Missiles in 2300

[Sigtrygg]

It was a suggestion to fix YOUR ISSUE

So it remains an issue since your fix doesn't work for me.

According to what?

real world electronics for one, the technology of the setting for another.

These AI are under human supervision

but not always... the robots especially have considerable autonomy in MgT2300

Where do you get the rule that they are Sentient your adding your house rule now and in no way do we have Sentient computers give me an actual example?

You haven't played Bayern?

 

[Sigtrygg]

Then if you don’t like 2300 anymore quit playing. This is a game nothing more nothing else even those who claim it’s hard sci-fi are wrong.

Is that really your answer to everything - don't like it so quit?

How can it be wrong for people at the time to describe it as hard sc fi? And it was hard sci fi, so you are wrong to say that. It is the current version that has drifted into soft sci fi/sci fantasy.

How about I adapt it with real world and plausible future technology (ie hard sci fi) to improve it. The game as it stands now is self contradictory, what with expert software, robots, cyberware, TL11 and 12 computers and yet weapon control electonics that was out of date by the 1990s.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Create your own game and setting all I’ve every seen you do complain about the games

Nah. I like the game just fine, it just needs a bit more oomph.
You don't get to tell me what to like, what to play, and you only see what you want to see. I complement Mongoose Traveller regularly, doesn't mean I can't disagree with how they choose to do some things, call out canon conflicts, or suggest improvements as I see them.

 

[tytalan]

real world electronics for one, the technology of the setting for another.

So there’s examples of real world electronics being jumped in and out of real space? Give me a citation

You haven't played Bayern?

How do you define sentient? And no I haven’t don’t need too the tech rules don’t allow for actual sentient computers in the setting

 

[tytalan]

Nah. I like the game just fine, it just needs a bit more oomph.
You don't get to tell me what to like, what to play, and you only see what you want to see. I complement Mongoose Traveller regularly, doesn't mean I can't disagree with how they choose to do some things, call out canon conflicts, or suggest improvements as I see them.

You like it yet you criticize everything about it. “ Mind people’s actions not there words for actions will illuminate the lies” your actions says different than your words. Disagreeing on a few things is you like the game but think is need so modification, attacking every aspect of the game says you hate the game and are here just to criticize it. Your actions support the latter.

 

[Bryn the 2300AD guy]

So it remains an issue since your fix doesn't work for me.

real world electronics for one, the technology of the setting for another.

but not always... the robots especially have considerable autonomy in MgT2300

You haven't played Bayern?

The intent of the author (Wm. Connors) was communicated on twitter. The central computer is literally a "brain in a jar." It's not an AI but a tortured human brain.

 

[tytalan]

How can it be wrong for people at the time to describe it as hard sc fi? And it was hard sci fi, so you are wrong to say that. It is the current version that has drifted into soft sci fi/sci fantasy.

Considering I’m not a fan of Miller to begin with and rather something is “Hard” or “Soft” scifi is primarily a matter of opinion I really don’t believe in the Hard/Soft categorization. David Webers Honor books can by one measure be considered ‘ hard’ yet could also be considered ‘Soft’ there is no fixed rules. So is 2300 ‘Hard’ Sci-fi that’s a matter of opinion some would say FTL and Inertialess Drives would make it soft scifi. I for one want to play a RPG not write science papers. There are ways to make drones make sense but instead fixing things you want to scrape large chunks of the game to fit your ‘Hard Sci-fi’ opinion.

I honestly hope mongoose never listens to what you want done to 2300 and Traveller because they will not be either of those after your done.

 

[Sigtrygg]

So there’s examples of real world electronics being jumped in and out of real space? Give me a citation

That's not even how stutterwarp works lol. Try again once you understand the technology of the setting.

How do you define sentient? And no I haven’t don’t need too the tech rules don’t allow for actual sentient computers in the setting

Well then don't speak about that which you know nothing of. The author of Bayern likely knows the setting better than you.

 

[Sigtrygg]

The intent of the author (Wm. Connors) was communicated on twitter. The central computer is literally a "brain in a jar." It's not an AI but a tortured human brain.

Shame that is made up afterwards and not in the adventure itself. It also contradicts what is written in the adventure itself.

Can you reference anything in the adventure that even hints at this, because the Ship's Computer section in book 2 p62,63 has no hints at all of it.

