Solomani Confederation (Military)

[Condottiere]

SC Courier: This is a small fast starship that is placed at the deposal of SolSec or Party officials for promoting the Solomani Cause. Fuel and maintenance are available for free at Solomani naval bases. An additional budget of up to Cr10000 per month is also available to pay for crew and life support expenses. All unused budget funds revert to the Solomani treasury. The ship is provided with few strings attached but it remains the property of the Solomani Party or SolSec. The Traveller may be asked by the SolSec or the Party to perform diplomatic or fact-finding missions on occasion. Should they ever demonstrate disloyalty to the Cause, SolSec will make an effort to retrieve the vessel. Multiple rolls of SC Courier instead add a further Cr10000 per month to the upkeep budget.

Travellers who receive an SC Courier may instead take a standard Type S Scout/Courier from the Traveller Core Rulebook.

 

[Condottiere]

Also, probably whatever is the space equivalent to fishing trawlers.

 

[Condottiere]

Advanced Combat Rifle, Assault Rifle and Advanced Projectile Weapon


At TL9 and higher, weapon designers can use advanced technology to improve a weapon’s overall performance without affecting weight or bulk – effectively wringing more out of the same weight and volume of weapon. Advanced Projectile Weapons cost 25% more than conventional projectile weapons but weigh 10% less. They have a Physical Signature one level lower, and range is 25% further.


1. We're going to assume that the technological level ten advanced combat rifle is the beneficiary of this feature.

2. Damage is the same at three dice.

3. But range is vastly increased.

4. Let's assume the Solomani variants have the same dimensions and calibre.

5. You can use the assault rifle bullet in an advanced combat rifle, but use the assault rifle range.

6. You could use the advanced combat rifle round in an assault rifle, but risks the increased propulsive force blowing up the receiver.

7. Cased ammunition is cheaper.

8. It may also permit longer storage than caseless.

9. While assault rifle ammunition costs fifteen bux per thirty, and advanced combat rifle ammunition fifteen bux per forty, you might be able to leverage the two, possibly three, technological levels difference in manufacturing for a discount.

 

[Condottiere]

Advanced Combat Rifle, and Gauss Rifle

1. The gauss rifle would be the default sidearm for the Confederation and Imperium militaries.

2. I would assume the same for the Hivers and Zhodani.

3. I wouldn't know about the Aslan and the Vargr.

4. Logic says that the gauss rifle would be more maintenance intensive, which wouldn't be an issue for most interstellar militaries, with access to extensive machine shops and armourers.

5. In theory, the cost of both types of ammunition are the same, though you'd think that a simple pellet would be a dime a dozen.

6. The difference of two technological levels allows the user to apply more force, more quantity, more accurately, further down range, in about the same ratio when you compare assault rifles and advanced combat rifles.

7. It is clear that any gauss based weapon system is a military weapon.

8. The advanced combat rifle is too effective not to be considered a military weapon.

9. The assault rifle in the fifty seventh century would be in a grey area, at best a paramilitary weapon, but highly likely dependent on it's legality on local jurisdictions, that could easily classify it as civilian, in about the same category as a hunting rifle.

 

[Condottiere]

Assault Rifle and the Intermediate Rifle Round

1. You could probably reinforce the assault rifle to be compatible with the Advanced Projectile Weapon.

2. Whether this required a refurbishment at technological level nine facility, I couldn't say.

3. You could isolate the intermediate rifle round, and build a firearm around it with an internal magazine, with a lever or a bolt action system.

4. Since automating a semi automatized firearm isn't impossible.

5. However, the assault rifle would represent little threat to law enforcement in an interstellar society.

6. In firearm terms, it is an ideal multipurpose tool, whether for hunting, sports, or personal protection.

7. Range falls within a sweetspot that most combat engagements take place, including, I suspect, in the fifty seventh century.

8. Large capacity magazines are available.

9. In the military sense, I think it would take over the spot held by submachineguns.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

1. Back to one of my favourite hobby horses.

2. The reason that navies would prefer supercarriers is supposed efficiency in scaling the size of the air group.

3. Since we tend to use the Imperium Navy as the yardstick for most naval matters in Traveller, a lot of comparisons tends to be based on those designs and likely doctrine.

