloading' equipment for reloading on the fly.. saves a lot of tonnage when all you have is a tube that basically lets the missile shoot.

The other thing is that unless i'm mistaken (and i just checked and I'm not) bays which are 'internal' for the most part still use a hardpoint.. this puzzels me slightly as how is a 'bay' really any diffrent to say an area for a landing craft etc? really it's not, all your doing is putting it on the hull and letting it face out..

But anyway lets say the VLS is a bay only weapon, well we'll your scout isn't likely to be packing much in the way of a 50ton bay but say a 500 ton ship could pack 2 bays (100 tons of it's total structure, it should still be able to have a semi decent cargo) or even 1 bay. Then say that either it costs a load less for a One shot (hence force O.S) launcher or that it has 1/2 again the amount of Tubes simply because you don't have to worry about the reloading mechanizium.

So rather then 12 missiles maybe it shoots 16 or rather then 12MCr it only costs 8MCr..

Now the draw back of course is that once you have shot it's wad you have to actually take the time to manually reload it.. From the EXTERIOR of the ship.. which would be in my mind at least a 6-12 hour job and if your doing it in space that's an EVA or 2 (most likely 2 given the limitations on basic suits life support).. I'd also say it's a difficult task and requires you to do a Zero G and either a Mechanical or a Gunnery check for each missile being loaded..

That means that yes you have a strong 'one shot' weapon but not one that is going to be over powered.. yeah you might 'surprise' the pirate, but unless all 12/16 of those missiles hit and incapacitate him your gonna be in a world of hurt..

I'd also look at allowing a smaller version of it that costs 1 - 5 tons (more then a turrent yes because your mounting it in the hull most likely) and has 3 - 5 tubes.. as well as a 1 shot 'External' launcher that is simply bolted onto a turrent carries a few extra missiles tubes in exchange for being able to reload.

Again all of these would require MANUAL reloading so it couldn't be done in combat..

An example of it would be..

Far Trader Echo's Gambit has 2 hardpoints normally and 64 tons of cargo space in it's clean design.. Josh the owner of Echo decides that he wants a triple turrent with 2 lasers and a sandcaster he can afford that so he looses 1 ton of space for that.. and it costs him 3.25Mcr for that turrent and it's weapons.. He also wants some 'long range' punch but he's a little tight on cash, so he decides he'll buy himself a O.S Missile system, it'll use a little more tonnage (3 tons we'll say) but he can get himself a 5 shot O.S missile launcher for 1Mcr far cheaper then he'd be able to afford in a turrent.. this means that he has:

2 x Beam Lasers
1 x Sandcaster

in turrent 1

and

One Shot Missilerack (5)

in turrent 2's location

it costs him 4.25MCr for the weapons and 4 tons of his cargo space (dropping him to 60 tons of cargo space)..

Now Josh then jumps into System Beta and is jumped by a pirate who has a real Missile rack, 2 lasers.. in the first round the pirate moves in and fires off a missile at him which josh manages to shoot down, he in return uses his O.S missile rack firing 5 missiles back at the raider who luckly manages to shoot down 2 but 3 get through inflicting some decent damage but not taking out it's missile launcher.. It shoots back again and this time Damages josh's turrent staying at missile range.

Josh tries to shoot back with his damaged turrent but missiles with everything..

The pirate shoots again etc etc etc..

The point here is that the One Shot system isn't gonna change the balance in the long run, Josh 'skimped' to get a cheaper system with more 'punch' or so he thought on the first shot, but he's now no longer got that system while the pirate can happly shoot from range until his ammo is gone..

Lets say that josh manages to flee or get a few lucky shots in with his damaged turrent and the pirate turns tail and runs.. Now as well as 'repairing' his damage, Josh also needs to spend a good 6 - 12 hours doing EVA to manually reload his one shot launcher durring which he's got to cut actually boosting (he can coast at what ever thrust he had but hey you don't want to be boosting and have something go wrong really your getting faster every second after all).. until that is done that weapon system is useless and if that pirate comes back with friends before the 6 - 12 hours is up.....

So yeah I don't think the one shot system is unbalanced ..