Advertisement
by Kassaran » Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:12 pm
Zarkenis Ultima wrote:Tristan noticed footsteps behind him and looked there, only to see Eric approaching and then pointing his sword at the girl. He just blinked a few times at this before speaking.
"Put that down, Mr. Eric." He said. "She's obviously not a chicken."
by Velkanika » Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:52 pm
Kassaran wrote:An amusing thought just crossed my mind on the prospect of lead ships in a class being given the name of said class. What if a country just, didn't? Like calling it a number or something and using that just to gain the reputation of floating 'ghost' ships. Ships that aren't technically commissioned or in service in spite of running under a country's flag? Not really doable for larger flagships, but smaller escorts, submarines, and perhaps certain riverboats and corvettes and cutters could get away with it?
On the topic of determining the role of the Naval Guard in the Kassaran Isles. The main issue I've been having is there really isn't a need for a large number of supercarriers in the Kassaran naval forces and likewise no reason to build it, in spite of having shipyards more than capable of doing so. Our largest vessels in-country aren't Armed Forces, but are just merchant freighters that I'd envision sit close to Longbow size.
Y'know, that's actually a good question, what is the largest ship that could be built?
Quick look on google, Bing, and every/anywhere else that let's you ask says the limit pretty much comes wherever you have locks and docks to service such a vessel. So in theory you could invest in developing the lauded 1,000,000 ton displacement freighter and likewise gain from the massive amount of shipping traffic it would egnerate and be able to retain. It'd probably need it's own detachment of Kassaran Naval Guard to hold and protect given that it'd be a massive investment and source of GDP, but it's interesting to think on how certain structures and vessels may become too valuable to let fail, like certain businesses in the modern world.
The necessity of a navy, in the restricted sense of the word, springs, therefore, from the existence of a peaceful shipping, and disappears with it, except in the case of a nation which has aggressive tendencies, and keeps up a navy merely as a branch of the military establishment. 1
by Gallia- » Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:56 pm
Kassaran wrote:An amusing thought just crossed my mind on the prospect of lead ships in a class being given the name of said class. What if a country just, didn't? Like calling it a number or something
by Qhevak » Mon Jul 13, 2020 4:52 am
HAV-190 Archangel Heavy Space Superiority Fighter
Image too large for forum
HAV-190B Politics By Other Means of the 4th Strike Division of the Burning Quasar PMC, in standard display colors
Specifications (HAV-190B)
Length: 2280 meters
Maximum Beam: 198 meters
Dry Mass: 11,000,000 tons
Wet Mass: 17,710,000 tons
Personnel: Varied, most often 80 Entangled
Primary Propulsion: TF-2250 Antimatter Catalyzed D-He3 Fusion Torch Drive
Maximum Thrust: 1.045 Teranewtons
Dry Acceleration: 95 m/s^2
Wet Acceleration 59 m/s^2
Max Exhaust Velocity: 6,150 km/s
Wet Delta-V: 2928.84 km/s
Secondary Propulsion: NTER-8223 Nuclear Gas Core Thermal-Electric Maneuvering Thrusters
Primary Electrical Power Supply: Fusion Torch MHD
Maximum Available Electrical Power: 40 terawatts
Primary Thermal Control System: Neutrino Chillers
Primary Armament: 4 PBA-850 Laser-Coupled Particle Accelerator Turrets
Primary Armament Output: Up to 34 Terawatts combined at 0.5 c beam velocity, up to 15 Terawatts per accelerator. Antiparticles can increase damage by a factor of nearly 5.
Secondary Armament: L-1149 100 nm laser phased array, combat mirror drones
Secondary Armament Output: Up to 10 Terawatts
Primary Defense: Quantum Dot Adaptive Star Pyramid Armor
Secondary Defenses: Plasma bubble defense drones, close in hardkill defensive railguns, AN/ALQ-24895 ECM suite
The most advanced warship class currently in service, the HAV-190 Archangel is a long range heavy fighter designed primarily for gaining space superiority over a star system. It is a dedicated space combatant, lacking any onboard space to ground weapon systems (the phased array can penetrate atmosphere if wavelength is increased, though this reduces range), although it carries provisions for external weapons pods enabling it to perform this duty in the absence of more dedicated craft.
Like most mainline combatants, the HAV-190 has an extremely thin star pyramid shape, resembling a sharply ridged needle from a distance. Four heavy particle accelerator cannon pods are mounted external towards the wide end of the pyramid.