4. Three hundred fighter/smallcraft appears to be the optimum number, with three launch tubes.

5. Hundred kilotonne fleet carriers seem to stand in for our concept of super carrier.

6. Battleship carrier concept is conceptualized by the semimegatonne Tigress class.

7. Standard heavy fighter remains a fifty tonne smallcraft.

8. Are there larger carrier carriers, with greater numbers of smallcraft.

9. Possibly, probably, and plausibly.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

A. I conducted a quick review of canonical Imperium starwarships, and was kinda surprised.

B. It was either light ten tonne fighters or heavy fifties.

C. A launch tube could clear a hundred fighters in an hour.

D. Two per hundred 'craft tends to imply you're in a hurry to get them out.

E. Groupings tend to be thirty, eighty and a hundred.

F. Docking clamps don't seem popular.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

G. Eighty 'craft is about the size of composite group for a super carrier.

H. It also seems to be the comfort zone for command and control.

I. Eightyish to a hundredish might be the normal number of 'craft for most dedicated carriers.

J. Thirtyish for a starwarship with a carrier capability.

K. Three hundred might in turn require really specialized control personnel and dedicated command facilities.

 

[ColinD]

If you had another Solomani Confederation Supercarrier versus an Imperial CruRon, how do your think it would go?

 

[Condottiere]

Depends on how the writers or the Confederation would define one.

For some reason, they were termed fighter carriers, the Midway class weighed in at two hundred kilotonnes with fifteen hundred thirty tonne fighters; modern ones are only mentioned as having between two to four hundred fighters.

The American super carriers may actually be able to outrun any warship capable of damaging it, it's classified and the one time an ex Navy nuclear engineer brought it up in conversation, said that when they practiced it, it left the rest of the escorts eating their dust.

Traditionally, Traveller carriers tend to have an acceleration of two, which means they can't make a run for it, they'd have to jump.

Let's say the average cruiser squadron has about four fifty kilotonne cruisers, and no fighter screen. Their objective would be to close with the enemy carrier as soon as possible, and unleash their spinal mounts; if they get the range, and keep closing, and the carrier can't jump, it's over.

Let's assume the carrier matches tonnage at two hundred kilotonnes; likely it has enough tertiary armament and point defence that missiles or ordnance aren't likely to damage it; secondary armament such as bays would keep destroyers at a respectful distance.

So it's a question whether the heavy fighters are enough to mission kill the four cruisers, if not destroy them.

At the optimum end, using current rules, fifteen hundred thirty five tonne fighters should wipe out four cruisers, because you can make called shots and damage the manoeuvre drives; and you could have a thousand concentrate on one cruiser at a time.

Once the manoeuvre drives are knocked out, the other cruisers have to decide whether to continue or stay concentrated; in one case, they can't close the distance to the carrier, in the other, they won't enjoy the combined defensive fire power covering each other, so they could be taken out separately.

At the other end, you have two hundred heavy fighters from a one hundred kilotonne fighter carrier, which would have the same number of firmpoints as the thirty fiver.

In theory, the fighters have the advantage if they manage to get into dogfight range, because they can just empty their missile magazines within six minutes, using the current rule set, contrasted as to actually where the energy weapon systems of the cruisers could draw the extra power needed for each shot in each dogfight round.

 

[ColinD]

I would like to run this battle!

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

L. Usually, you have one corresponding recovery deck per launch tube.

M. Recovery rate is one 'craft per six minutes, so ten times slower than the launch rate.

N. You can have multiple recovery decks, though I would suppose you tilt the ratio only if you expect to need to make a quick getaway, or it's more important to scramble the aerospace group.

O. I'm a little sceptical that you can combine several recovery decks to take in a larger 'craft.

P. I would suppose you could put four together in a cube, though recovering four 'craft simultaneously would indicate that the approach might be in four different orientations, if you assume that the floor would be used to guide in the 'craft, and that individual recovery equipment is anchored to each wall.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

Q. The Confederation Navy might have thought that while attaching mass numbers of smallcraft to docking clamps in a dispersed structural hull would be a good idea.

R. In theory, you could have a mass release of fifteen hundred fighters in eighteen minutes, and they could all reclamp in another eighteen minutes.

S. Despite the fact that this requires minimal acceleration (as in slight manoeuvring in place only), I tend to view this as ending in a mass traffic jam.

T. Launch tubes allow a controlled release, and recovery decks a controlled recovery of smallcraft, while both are under acceleration.