"One of the most unusual members of Bayern’s crew is Aristotle, the ship’s simulated intelligence. Affectionately known as ‘Ace’ by the crew, this machine is one of the most advanced data processing devices ever built."

"Aristotle is not self-aware but puts on an incredible simulation."

"Aristotle is a learning computer able to modify its own program as the mission progresses. Part of the reason that its program seems so lifelike and sophisticated is its complexity; millions of items of holographic programming interact to produce the seemingly lifelike responses. As the mission progresses Travellers will begin to notice that it gradually seems to be adopting even more lifelike traits."

Doesn't sound much like a brain in a jar being tortured (which is a trope I have seen in many a sci fi novel)

"Although the main computer has been compromised, Ace, the ship’s simulated intelligence, has not. Ace runs on a separate, firewalled set of hardware."
"It has yet to move against Ace’s hardware, as the two computer cores are co-located in the forward hull and the virus does not want the
possibility of damaging its own hardware before it destroys the ship."

I could quote a whole lot from Gambit, but the upshot is the scenario as presented has Ace being an electronic machine.

 

[tytalan]

That's not even how stutterwarp works lol. Try again once you understand the technology of the setting.

It works by Quantum tunneling which is the next best thing or would you prefer I call it micro teleportation? You avoided the answer where your citation of electronic being teleported?

Well then don't speak about that which you know nothing of. The author of Bayern likely knows the setting better than you.

Which version are you referring to and their ample of cases of a adventure author not knowing the setting all that well.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Considering I’m not a fan of Miller to begin with and rather something is “Hard” or “Soft” scifi is primarily a matter of opinion I really don’t believe in the Hard/Soft categorization.

Then why bring it up? Maybe you should stop playing his games and settings then. It was and is the wider rpg community that labelled 2300 as harder sci fi than classic Traveller.

David Webers Honor books can by one measure be considered ‘ hard’ yet could also be considered ‘Soft’ there is no fixed rules.

There is no hard science at all in the HH books. What is considered hard sci fi is worthy of many an essay, but the usual definition is breaks the fewest laws of known physics.

So is 2300 ‘Hard’ Sci-fi that’s a matter of opinion some would say FTL and Inertialess Drives would make it soft scifi.

The original had stutterwarp and fusion power plants. The fusion power plant is theoretically possible, so gets a hard sci fi pass, the stutterwarp is preposterous. The beanstalk is debatable depending on material science advances. It really gets the hard science label because there is no artificial gravity.
Alien races makes it soft sci fi too, although they were some of the best aliens in an rpg to that date.

I for one want to play a RPG not write science papers.

Then do so, but if you want to play science fiction games you need to know some science...

There are ways to make drones make sense but instead fixing things you want to scrape large chunks of the game to fit your ‘Hard Sci-fi’ opinion.

Not at all, the only thing that would change is the reduction of the penalty to hit a drone or missile gets, I'd have to playtest it to determine what ifs fun at the table. I like the vast majority of the setting, even the cyberware, augmentation, genetic engineering. I am not a fan of the emphasis given to the kafer war as the setting has the potential to be so much more.
I am really glad they did Bayern, but would like to have seen more original setting material before the kafers take over (much like the FFW ruining a setting)

I honestly hope mongoose never listens to what you want done to 2300 and Traveller because they will not be either of those after your done.

I very much doubt they will listen to me, or you for that matter.

The game, and its settings, are theirs to do with as they wish. The previous canon still exists, so I can mix and match T2300, 2300AD, MgT2300 and many other games to get the game I want at my table. You can do the same.

 

[Sigtrygg]

It works by Quantum tunneling which is the next best thing or would you prefer I call it micro teleportation? You avoided the answer where your citation of electronic being teleported?

What ever it is it does not work by "quantum tunneling" as the authors invented. A little pop sci knowledge is a dangerous thing lol.
Your "give me an example of real world electronic quantum tunneling" is disingenuous; it is a made up fantasy element to the game, and I am referring to how electronics in the real world and the setting work.
There is no evidence what so ever in setting of robots, computers, electronics or cyberware being adversely affected by the magic tech of stutterwarp, they appear to be able to cope easily enough by syncing with stutterwarp frequency.

Which version are you referring to and their ample of cases of a adventure author not knowing the setting all that well.

The Mongoose version, but see what Bryn has had to say on the matter.

