NATION

PASSWORD

Argument Thread OOC Future Tech Only

A staging-point for declarations of war and other major diplomatic events. [In character]

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Demigueris
Diplomat
 
Posts: 936
Founded: Dec 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Demigueris » Sun Nov 25, 2012 4:58 pm

Feazanthia wrote:A MIRV-style (or in this case, a MIV) will ultimately not be your best bet at getting around an enemy's point-defense. However, missile busses in space combat have a variety of uses. For instance, I use multiple launch vehicles to carry my attack missiles great distances (because of my seemingly insane love of light-second plus combat ranges). One of my capital-sized launch vehicles will carry around ten missiles (mixed between my Kuun-Lamaat attack missiles, my Osheklam-Koya EM warfare drones, and Yorlastu-Lamaat control platforms) each at a high linear acceleration. Once it's built up sufficient velocity, and once it reaches its deployment site, the launch vehicle will deploy its missiles and then go ballistic at the target. The missiles themselves are designed with a higher priority on RCS rather than linear acceleration, as they already have a ton of velocity from the launch vehicle, and are far better adapted to randomwalking and dodging incoming PDS fire until they reach their attack ranges and can start pounding lasers into the enemy or overloading his sensors.

This approach gives my weapons systems a much greater degree of flexibility and suits my style of extreme range combat much better than if I just went with large missiles.


I tend to supplement that with a variety of specialist payloads specifically designed to provide the incoming missiles with their own PD against interception, both with SEAD weapons designed to target anything that lights them up, and cluster laser style weapons that directly engage interceptor missiles; these provide blocking units for anti-ship payloads with high kill ratio wardheads.

User avatar
Feazanthia
Minister
 
Posts: 2291
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Feazanthia » Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:04 am

Missile engagement ranges being what they are, a good anti-interceptor weapon (and good anti-strike craft weapon, should you be facing such silly things) would be an old Excalibur-style bomb-pumped laser thrown into your mix. Even if you doubled or tripled up individually-targeted lasing rods on each target, a single Excalibur-style munition could take out thirty to fifty interceptors/strike craft or more. Throw one of these munitions into every third missile bus in a fleet-sized volley of 200 or so busses and...well, you do the math.

Edit: Of course your missiles will have to be smart enough to not have their sensors unshielded when your BPLs go off, otherwise you could be looking at a whole lot of dumbfire missiles in your volley, and in space a dumbfire missile is a useless missile.
Last edited by Feazanthia on Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
<Viridia>: Because 'assisting with science' is your code-phrase for 'fucking about like a rampant orangutan being handed the keys to a banana factory'
The Local Cluster - an FT Region

User avatar
Auman
Minister
 
Posts: 2059
Founded: Antiquity
Father Knows Best State

Postby Auman » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:36 pm

I'll be watching this space with enthusiasm.
IBNFTW local 8492

User avatar
Trailers
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 358
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Trailers » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:38 pm

I didn't know you had enthusiasm Auman.

And Feaz, that means that interceptor-missiles will need to be equipped with some sort of targeting-disruption countermeasures.
Lay coins upon our brows, sound the bells
We're paying our fare on the river to Hell
Drape our bloodied banner upon the funeral pyre
And tell our sons we died Hellenic soldiers, with our faces to the fire

User avatar
Demigueris
Diplomat
 
Posts: 936
Founded: Dec 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Demigueris » Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:06 pm

Feazanthia wrote:Missile engagement ranges being what they are, a good anti-interceptor weapon (and good anti-strike craft weapon, should you be facing such silly things) would be an old Excalibur-style bomb-pumped laser thrown into your mix. Even if you doubled or tripled up individually-targeted lasing rods on each target, a single Excalibur-style munition could take out thirty to fifty interceptors/strike craft or more. Throw one of these munitions into every third missile bus in a fleet-sized volley of 200 or so busses and...well, you do the math.

Edit: Of course your missiles will have to be smart enough to not have their sensors unshielded when your BPLs go off, otherwise you could be looking at a whole lot of dumbfire missiles in your volley, and in space a dumbfire missile is a useless missile.


Depends on how intelligent your missile defense doctrine is, how intelligent your opponent's countermeasures are.

Let's say you employ long range cluster laser munitions against an approaching missile salvo. Tracking your launches, as they accelerate to speed, the incoming missiles disperse widely; they don't need to congregate together before their final attack run on the fleet.

Sensible missile doctrine is going to throw your own interceptor munitions forward, along with most of your ECM warheads.

In that configuration a 200 missile anti-missile fire salvo from the fleet is going to be engaging at long range against disperse targets with plenty of momentum to bleed off in combat maneuvers. Depending on how intelligently your defensive salvo is programmed you'd be doing well to get anywhere near a 1 to 1 kill ratio.