U. There probably is an optimal distance between docking clamps that would allow a mass launch; recovery would likely be as each fighter has the opportunity to return.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

V. If you use a docking space directly connected to the hull, it takes six to eighteen minutes to launch or recover a smallcraft, accelerationless.

W. A full hangar would needs two to twelve minutes to launch or recover a spacecraft, presumably accelerationless.

X. In theory, you could store a spacecraft in an empty weapons bay.

Y. In practice, you'd have to tie it down so that it doesn't move about, increasing the time it would take for recovery and launch.

Z. If, by some coincidence the configuration of the weapons bay matches that of the spacecraft, you could probably only need ten percent extra space; if not, at least hundred percent.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

1. Antebellum Confederation Navy would appear to have only four types of dedicated carriers.

2. Fighter, pocket, troop, and light troop.

3. The Midways and Zhukovs are dispersed structures, which probably under the then prevailing ruleset took advantage of instant mass release, which on reflection I don't think is feasible.

4. Hussar class light troop carriers probably would have a launch tube under the current design rules, with thirty dropships, and what I perceive is the implication that the preference is for fast launch.

5. Pocket carriers were conceptualized to give a fighter screen to fleet units, with acceleration factor five and jump factor three.

6. The problem is, that at forty to fifty fighters, that really wouldn't be enough for a Fleet Squadron, though conceivably enough for a Strike Squadron.

7. It's stated that the Confederation Navy either had pocket or fighter carriers, implying that there was nothing in between.

8. In my opinion, they should have constructed light carriers with around an eighty 'craft aerospace group, but it might have made sense, somewhat, then.

9. I do get the impression that since it's a concept established a very long time ago, it's worked, at a minimum as an add on component to their strike groups, that, presumably, it allows the design of cruisers (battle and otherwise) without an organic fighter wing.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

A. Promethii and Texii have an organic fighter component.

B. The Texii have ten ten tonne light fighters, which in the commerce raiding role, don't necessarily need a running start to attack slow moving merchantmen.

C. The Promethii have twenty thirty tonne fighters.

D. It would be a bad idea for a line of battle ship to come to cut acceleration in order to either launch or recover fighters, since you have to assume that in either case you could be in the range of the enemies' weapons systems.

E. Twenty fighters are too small a group for a dedicated launch tube.

F. Fifty could be about the optimum per launch tube, taking half an hour to clear out.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

G. Moving on, the Zuiho class weighs in at twenty five kilotonnes with apparently four wings of three squadrons, made up of eight Kestrel fifteen tonne light fighters.

H. Or equivalent 'craft to take up two kilotonne hangars.

I. Two recovery decks rated for one hundred twenty tonne spacecraft.

J. Sixteen fifteen tonne launch tubes are mentioned, but eighteen hundred total comes out as twelve only.

K. As usual, always recalculate all spacecraft statistics to ensure accuracy.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

L. Traditionally, fighter squadrons in Traveller are bundled as ten 'craft, which I suppose made accounting easier.

M. Eight hints at a Teutonic take on this.

N. Two fighters combine into a rotte, two rotte into a schwarm, and two schwarm into a staffel.

O. A gruppe would be three (or four) staffeln.

P. A geschwader has three plus gruppen.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

Q. The Zuiho aerospace group is around the hundredish 'craft size, if a dedicated Jagdgeschwader.

R. Unlike the Luftwaffe, the aerospace component would be subordinate to fleet commands, so there would be a certain size it wouldn't be feasible to create units for.

S. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that for an interstellar navy, eight is too small a grouping for a fighter squadron.

T. An aerospace group could be assigned to each Fleet Squadron, under the command of a [Group] Captain.

U. Each fast dreadnought would have it's own organic fighter wing, somewhat composite, led by a [Wing] Commander.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

Q. At this point, I realized I ran out of ranks.

R. [Flight] Lieutenant would lead a flight, but since Lieutenant [Commander] is a brevet rank for me, squadron and squadron leader are suddenly left in limbo.

S. On the other hand, rotte is basically section, element, cell, or division, and division is a subunit of a (navy) squadron.

T. So I could make (aerospace) squadrons semi permanent collections of assigned flights from permanent wings, and you can assign colours to identify them.

U. Sections, or cells, would be two to three 'craft, and flights, two to four sections.