 

[phavoc]

There are no "fleet escorts" because there is no assymetric threat to defend against. 2300AD "escorts" are there to protect convoys against attack. The fleet ships typically do not travel with them. Missiles and fighters effectively act as the screen of a fleet.

Currently, naval vessels have three different media to contend with - subsurface, surface and air. Each of these needs different sensors, different weapons, and there are specialised vessels to attack and defend in each of these media. Task forces need all of them working as a team.

In 2300AD space combat there is a single media - space. For weapons we only have three:

1. X-ray lasers. Long ranged (2 light-seconds) and accurate, capable of engaging all targets. The lighter ones are starting to struggle against very heavy armour, which may long term lead to heavier lasers whose major drawback is simply increased mass (mostly from increased power plant size).
2. Particle beams. No range difference in the rules, but the physics say they should have shorter ranges. Hard hitting and capable of penetrating armour, but inaccurate with a large to hit penalty.
3. Nuclear bomb pumped "lasers." No range difference in the rules, but the physics say these should have much shorter ranges. Very, very hard hitting but are expended in the attack. A small ship hit with a nuke is likely out-of-action.

These can all be mounted on ships, fighters or missiles, if large enough (nukes being launched from ships and fighters on chemical rockets to clear the launchers blast radius before detonating). The Ritage-1 mounts a particle beam (explicitly stated in the canon writeup) and has some sensors, whereas the Ritage-2 has a big nuke but no sensors. The small sensors are best explained as a form of semi-active homing, wherein the mothership is illuminating the target, and the missile can generate a target solution based off that data. The Ritage-1 is basically used as a skirmisher for fleet units, whereas the Ritage-2 is there to strike at medium to close ranges, probably as the "first volley" going into a gun action.

The real problem is that a fully-independent missile needs to have all the stuff a fighter does on the hull, such as sensor arrays. For the same cost you can have a much more capable manned fighter. Indeed, manned fighters are incredibly effective, as long as they are designed well.

Let me note - IRL passive sensors give no range data. To range a target requires an active sensor (i.e. a radar or laser rangefinder). For solving a target solution, range data is so crucial that attacking with only passive data is likely impossible. For a laser the attacker is firing several seconds ahead of the target (i.e. 10,000's of km). With a missile the lag can be huge.

The reason why any shooting is possible is the "pseudo-momentum" and "pseudo-inertia" generated by the gyroscopic effect of the stutterwarp. Warping ships resist turning, and resist changes in stutterwarp rate. If you can project a course and lead the target, then the enemy will likely be roughly there. For the same reason missiles should struggle to adjust their courses.

Sure, space isn't the same as surface/subsurface and air environments - but that's not really been the issue. While each of those environments requires different forms of sensors, spacecraft in Traveller have IR, radar, Lidar, gravitica and other forms of sensors to detect things. It's an integrated environment, but also 360. Different, but essentially the same thing at this level of discussion since we aren't delving into specifics between them.

Again, not being terribly knowledgeable in 2300 fleet weapons, from what you describe above, the particle beams are the "main guns" while the x-ray lasers are the secondary armament. Traveller is similar, as is the real world. There's nothing stopping 2300 naval flotillas from having starships as escorts - the OHP frigate of the USN was designed as a general-purpose warship that was able to detect and engage subsurface, surface and air targets. Ship specialization is possible, though some navies prefer to build general purpose warships more than specialized ones. Much depends on their intended missions as well as the budgets of the navy involved. Smaller navies don't have the luxury of specialized ships (generally speaking) unless they are specifically intended to operate with other groups whose ships will fill in the operational gaps that they cannot do, or do not do well.

Fighters work ok in general, but are short-legged and require a mothership. Deploying missiles works ok too, but they are even more short-legged and you'd only do so when expecting combat. Operationally having escorts works equally well in all tech levels and environments as the missions remain the same regardless of the tech.

I'm not sure what you mean about a fully independent missile. Pilots are given mission parameters as much as missiles are given targeting parameters. Computers can certainly be given logical choices - though humans have an innate ability to think outside the box that computers don't, so in some ways they are superior (and in others, inferior - computers never get bored and don't play on their phones when they should be working...

