Solomani Confederation (Military)

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

Q. Essentially, what we're going after is a heighliner.

R. Half would be used to sustain sector navy depots from the strategic naval reserve.

S. The other half would be deployed forward, mostly facing the Imperium, basically the four Carrier Squadrons per sector.

T. In between, jump shuttles carrying single pods.

U. Militarily, mass at the point of contact, and logistically, economies of scale.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

V. Pods and secondary hulls should be fifty hundred and one tonnes, twenty five kilotonnes, fifty kilotonnes, and hundred kilotonnes.

W. If we can keep the tonnage of the tender itself to one hundred seventy and nine tenths kilotonnes, we could have three attached pods of hundred kilotonnes each.

X. We could subdivide it into five twenty five kilotonne fuel shuttles, and a primary hull of forty six and nine tenths kilotonnes.

Y. Or, exchange in a hundred kilotonne fuel barge, and the primary hull becomes seventy one and nine tenths kilotonnes, with three cargo pods and a fuel pod.

Z. Probably could squeeze in a command module in there somewhere.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

1. It's an interesting question as to the size of the battle rider.

2. The Imperium Navy has the fifty kilotonne Hadrian class with a factor three meson, which is about the ideal tonnage for a large enough spinal mount and close quarters.

3. It depends as to what you want to use the battle riders against.

4. Fifty kilotonnes allows twice the number of hundred kilotonne spacecraft.

5. But that also depends on the allocated number of spacecraft.

6. It seems there are two battle rider squadrons per sector, probably both for the Confederation and the Imperium.

7. Who knows what the ponies and the roaches have for naval doctrine, though I suppose we'll soon know for the Zhodani, since a Frontier War supplement is in the works.

8. The Vargr are both unlikely to have the capacity to build large battle riders, and at the same time, incentivized to have them (hint: control).

9. As regards the Aslan, if you have two squadrons per sector, only the most powerful clans are likely to have even one squadron.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

A. Doing some more preliminary calculations, I find that I can't fit in a three parsec range and three hundred kilotonne pods.

B. Originally, I envisioned a Carrier Squadron with one tender holding a Carrier Division of three hundred kilotonne battle riders, another tender a hangar, an assault, and a logistics pod, and possibly a third just with three logistics pods, or whatever else is needed.

C. Factor three meson is about what I expect the Victory class to have.

D. The hundred kilotonne Murat class has a factor four meson, but lots of large bays.

E. I think I'd rather cripple a battleship with one shot at long distance.

F. I'd commit the battle riders only against a strategic world, or when you have the enemy's primary combat formation pinned.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

G. In theory, being cheaper individually than an equivalent jump capable starwarship, you'd be more inclined to use them.

H. In actuality, the setting indicates they are limited to two squadrons per sector.

I. At about five battle riders per squadron.

J. So you're pretty much incentivized to keep them as large as viably possible.

K. The Imperium seems to like fifty kilotonnes, and Solomani Front indicates that the Confederation likes stuff in hundred kilotonne lots.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Carriers

L. If I'm back down to two hundred kilotonne pods per tender, then for a battle rider squadron, it could start to resemble a Fleet Squadron.

M. Two battle riders form a Carrier Division (with the tender).

N. Three Carrier Divisions form a Carrier Squadron, like three two fast dreadnought Fleet Divisions make up a full Fleet Squadron.

O. Normal Carrier Squadron configuration could be a hangar and an assault pod each per Division.

P. Basically, they'd be committed for planetary assaults, and assuming the planets are strategic, the Imperium would commit their primary combat formations there.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

V. An interesting question with modularization and podularization is how far you can cluster hardpoints together.

W. With podularization, since it's external, it follows normal rules, in that if you cluster three hardpoints, the pod has to be at least three hundred tonnes.

X. Turrets and bays are inherently modular, and essentially it's an internal swap of equipment, already supported by the hull.

Y. Modules make this a bit more murky, since as an internal swap, you don't expect it to structurally support the hardpoint, though logic would indicate so.

Z. Logic would indicate that a module that would hold a firmpoint should need at least be five tonnes, and a hardpoint hundred tonnes.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

1. Since military operations short of war might prefer precision weaponry, capital turrets, despite the increased cost, including hardpoints, might be preferred.

2. Problem being, minimum is five kilotonnes for a small one.

3. Pop up mounting, or retractable mounts, might be more optimal for a streamlined hull; also, less bellicose.

4. I presume that barbettes are large turrets built to be more streamlined, considering they appear to be substantially larger than normal turrets, and have more volume comparatively to turrets than necessary.

5. Bay weapons would be regressed.

6. Weapon systems, though not spinal mounts, are modular.

7. Speed of swapping out, and cost, would be a minor refit, one tenth of the cost and time, calculated by megabux times days.

8. Easy enough for a laser drill at fifteen kilobux per, and twenty one minutes and thirty six seconds.

9. Though you might have to include the cost of the fixed mounting or turret platform in that; I suppose it depends if you take a holistic view.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

A. The weapons loadout would depend on time and place.

B. That may be too glib.

C. In wartime, there's going to be a lot of corner cutting, and the easiest to manufacture weapon systems would be installed on normal turrets, since the expected opposition are going to be other escorts, smallcraft, commerce raiders, and so on.

D. In peacetime, you could afford to have pop up turrets with the latest weapon systems, though opposed by the Treasury.

E. Here you might run into the difference between a member navy that just needs to patrol the local system, and the Confederation Navy exerting it's presence.

F. The lack of externally visible weapon systems conveys a narrative of peacekeeping, besides making it easier (presumably) to fly through an atmosphere.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

G. One tonne quad turrets cost double that of a default turret and become available at technological level twelve.

H. Pop up are technological level ten and add a tonne and a megastarbux.

I. Comparatively, a twenty tonne technological level twelve dedicated point defence system eliminates four to twenty four missiles automatically, average fourteen.