The HAV-190B is the full production space superiority variants with 1484 built - the early production HAV-190A variant with 10% less thrust is mostly scrapped, though 9 are still in use with Burning Quaser. The HEV-190B EWAR variant replaces 2 of the particle accelerators with an expanded phased array - 91 built, most in use with the Knights Aethra.
by New Vihenia » Mon Jul 13, 2020 9:29 am
Kassaran wrote:
Y'know, that's actually a good question, what is the largest ship that could be built?
by The Northernmost Americas » Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:21 am
by United States of PA » Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:15 pm
by The Akasha Colony » Mon Jul 13, 2020 4:25 pm
The Northernmost Americas wrote:Posted this in the wrong thread.
Assuming fitting two Merlin's onto a destroyer isn't possible, would one merlin or two SH-60s be better for ASW?
by Velkanika » Mon Jul 13, 2020 4:36 pm
The necessity of a navy, in the restricted sense of the word, springs, therefore, from the existence of a peaceful shipping, and disappears with it, except in the case of a nation which has aggressive tendencies, and keeps up a navy merely as a branch of the military establishment. 1
by Austrasien » Mon Jul 13, 2020 7:43 pm
Mitheldalond wrote:Behold! My first proper(ish) full write-up. (Ironically, most of the information here would be highly classified.)
by New Vihenia » Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:15 am
Austrasien wrote:
As an aside, one of the most promising techniques for detecting underwater objects ATM is "ghost imaging". Though googling it will mostly just give you blather about spooky-scary quantum and detecting B-2s; it is a very powerful technique for recovering the image of an object which is heavily obscured by interfering (in the wave sense) the very small amount of light reflected from it with the direct light of the illuminator. This could push the depth a submarine could be photographed in effect potentially down to the limits of light penetration into the water (which would cover most of the world's littorals including important areas like the Baltic and East/South China Sea) and probably much work has already been done in this area. But the ideal platforms for visible light ghost cameras would be aircraft or satellites.
by Austrasien » Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:41 am
by Mitheldalond » Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:08 pm
The Akasha Colony wrote:Mitheldalond wrote:The need to constantly circulate reactor coolant is a major source of noise on even the quietest nuclear submarines, and is one of the main reasons it's considered possible to make an AIP-equipped diesel-electric boat quieter than a nuclear one. The Uinen is one of only a handful of nuclear submarines that have the ability to operate with their reactor pumps secured (turned off). When this is done, the only moving parts left to produce sound are the propeller shaft and motor, making them quieter than many AIP boats, which often have additional moving parts (Stirling engines for example). However, this can only be done for a short time before the reactor is in danger of overheating. The Uinen-class solves this problem by reducing reactor output to the minimum level necessary to sustain the reaction (they could just shut down the reactor completely, but this runs the risk - however slight - of not being able to restart the reactor, so it's rarely done). This dramatically reduces the amount of heat produced, which allows the Uinens to operate significantly longer with pumps secured, or to circulate coolant much more slowly and quietly. When operating in this mode, the boats run entirely on battery power. They use lithium-ion batteries - which have a much higher capacity than the older lead-acid types - and carry an unusually large number of cells for a nuclear boat, allowing for up to three days of operations at a speed of around 5 knots. Unlike diesel-electric subs, an Uinen does not have to surface to recharge her batteries; she simply has to increase her reactor output to normal levels.
I'm not sure if this is some kind of intentional IC technology shortcoming, but natural circulation reactors have been capable of operating indefinitely without pumps for over 50 years, without any danger of "overheating" or some kind of time limit. IIRC the newer NCR designs in boats like Virginia can provide something like 30-40% of maximum output without the pumps, so they can provide quite a lot of power while silent without any concern about overheating.
The relative noise output of a diesel boat and a modern SSN is more or less irrelevant; both are quieter than the ambient ocean and therefore essentially equally undetectable by passive means at any useful distance.
The Akasha Colony wrote:Even so, Uinen-class boats have reported difficulty detecting and tracking each other in exercises.
This is generally true of most modern submarines: even modern passive sonar is generally no longer very effective at detecting modern submarines, be they nuclear or diesel.