I mostly agree with the active/passive sensor comment, though there are some exceptions to usage of them. Active sensors are the preferred method for determining range information, though passive sensors can still provide you with enough detail for weapons engagement. The old Mk1 eyeball is passive, but when connected to the Mk1 brain it can estimate all kinds of things using only passively gathered information. Good passive sensors will be able to give you the same info and allow you to engage the enemy with weapons - though you may not know they are 1,029 km distant. In space you can be talking easily about 10s of thousands of kilometers, and depending on the situation you may not be able to engage a distant enemy with passive sensors only. Detection is possible, but not a target lock for some types of weapons. And space, being a vacuum, is terrible for area-effect weaponry.

A missile need not be able to turn in space except for it's orientation if it's a stand-off weapon. A bomb-pumped laser could engage a ship as long at it was within its' warhead range. Traveller ship combat ignores a lot of physics to make ship combat possible (tracking newtonian movement in 3D for gameplay really sucks).

 

[Bryn the 2300AD guy]

Wouldn't this be the reason that probe drones would exist? To give multiple datapoints and baseline that could be hundreds of kilometers. So, say 1,000km apart (laser communications to stay coordinated, not give away their positions, and constantly knowing the exact range between your ship and your probe drones), that would give you accuracy at (by your math) about 1,000,000km. The computing power to calculate range from that data is available today, so in 2300 it should be even easier.

You've introduced huge numbers of additional variables, but also you now have multiple stutterwarping vessels. An oddity of stutterwarp is that stutterwarping vessels struggle to communicate with each other. Signals are sliced up and for meaningful communication to occur a whole lot of stuff has to happen with neither side unable to maneouvre. Typically, if you really want to "talk" then all ships need to disengage their drives. If you can't do this then (per Challenge 30)::

"Thus, the second method is a quite complex system which is used commonly on many military vessels. When such a vessel wishes to transmit a message to an object which is relatively stationary, it sends the message along with a pulsed signal which gives the ship's exact cycle rate and velocity vector relative to a standard inertial reference point. The receiver then runs the transmission through a computer which decodes the ship's vector information signal (called a DDB for Dynamic Data Burst) and corrects for any distortions. Now, if the stationary receiver wishes to transmit a signal back, it sends out its response in a chopped form fashioned for the ship to read with no computer assistance; that is, unless they have changed their heading, speed, or cycle rate since their initial transmission. The same mechanics apply to two ships using stutterwarp, except the initial message is just the DDB. The receiver ship reads the DDB and alters its cycle rate slightly to mesh with the transmitting ship's. It then sends a confirmation signal that it is ready to receive and meaningful communication can occur."

Essentially, a ship can transmit to a missile, as long as the missile doesn't change course or speed, but the missile cannot transmit back (if it had a transmitter) because it doesn't have the ships vector information, unless the ship isn't maneouvring. Comms are very tight beam and need processing to account for stutterwarp effects.

This is the reason why Triumphant Destiny's flagship stayed back at Beowulf - if stationary it can talk to the ship commanders. However, when USS Columbia made a run at it, it forced the Kafer Delta to spin up the drive and severed fleet communications. All Kafer ships were then individuals.

Note, this might not apply to very short range broadcast comms, but a broadcast rather than tightbeam signal attenuates quickly, and likely needs a lot of power.

The probe will probably work, as long as you aren't under drive...

Active sensors or passive sensors, the computer must still extrapolate a course and a point of aim, but by your own argument, passive sensors receive data 3 times faster than active sensors, so the data from the passive sensors is more up-to-date and therefore more accurate. Might need to rethink that. Passive sensors should be accurate, but making them more accurate than active sensors seems kind of off.

Passive sensors have no range component. All you have are polar coordinates. You need a range component to resolve a target solution if aiming from the mothership.

However, using proportional navigation, rather simple logic is needed for a collision (as long as the missile can "see"the target), but this isn't great for a bomb-pumped nuke. You'll still need to range for the attack. It would work for a proximity detonation. Given that adjacent range is 100 km on Mongoose a missile will cross this distance in milliseconds. A simple proximity nuke works better, and is potentially far deadlier.

With nuclear weapons in space, there is no blast wave, just a massive burst of X-rays and gamma-rays. Gamma passes through light material doing relatively minor damage (although high doses kill people).* X-rays interact with the electron shells of material, causing explosive effects by flashing matter to a plasma if close enough. A nuke going off 10 m from a ship would instantly destroy it, whereas one 100 m away would only do surface damage and 1 km away would hardly be noticed. Inverse square law...

* 100 Gys, an insta-kill dose would equate to 14 kJ of gamma radiation striking a person, as I calculate here.