In the meantime, unless you held back, you've got very little time to reload your interceptor batteries - which will need to be physically reloaded and there are limits on how quickly you can get another missile ready for launch.

The logistics of fleet defensive fire are against the defender of an attack. Attackers can fire, have their missiles drift, fire again, again and again and time the acceleration profiles to have multiple salvos strike in rapid succession. Fleets engaging in defensive maneuvers are going to be firing individual salvos unless they were expecting the attack... against a good attack the numbers are going to be against the defensive fleet for weight of volume. Realistically you're looking at overwhelming numbers.

Once ranges close, and attacking interceptors have clear runs at interceptors just clearing their tubes they attackers have good shots at slow moving targets with excellent prospect for multiple kills. It becomes a kill zone for both missile salvos, but missiles accelerating from their launch tubes are at a disadvantage here. Moreover the attacker, if they were smart, has the option of timing multiple salvos to hit their targets in rapid succession(preferably within the time it would take them to reload their own interceptor systems).

The closer the distance gets - and the more dispersed your fleet - the more the fleet becomes vulnerable to isolation. Your battleships may have plenty of spare fleet defense fire to spare, but at close range, a missile with zero Delta-V trying to dash to cover a distant picket is at a disadvantage to missiles that have been accelerating for hours descending on specific targets at relativistic velocities. Let's take your fleet as the zero velocity point. If it takes your interceptor 2 seconds to successfully deploy, and accelerate through the couple of dozen kilometers to your picket ship under attack... the incoming missile in that time covers, let's say, 20 000 kilometers. Which side does the engagement envelope favor even with a cluster warhead(especially if that incoming missile turns out to be a cluster warhead itself and detonates wiping out any slow moving interceptors yet to start their acceleration burn)?

There's more to it than just that - plenty an intelligent defender can do to mitigate the situation - but cluster-warheads = win isn't necessarily the panacea to a missile offensive you're looking for; not against a robust one anyway.
Last edited by Demigueris on Sun Jan 27, 2013 3:30 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Auman
Minister
 
Posts: 2059
Founded: Antiquity
Father Knows Best State

Postby Auman » Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:00 pm

Trailers wrote:I didn't know you had enthusiasm Auman.

And Feaz, that means that interceptor-missiles will need to be equipped with some sort of targeting-disruption countermeasures.


Everyone is enthusiastic about something... Or what ever. As far as an interceptor missile goes, all you really -need- are guidance systems of some kind and velocity. Anything on top of that is icing. I think in the environment of space, equipping interceptor missiles with devices capable of tricking enemy ordnance might be a worthwhile endeavor. Gear them more towards bursting junk transmissions in an effort to throw off the enemy projectile from its course or, maybe, even fool it into detonating. As far as false bogeying goes, that could be effective in wasting fuel, which for all intents and purposes could make the missile run dry and become worthless. These are all just broad theories I'm presenting as a way of putting my foot in the door jam of this conversation.
Last edited by Auman on Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
IBNFTW local 8492

User avatar
The Fedral Union
Senator
 
Posts: 4270
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby The Fedral Union » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:30 pm

Well fun thing about disrupting targets in space, if you were realistic as you claim you are, you'd realize there's no way to "jam" the heat coming off of a ship. Because the order of magnitudes are different. Thankfully I don't play super realistic so I'm safe.
Last edited by The Fedral Union on Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
[09:07.53] <Estainia> ... Nuclear handgrenades have one end result. Everybody dies. For the M.F Republic, I guess
Member of the Galactic Economic and Security Organization
[REDACTED BY MOD]

User avatar
Auman
Minister
 
Posts: 2059
Founded: Antiquity
Father Knows Best State

Postby Auman » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:52 am

The Fedral Union wrote:Well fun thing about disrupting targets in space, if you were realistic as you claim you are, you'd realize there's no way to "jam" the heat coming off of a ship. Because the order of magnitudes are different. Thankfully I don't play super realistic so I'm safe.


You can jam anything... Even eyeballs.
IBNFTW local 8492

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14159
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Akasha Colony » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:58 am

Auman wrote:
The Fedral Union wrote:Well fun thing about disrupting targets in space, if you were realistic as you claim you are, you'd realize there's no way to "jam" the heat coming off of a ship. Because the order of magnitudes are different. Thankfully I don't play super realistic so I'm safe.


You can jam anything... Even eyeballs.


Depends what you define as 'jamming.' You can certainly throw out all manner of spoofing decoys with their own big IR signatures to overwhelm the enemy, but you won't be hiding from them. Yes, there are modern systems that can mask an IR signature against the background heat of Earth, but in space, even a single degree is enough to stand out against what is otherwise a pretty constant temperature.
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

User avatar
Strykla
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6538
Founded: Oct 30, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Strykla » Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:02 pm

Auman wrote:
The Fedral Union wrote:Well fun thing about disrupting targets in space, if you were realistic as you claim you are, you'd realize there's no way to "jam" the heat coming off of a ship. Because the order of magnitudes are different. Thankfully I don't play super realistic so I'm safe.