The Akasha Colony wrote:Weapons complement seems light and unusually arranged for a hunter-killer. The Los Angeles-class was considered to be uncomfortably short of stowage with only 25 torpedoes, which is why the 12-tube VLS was added. But the VLS obviously didn't increase torpedo storage, it improved land-attack capability. A hunter-killer would be armed more like Seawolf or Astute: more torpedo room space, less or no VLS. Since Tomahawks and Harpoons can be fired from the torpedo tubes anyway, this is enough to provide basic surface attack capability if needed.
The Akasha Colony wrote:It's nice to see something that isn't a titanium-hulled gigasub though.
Velkanika wrote:On the subject of modern subs and passive sonar, "quieter than x class" means literally nothing. Modern quieting improvements have really been about isolating and eliminating specific frequency bands rather than reducing the overall volume of noise radiated. Likewise, modern passive sonar advances are primarily on the processing end to look for patterns of noise in specific frequency bands.
by Gallia- » Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:15 pm
by The Akasha Colony » Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:54 pm
Mitheldalond wrote:No, that would be some critical research failure on my part, not an intentional flaw. I’ll have to change this paragraph into something about how her reactor can drive her to something like 20-25 knots (and power her other systems) without coolant pumps, with enough battery capacity to boost that up to 35 knots for several hours. After that she’d have to either slow back down, or turn on her coolant pumps to maintain speed.
She’s not really intended to be exclusively a hunter-killer. More of general-purpose attack sub with a focus/emphasis on anti-sub warfare; she still needs at least some ability fulfill the other roles of an attack submarine. A small(ish), highly stealthy boat would, for example, be well suited for delivering/extracting special forces, intelligence gathering in foreign waters, or sneaking a missile strike in close passed enemy defenses.
The VLS silos (or I guess multi-purpose silos would be a better term) are intended to be able to swap out the missile packs for SEAL Delivery Vehicles, lock-out chambers, intelligence gathering equipment, etc. as needed (they are basically a shorter version of Ohio’s ballistic missile tubes). My intention is for them to be placed side by side in the hull outside of the pressure hull. There would be essentially two pressure hulls (fore and aft) connected by a thinner (wasp-waisted) section of pressure hull – maybe about 10’x10’x10’ - between the two silos. My thinking is that this would increase her ability to survive a torpedo hit, since in theory only one pressure hull would be damaged, with no danger of flooding to the other. Above the thin section between the silos I’m thinking of putting an escape trunk/pod. Below I’m now thinking of putting a hanger for a couple of smallish UUVs – maybe about REMUS 6000 sized, but wire controlled to communicate with the sub – fitted with active sonar and maybe ~20km of cable to give the sub the ability to do an active sonar search without giving away its position.
Also, the what I’ve found indicates that it takes about 15 min to reload a torpedo tube, and I’m pretty sure you can only reload one or two at once. So launching a 12-missile attack from 6 torpedo tubes could take about an hour, while VLS tubes could do it in a few seconds.
I don’t remember exactly why I only gave them 26 torpedoes, but the reason probably doesn’t apply anymore (the original concept was for a class of lower cost diesel AIP boats, so they’ve obviously changed a lot since then). I might bump it up to 30 weapons, but these are mainly designed as carrier group escorts, so in theory a lower weapon capacity shouldn’t be a huge problem; they can just presumably go get more from a replenishment ship.
It is overall quieter than a Seawolf, though. In addition to what TBN said, even if there were no improvements in technology, it’s still a smaller boat with a smaller surface area, which means it reflects less sound from an active sonar ping and produces less hull noise through less contact with the water. The difference may be insignificant, but it technically does exist.
Good call about processor improvements though.
by New Visayan Islands » Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:52 am
by United Earthlings » Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:02 pm
Mitheldalond wrote:She’s not really intended to be exclusively a hunter-killer. More of general-purpose attack sub with a focus/emphasis on anti-sub warfare; she still needs at least some ability fulfill the other roles of an attack submarine. A small(ish), highly stealthy boat would, for example, be well suited for delivering/extracting special forces, intelligence gathering in foreign waters, or sneaking a missile strike in close passed enemy defenses.
Below I’m now thinking of putting a hanger for a couple of smallish UUVs – maybe about REMUS 6000 sized, but wire controlled to communicate with the sub – fitted with active sonar and maybe ~20km of cable to give the sub the ability to do an active sonar search without giving away its position.
Also, the what I’ve found indicates that it takes about 15 min to reload a torpedo tube, and I’m pretty sure you can only reload one or two at once. So launching a 12-missile attack from 6 torpedo tubes could take about an hour, while VLS tubes could do it in a few seconds.