Anyway, the point is that missiles can use the pronav algorithum to strike targets. That's how guided weapons work today - they simply adjust their course so the bearing to the target is constant. That means they're part of a collision triangle and they will intercept. When to explode is handled by a fuse, and the sensor does not need to know the distance, only the bearing.

 

[tytalan]

Then why bring it up? Maybe you should stop playing his games and settings then. It was and is the wider rpg community that labelled 2300 as harder sci fi than classic Traveller.

Wrong miller check out the guy who first came up with Hard Scifi as a category

Then do so, but if you want to play science fiction games you need to know some science..

No you don’t if you think this your wrong I’ve ran plenty of game of Traveller at conventions with people that didn’t know and science. The only thing you need to know is how to RP and be able to learn the Game system. That’s your problem you want to remove the fun in favor of forcing people to have a science degree.

What ever it is it does not work by "quantum tunneling" as the authors invented. A little pop sci knowledge is a dangerous thing lol.
Your "give me an example of real world electronic quantum tunneling" is disingenuous; it is a made up fantasy element to the game, and I am referring to how electronics in the real world and the setting work.
There is no evidence what so ever in setting of robots, computers, electronics or cyberware being adversely affected by the magic tech of stutterwarp, they appear to be able to cope easily enough by syncing with stutterwarp frequency.

No you change your argument, like you said it’s a made up effect which means you have no justification to say that it doesn’t interfere with computers and electronics. A minor effect could easily make robot control combat drones less effective.

By the way here the quote from book 3 on what the shutter warp drives “ On August 18th of that year, a team led by Dr. Emile Jerome induced a microscopic quantum jump on a complete hydrogen molecule.” Microscopic quantum jump is close enough to quantum tunneling it’s still teleporting.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Okay. Sounds like I just don't have a good enough grasp of the system. Thanks for the info.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Wrong miller check out the guy who first came up with Hard Scifi as a category

How about you indicate that you are talking about the person who is credited with the term rather than the game designer.

No you don’t if you think this your wrong I’ve ran plenty of game of Traveller at conventions with people that didn’t know and science.

I am sure you have, and I am sure they had fun. A game with you must be so entertaining.

The only thing you need to know is how to RP and be able to learn the Game system.

The science fiction game system...

That’s your problem you want to remove the fun in favor of forcing people to have a science degree.

Not at all, I want it to be fun but within certain parameters dictated by the setting paradigms.

No you change your argument, like you said it’s a made up effect which means you have no justification to say that it doesn’t interfere with computers and electronics.

No, I am sticking to my argument, you are the one who brought up the preposterous. Within the setting there is no evidence that stutterwarp interferes with onboard electronics, computers, cybernetics, software or robots. If I have missed something please show me.

A minor effect could easily make robot control combat drones less effective.

It could, but it is not in the rules as written. It's a house rule you introduced to explain a rule I don't like, I just change the rule. Rule zero.

By the way here the quote from book 3 on what the shutter warp drives “ On August 18th of that year, a team led by Dr. Emile Jerome induced a microscopic quantum jump on a complete hydrogen molecule.” Microscopic quantum jump is close enough to quantum tunneling it’s still teleporting.

It's also in game technobabble. Quantum tunneling involves overcoming energy barriers, which can be explained in a couple of ways, either as a consequence of the wave nature of "particles" or as a consequence of uncertainty are the simplest.

A more "plausible" explanation would be to generate a alqubieree warp bubble that moves the ship slightly that you then cycle to achieve the speeds the game requires.

By the way it is stutterwarp, not shutter warp.

 

[Bryn the 2300AD guy]

Shame that is made up afterwards and not in the adventure itself. It also contradicts what is written in the adventure itself.

Can you reference anything in the adventure that even hints at this, because the Ship's Computer section in book 2 p62,63 has no hints at all of it.

Mongoose Project Bayern by Gavin Dady is a rewrite of the GDW Bayern module by Billy Connors. This in itself expands on a Challenge article "Flight of the Bayern" by Rob Caswell which expands on the AR-I article by Tim Brown. They all have areas of inconsistency with each other. Primarily, how stutterwarp discharge worked was redefined between "Flight" and "Bayern," which was written for Traveller: 2300 (and has rules and branding in the main text for that edition), but published around the time of 2300AD.