You can jam anything... Even eyeballs.

[url=a3.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/7/edbd7e0cfe6a55f87aa51ae0820e3147/l.jpg]Quite.[/url]

But no cookies. You can only jam stuff in the EM spectra by doing the equivalent of shining a spotlight in its face, and that obviously doesn't sound very practical, does it?
Lord Justice Clerk of the Classical Royalist Party, NSG Senate. Hail, Companion!

User avatar
Auman
Minister
 
Posts: 2059
Founded: Antiquity
Father Knows Best State

Postby Auman » Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:29 pm

Actually, spoofing is what I was originally talking about... False readings and all that jazz. Rob decided to take that as jamming for some reason. When it comes down to my definition of jamming, which I know isn't adequate, I think you can jam visual sensors by jabbing your thumb into a guys eye balls.

And that's how you jam eye balls.
Last edited by Auman on Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
IBNFTW local 8492

User avatar
SquareDisc City
Senator
 
Posts: 3587
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby SquareDisc City » Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:33 pm

Strykla wrote:But no cookies. You can only jam stuff in the EM spectra by doing the equivalent of shining a spotlight in its face, and that obviously doesn't sound very practical, does it?
Actually that doesn't seem at all impractical. It would be similar to a laser weapon except broadband and possibly lower power. It's possible to make pretty tight beams of non-laser light too. To the extent that I've thought about them at all I figure my 'Transmitter Batteries' (packages of assorted high-power transmitters used for jamming) would include such.

That said, I've found jamming tends to just be treated as a nuisance that degrades the target's efficiency but gets worked around.
FT: The Confederation of the United Pokemon Types, led by Regent Mew.
Nuclear pulse propulsion is best propulsion.

User avatar
Red Talons
Diplomat
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 12, 2008
Father Knows Best State

Postby Red Talons » Sat May 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Step 1, set particle beams to wide angle dispersion.

Step 2, fire at enemy ships.

Step 3, you see all the pretty colors.

Step 4, flank and then shift to pinpoint beams.

Step 5, fly away from expanding gasses (aka, enemy ships)
This is my factbook(perpetually under construction)
Because I advocate more space-magic, Laws For Magic.
A 4.2 civilization, according to this index.
---
Defense Status
{Green}--{Orange}--|{Blue}|--{Red}--{Black}
---
Universal peace is an archaic concept.
It is like taking a handful of sand,
and expecting none of it to slip through your fingers...

=Isahil Traekith=
---
Fear is a basic emotion...
What frightens you more, the evil that you know?...
...Or the evil that you don't...
When you light a candle,
you also cast a shadow...
=[Data Redacted]=

User avatar
North Mack
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1213
Founded: Apr 27, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby North Mack » Sat May 25, 2013 7:03 am

Red Talons wrote:Step 1, set particle beams to wide angle dispersion.

Step 2, fire at enemy ships.

Step 3, you see all the pretty colors.

Step 4, flank and then shift to pinpoint beams.

Step 5, fly away from expanding gasses (aka, enemy ships)


"Captain, they're firing... disco?"
Last edited by North Mack on Sat May 25, 2013 7:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
T H E S T E L L A R R E P U B L I C O F N O R T H M A C K
Forged in Fire, Reforged in Blood
[ DeviantArt | NS FT Discord | The Local Cluster | FT Advice and Assistance Thread | The State of the Galaxy ]

User avatar
The Akasha Colony
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14159
Founded: Apr 25, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby The Akasha Colony » Sat May 25, 2013 12:26 pm

Strykla wrote:
Auman wrote:
You can jam anything... Even eyeballs.

[url=a3.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/7/edbd7e0cfe6a55f87aa51ae0820e3147/l.jpg]Quite.[/url]

But no cookies. You can only jam stuff in the EM spectra by doing the equivalent of shining a spotlight in its face, and that obviously doesn't sound very practical, does it?


Given that there are modern systems for tanks that do exactly that, it sounds perfectly practical.
A colony of the New Free Planets Alliance.
The primary MT nation of this account is the Republic of Carthage.
New Free Planets Alliance (FT)
New Terran Republic (FT)
Republic of Carthage (MT)
World Economic Union (MT)
Kaiserreich Europa Zentral (PT/MT)
Five Republics of Hanalua (FanT)
National Links: Factbook Entry | Embassy Program
Storefronts: Carthaginian Naval Export Authority [MT, Navy]

User avatar
Feazanthia
Minister
 
Posts: 2291
Founded: Feb 27, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Feazanthia » Tue May 28, 2013 5:50 pm

<Viridia>: Because 'assisting with science' is your code-phrase for 'fucking about like a rampant orangutan being handed the keys to a banana factory'
The Local Cluster - an FT Region

User avatar
Terraius
Minister
 
Posts: 3073
Founded: Oct 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Terraius » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:29 pm

Disco balls in space.