I don’t remember exactly why I only gave them 26 torpedoes, but the reason probably doesn’t apply anymore (the original concept was for a class of lower cost diesel AIP boats, so they’ve obviously changed a lot since then). I might bump it up to 30 weapons, but these are mainly designed as carrier group escorts, so in theory a lower weapon capacity shouldn’t be a huge problem; they can just presumably go get more from a replenishment ship.
by Triplebaconation » Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:29 pm
by Gallia- » Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:32 pm
Austrasien wrote:The sun (and possibly the moon) is a bit more promising than lasers for that reason. Ghost imagining does not as was sometimes claimed require either entanglement or a coherent light source.
by Kuoyama » Sun Jul 10, 2022 5:24 pm
by The Akasha Colony » Sun Jul 10, 2022 7:05 pm
Kuoyama wrote:So there is a major Inter-war era/ WW2 project my nation has for that time period.
I call it the Dronning-class Battleship, but basically the idea is a ship with a diamond orientation of guns in the front, two on the center-line, the back one higher than the front, and two on the sides of the ship near the front, able to shoot forwards and sideways are two more wing guns. And two more main guns in the back. That totals to 6 15-inch guns. I'll be putting an armor belt on it.
My general idea for it's use would be in narrow straights or when surrounded by friendly ships, so it could keep a narrow profile and shoot forward. It will probably be pretty slow, but I want to know, is this feasible, and if so, any tips on it?
by Kuoyama » Sun Jul 10, 2022 8:35 pm
The Akasha Colony wrote:Kuoyama wrote:So there is a major Inter-war era/ WW2 project my nation has for that time period.
I call it the Dronning-class Battleship, but basically the idea is a ship with a diamond orientation of guns in the front, two on the center-line, the back one higher than the front, and two on the sides of the ship near the front, able to shoot forwards and sideways are two more wing guns. And two more main guns in the back. That totals to 6 15-inch guns. I'll be putting an armor belt on it.
My general idea for it's use would be in narrow straights or when surrounded by friendly ships, so it could keep a narrow profile and shoot forward. It will probably be pretty slow, but I want to know, is this feasible, and if so, any tips on it?
Wing turrets were already known to be a bad idea before WWI. By the time the war started, all battleships and battlecruisers under construction for the major powers had adopted an all-centerline arrangement of some form, and after the war any thought of a wing-mounted main battery was more or less discarded. If maximum frontal firepower is required, it is much simpler and effective to do so with multi-gun superfiring turrets like the French were fond of in designs like Richelieu.
Most powers did not favor this arrangement though because it leaves a significant arc to the stern unprotected by the main guns. The French accepted it in order to meet treaty limits on displacement without sacrificing speed or armor. Traditional fore and aft centerline arrangements have the advantage of providing full coverage with very large arcs to either side in which the entire main battery could be brought to bear. This maximizes tactical flexibility, especially given the tendency for warships to operate in squadrons in a line astern formation.
by HarYan » Mon Dec 12, 2022 7:30 pm
by Hurtful Thoughts » Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:16 pm
Kuoyama wrote:The Akasha Colony wrote:
Wing turrets were already known to be a bad idea before WWI. By the time the war started, all battleships and battlecruisers under construction for the major powers had adopted an all-centerline arrangement of some form, and after the war any thought of a wing-mounted main battery was more or less discarded. If maximum frontal firepower is required, it is much simpler and effective to do so with multi-gun superfiring turrets like the French were fond of in designs like Richelieu.
Most powers did not favor this arrangement though because it leaves a significant arc to the stern unprotected by the main guns. The French accepted it in order to meet treaty limits on displacement without sacrificing speed or armor. Traditional fore and aft centerline arrangements have the advantage of providing full coverage with very large arcs to either side in which the entire main battery could be brought to bear. This maximizes tactical flexibility, especially given the tendency for warships to operate in squadrons in a line astern formation.
Good to know. That explains why I couldn't find any ships like that
Mokostana wrote:See, Hurty cared not if the mission succeeded or not, as long as it was spectacular trainwreck. Sometimes that was the host Nation firing a SCUD into a hospital to destroy a foreign infection and accidentally sparking a rebellion... or accidentally starting the Mokan Drug War
Blackhelm Confederacy wrote:If there was only a "like" button for NS posts....
by Nou Pais Valencia » Thu Dec 15, 2022 2:12 am
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Ammmericaaaa
Advertisement