Interestingly, there were four logos for the GDW stuff, which correspond to 4 major eras, and Bayern was a 2300 era book released just into 2300AD:



1. Traveller: 2300

Only two products had the Traveller branding, the original 1986 rulebook, and Energy Curve (dated 1987 on the cover, but '86 inside). The latter's serial number indicates the second adventure, but I think it came out first (Lester W. Smith has since blogged that Beanstalk was supposed to be first but had overran and his first job was to get it out). Tracking by Challenge issues, the boxed set is released Q4 1986, and Ch27's JTAS section has an early Richelieu on the cover, with French Tricolor, and the 2k3 content is in the JTAS section.

Challenge 28 (Q1, '87) still has T:2k3 in the JTAS section and the ad is only for the boxed set. Ch 29 and 30 (Q2 and Q3 '87) keep the T:2k3 branding but the JTAS section has been replaced by Traveller, T:2k and T:2k3 sections

2. 2300

The rebrand, dropping "Traveller" from the name, happens around Challenge 31 (Q4, '87). Interestingly, there are the original T:2k3 ad for the core book, and a 2300 branded ad for the upcoming Colonial Atlas and Kafer SB. The branding was a simple zoom in, to cut out the "Traveller" of the branding.

The 2300 branding lasts to Ch 32 (Q1, '88), so maybe six(ish) months. Seven products would be launched with 2300 branding in this period: Beanstalk, Kafer Dawn, Mission Arcturus, Nyotekundu Sourcebook, Aurore SB, Star Cruiser and Ships of the French Arm. All were dated 1987.

3. 2300 AD

Challenge 33 (Q2, '88) contained the new name, and an ad for the new boxed set, along with the module Bayern and the Ground Vehicle Guide. It also included what is, I think, the first outside contributed 2k3 article (Davout). Ch 34 (Q3, '88) discusses the revision, and has an ad for Invasion with the old T:2k3 boxed set in the art. Ch 35 switched to bimonthly (Oct-Nov, '88) has the 2300 AD boxed set and Equipment Guide advertised. Ch 38 (Apr-May '89) gives us ads for Ranger, Bayern and Earth/Cybertech.

4. Gold Border 2300 AD

There was a minor restyling of the logo with the cyberpunk stuff. The move in this direction was announced in Challenge 40 (Aug-Sept '89), and the Ch 43 (Feb-Mar '90) announced Tim Brown was stepping back from Challenge and being replaced by Julia Martin, which appears to have cemented the cyberpunk shift, with an ad for Deathwatch Program's Feb '90 release.

The new logo was only included in Deathwatch Program (Feb '90) and Rotten to the Core (mid-'90).

---

 

[Bryn the 2300AD guy]

the OHP frigate of the USN was designed as a general-purpose warship that was able to detect and engage subsurface, surface and air targets.

Ca. 1970 the USN had fleet anti-submarine ships were which were designated destroyers (DD), and convoy escorts which were designated ocean escorts (DE). The Perry was the DE of the Spruance DD/ Perry DE high-low pair. She was not designed for fleet work but for convoy defence and was equipped with lower grade sensors and weapons, although some of each was provided (unlike previous DE's).

The USN had a battle force based around CV(N)'s, with each carrier group having a CG(N) for surface action (almost all late WW2 ships with some turrets replaced with missile launchers), a pair of DLG(N)'s (frigate, a large anti-aircraft vessel) and some DD's (specialised anti-submarine vessels). DE's were not part of a carrier group, but rather were assigned to protect convoys, auxiliairies and amphibious landing ships.

In the MSIF, the Aconit fit the role of a Perry, Knox, Brooke or Garcia DE. A general purpose convoy escort, but not one with a high capability in any area, having been built as the low part of a high/low mix.

The "big ship" concept which produced the Suffrens (100 MW for tactical systems, 200 MW for drives) and Richelieus (115 MW for tactical systems, 300 MW for drives) envisioned ships powerful enough to operate independently or as the core of a TF. These fulfil the roles of CG and CV. In the middle, the capable "normal" ship is probably based around a 150 MW fusion plant* and uses either 75 or 100 MW for the drive, leaving 75 or 50 MW for tactical systems. One of the oldest types is in SotFA - the Ypres class had a 150 MW fusion plant, 100 MW for drives and 50 MW for tactical systems, and is called a frigate. She'd be the equivalent to a DLGN frigate.