This is why we cant have nice things.
The Archregimancy wrote:Terraius is also a Catholic heretic personally responsible for the Fourth Crusade.
Lupelia wrote:Terraius: best Byzantine nation for weather.
Yeah I really like planet consuming Warp storms myself.




A Nationstates-II FT Roleplay

User avatar
Ozymos
Minister
 
Posts: 3082
Founded: Oct 14, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Ozymos » Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:32 pm

Terraius wrote:Disco balls in space.

This is why we cant have nice things.


I always thought this was exactly why we can have nice things.
"Through adversity, to the stars!"
The Intersystems Alliance
Liu Xiu | Excalibur Squadron

User avatar
Yortini Systems
Diplomat
 
Posts: 747
Founded: Mar 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Yortini Systems » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:01 pm

So I'm going to ask a question that I'm pretty sure was asked before at least once on this thread, though I can't find it anywhere and I don't want to search through 34 pages of posts.

The question is: Are fighters effective in space warfare? I mean strictly space fighters, ones that can't enter the atmosphere.
A cactolith is a quasihorizontal chonolith composed of anastomosing ductoliths whose distal ends curl like a harpolith, thin like a sphenolith, or bulge discordantly like an akmolith or ethmolith.

User avatar
OMGeverynameistaken
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12437
Founded: Jun 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby OMGeverynameistaken » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:08 pm

Space Russia's "jamming" works on the simple principle of having highly inefficient drive systems that spray massive amounts of EM radiation all over the place. They're actually so disruptive that smaller ships can be destroyed simply by flying too close to a capital ship's radiators. But that just goes back to the old "drive systems as weapons" trope, although as direct weapons Russian drive systems are markedly less efficient than standard reaction drives.

But they make up for it by having really scary guns.
I AM DISAPPOINTED

User avatar
SquareDisc City
Senator
 
Posts: 3587
Founded: Jul 02, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby SquareDisc City » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:20 pm

Yortini Systems wrote:The question is: Are fighters effective in space warfare? I mean strictly space fighters, ones that can't enter the atmosphere.
The generally accepted viewpoint is no.
FT: The Confederation of the United Pokemon Types, led by Regent Mew.
Nuclear pulse propulsion is best propulsion.

User avatar
Caecuser
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6896
Founded: Jul 01, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Caecuser » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:25 pm

Yortini Systems wrote:So I'm going to ask a question that I'm pretty sure was asked before at least once on this thread, though I can't find it anywhere and I don't want to search through 34 pages of posts.

The question is: Are fighters effective in space warfare? I mean strictly space fighters, ones that can't enter the atmosphere.


I'm of the opinion they are, many are of the opinion they aren't.

In the end it depends on the tech.

Read the Star Carrier series for some info on them.
Last edited by Caecuser on Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vocenae
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1097
Founded: Jan 19, 2006
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Vocenae » Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:50 pm

Here's the short answer.

If you're going for Rule of Cool, which is to say you're not worried about the realism, then by all means use space fighters. They can have interesting characters and storylines attached to them. So long as you're not being stupid with them, making them horribly overpowered and what not, people will typically be okay with you having them.

If you're going for realism, then no. Whatever advantages fighters might have will typically be outclassed in every way by larger ships.
Last edited by Vocenae on Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Imperial Star Republic
18:34 <Kyrusia> Voc: The one anchor of moral conscience in a sea of turbulent depravity.

User avatar
Yortini Systems
Diplomat
 
Posts: 747
Founded: Mar 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Yortini Systems » Sat Aug 10, 2013 6:12 pm

Thanks for the answers. I thought the same thing, I think medium sized ships are the best way to go.
A cactolith is a quasihorizontal chonolith composed of anastomosing ductoliths whose distal ends curl like a harpolith, thin like a sphenolith, or bulge discordantly like an akmolith or ethmolith.

User avatar
Vernii
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 476
Founded: Sep 17, 2008
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Vernii » Sun Aug 11, 2013 10:39 pm

Yortini Systems wrote:Thanks for the answers. I thought the same thing, I think medium sized ships are the best way to go.


Battle riders might be the solution to your problem. Look them up.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to International Incidents

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Republic Under Specters Grasp, Russia and Collaborative States, Socalist Republic Of Mercenaries, Southeast Marajarbia

Advertisement

Remove ads