J. A technological level twelve beam laser (plus four) quad set up (plus three) would be effect minus difficulty, with accuracy (plus one), average seven.

K. Technological level eleven (plus four) triple turret (plus two) would be average five.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

L. Gatling point defence laser platformed on point defence turret.

M. Half tonne point defence turret (plus two), and Gatling (plus two at adjacent and close ranges).

N. Average three; damage two to six, versus four to nine (quad), and three to eight (triple).

O. However, three power points, versus eighteen (quad), and thirteen (triple).

P. One megastarbux, versus four (quad), and two and a half (triple).

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

Q. Heavy point defence laser platformed on point defence turret.

R. Medium range at three half dice damage and three power points, at one and a quarter megastarbux.

S. Technological level thirteen customization with very high yield, full nine points of damage per hit.

T. Technological level twelve dual laser point defence (plus one) with accuracy customization (plus one, platformed on point defence turret (plus two), average three at close and adjacent range.

U. Technological level fourteen gatling point defence laser (plus two), customized with accuracy (plus one), platformed on point defence turret (plus two), average four at adjacent and close range.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

V. The primary hull may need to be capped at nine hundred ninety nine tonnes.

W. I don't think that one more or less hardpoint matters, which can be substituted with upto three firmpoints.

X. How far can you podularize the hull?

Y. I'm going to go with three quarters, like modularization.

Z. Can ... include the bridge, power plant, drives or any structure or armour options.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

1. There are no examples of pods with manoeuvre or jump drives.

2. To be fair, I rather doubt that the designers considered this.

3. With a jump drive it probably doesn't matter.

4. A manoeuvre drive would need to be positioned in order to be able to freely accelerate, without interference from the hull's configuration, or other intervening components.

5. Also, would need to be stapled down so that it doesn't break free from any possible push.

6. Self contained control centres supposedly based on the area of control, in terms of volume and cost.

7. Given examples appear to contradict this, or the writer was careless, not distinguishing between what would be a shipwide function, and one confined to the pod itself.

8. Pods should be uniform, in volume and configuration.

9. If we assume that seventy five percent is maximum podularization, that would be seven hundred forty nine and a quarter tonnes.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

A. Podularization and modularization take up the same space.

B. In other words, seventy five percent is the maximum for both options.

C. You could, however, modularize your pods upto seventy five percent of their volume.

D. You can't podularize modules, however.

E. And podularized modules cannot ... include the bridge, power plant, drives or any structure or armour options.

F. Switching out modules with weapon systems, would not be considered minor refits.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

G. Podularization should allow modular construction in the sense that they are either in stock, or can be built simultaneously.

H. Modularization offers the same, but internally.

I. Assuming engineering aren't constructed on site (maybe adjacent), that tends to cover most major ship components.

J. Bridges tend to be rather standard in size, so they could be dropped in

K. It would be wiring up the hull, and integrating the systems that would be needed to be done at the shipyard.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Patrol Ships

L. Since podularization has no ship component restrictions, we can revise our expectations.

M. The spacecraft can be divided into four parts, the fourth being the primary frame that holds everything together.

N. The first would be the forward bridge section, that's attached in front.

O. The second would be the engineering section, screwed in the rear.

P. The third would be the mission pod, which would, for convenience, be situated in the belly.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Spinal Mounts

1. Likewise, their construction is a closely guarded secret. Meson weapons are generally removed from decommissioned warships and sometimes replaced with a particle accelerator.

2. Most are based upon a design patented by Instellarms, which spent a colossal amount of money developing the weapon.

3. Only a handful of specialist manufacturers produce meson guns and these are not used by the Imperial Navy. Most are destined for planetside defence installations.

4. It's not that the Confederation Navy can't procure particle accelerator spinal mounts, it's more that it's not worth the effort.

5. Having a limited number of homogenous meson guns simplifies procurement.

6. And apparently, you can control who gets them.

7. Replacing a spinal mount is a major refit.

8. Removing these components costs 0.5 times the cost of the original system, while removing them and then installing new ones costs 1.5 times the cost of the new system. The time this takes is one quarter of the time required to build a new ship of the same size as described in Construction Times on page 8.

9. Removal is fifty percent of the cost of the original component; removal of the original spinal mount, and replacement is one hundred fifty percent of the new spinal mount, plus I assume the cost of the new spinal mount, which is two hundred fifty percent in total, based on the cost of the new spinal mount.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Spinal Mounts

A. Chances are that factor one particle accelerators are somewhat easy to obtain, for navies that want them for their cruisers.

B. Replacing equivalent sized meson guns, or even just the need to replace them through damage, seems massively expensive.

C. I don't think that the Confederation Navy would dismantle, or replace, a meson gun from a functional starwarship; more that any transfer to a member world navy is just going to have an enhanced Solomani Security presence onboard.

D. Probably a lot less to do with industrial (or any other type of) espionage, than keeping a weapon of mass destruction from the hands of revolting factions, or opportunistic Aslan clans (who might have trouble sourcing a meson spinal mount on their own).

E. Meson spinal mounts in the Confederation could only be manufactured in facilities under Confederation Navy control and supervision.

F. Even the most common, the factor one meson gun, technological level twelve.

 

[Condottiere]

Confederation Navy: Spinal Mounts

G. Optionally, they could have a tachyon cannon spinal mount.

H. Being technological level fourteen, it would be introduced as the Confederation was gearing up to their confrontation with the Imperium.

I. Then, you had a century of re(building/arming), so unlikely to be expending resources on something more easily accomplished by other weapon systems.

J. Maybe one of the more ambitious member world navies.

K. The rest of them might be in some secret laboratory, under research and development for the next generation weapon systems.