The "destroyers" are likely the 75/75 MW versions, a bit slower but more heavily gunned.

We don't have need of different anti-air, anti-sub etc. ships, but I've assumed things are moving towards more drone and missiles, and especially fighter carriers are starting to appear, and they are extremely powerful units that only the two most powerful nations, France and Britain, have.


* Fusion reactors have a minimum size of 150 MW (ca. 500 dTons) this creates a minimum size for fusion vessels.

 

[phavoc]

You've introduced huge numbers of additional variables, but also you now have multiple stutterwarping vessels. An oddity of stutterwarp is that stutterwarping vessels struggle to communicate with each other. Signals are sliced up and for meaningful communication to occur a whole lot of stuff has to happen with neither side unable to maneouvre. Typically, if you really want to "talk" then all ships need to disengage their drives. If you can't do this then (per Challenge 30)::

"Thus, the second method is a quite complex system which is used commonly on many military vessels. When such a vessel wishes to transmit a message to an object which is relatively stationary, it sends the message along with a pulsed signal which gives the ship's exact cycle rate and velocity vector relative to a standard inertial reference point. The receiver then runs the transmission through a computer which decodes the ship's vector information signal (called a DDB for Dynamic Data Burst) and corrects for any distortions. Now, if the stationary receiver wishes to transmit a signal back, it sends out its response in a chopped form fashioned for the ship to read with no computer assistance; that is, unless they have changed their heading, speed, or cycle rate since their initial transmission. The same mechanics apply to two ships using stutterwarp, except the initial message is just the DDB. The receiver ship reads the DDB and alters its cycle rate slightly to mesh with the transmitting ship's. It then sends a confirmation signal that it is ready to receive and meaningful communication can occur."

Essentially, a ship can transmit to a missile, as long as the missile doesn't change course or speed, but the missile cannot transmit back (if it had a transmitter) because it doesn't have the ships vector information, unless the ship isn't maneouvring. Comms are very tight beam and need processing to account for stutterwarp effects.

This is the reason why Triumphant Destiny's flagship stayed back at Beowulf - if stationary it can talk to the ship commanders. However, when USS Columbia made a run at it, it forced the Kafer Delta to spin up the drive and severed fleet communications. All Kafer ships were then individuals.

Note, this might not apply to very short range broadcast comms, but a broadcast rather than tightbeam signal attenuates quickly, and likely needs a lot of power.

The probe will probably work, as long as you aren't under drive...



Passive sensors have no range component. All you have are polar coordinates. You need a range component to resolve a target solution if aiming from the mothership.

However, using proportional navigation, rather simple logic is needed for a collision (as long as the missile can "see"the target), but this isn't great for a bomb-pumped nuke. You'll still need to range for the attack. It would work for a proximity detonation. Given that adjacent range is 100 km on Mongoose a missile will cross this distance in milliseconds. A simple proximity nuke works better, and is potentially far deadlier.

With nuclear weapons in space, there is no blast wave, just a massive burst of X-rays and gamma-rays. Gamma passes through light material doing relatively minor damage (although high doses kill people).* X-rays interact with the electron shells of material, causing explosive effects by flashing matter to a plasma if close enough. A nuke going off 10 m from a ship would instantly destroy it, whereas one 100 m away would only do surface damage and 1 km away would hardly be noticed. Inverse square law...

* 100 Gys, an insta-kill dose would equate to 14 kJ of gamma radiation striking a person, as I calculate here.

Anyway, the point is that missiles can use the pronav algorithum to strike targets. That's how guided weapons work today - they simply adjust their course so the bearing to the target is constant. That means they're part of a collision triangle and they will intercept. When to explode is handled by a fuse, and the sensor does not need to know the distance, only the bearing.

Huh, did not know about the transmission issue. Did 2300AD explore the idea of synchronizing the stutterwarp drives of multiple ships so that their phasing periods were the same? I don't recall all the granularity of stutterwarp and its timing, but something like that would work.

One could, if you knew the general parameters of the stutterwarp cycle, transmit your signal to the ship in larger blocks (i.e. if your ship was in stutterwarp every other second, your message would be broken up into blocks where each block was say 3 seconds long, so that no matter what the ship would get the block while it came back into real-time space). Kind of similar to how you can break up a data file into blocks and each block is tagged and you can reassemble the blocks non-sequentially to receive the entire file as you get the final pieces.