The Alamo Contingency has already failed

Jonathan_S wrote:Pure speculation, but it's possible that ships need extra tractors to spread the load. After all, those tractors are moving something with vastly higher mass than a graser torp.

Indeed, several orders of magnitude. We don't know how much a GT weighs, but let's say it's an absurd 30,000 tonnes, or as much as an old-style frigate. A Lenny Det is going to come in at 15 million or so tonnes, 500 times more (which is closer to 4 orders of magnitude than 3).

If pulling an object at the same acceleration requires a proportional tractor count per unit of mass, then the Lenny Det would require 500 more tractors than a GT to pull the same thousands of acceleration. Or, to pull a mere hundreds, then 50 times more... which actually happens to work out for the square-cube law that will apply to the surface area increase.

So, yes, that math actually works out. Assuming of course that the acceleration ratio is indeed linear or close to in the regions we're talking about, and though these things usually aren't, we have no reason to believe they can't be. This is fictional physics after all. Though... without a wedge, just where is the Lenny Det getting energy from?

But even so, spider ships probably do have drives overpowered enough to accelerate them well above what their crews can survive.

We're told that they can sustain 250 gravities without completely killing the crew, by having the crew in special couches. This was emergency acceleration, not something you'd do in a constant basis. You may need to pull that much during a battle, due to evasive manoeuvres.

But it makes no sense to give the ship the ability to pull much more than that. Redundant tractors, sure, because you don't want the ship to lose its acceleration and be overhauled by freighters.

Loren Pechtel wrote:I think it's a retcon to put things back on the original timeline. Most of the problems that have been exposed are going to take a long time to prove because they're the dog that didn't bark in the night type clues.

Shannon_Foraker wrote:That explains things well!

I don't agree.

Repeating myself here, but the big problem is the number of books left. A timeline reset would require several more books to conclude the series, and we know from what David has stated that there aren't that many. He didn't seem to have decided on who will take over from him in the mainline, so it couldn't have been a decision in consultation with whoever that is.

Moreover, the timeline shifted in the first place because of Eric Flint and the Crown of Slaves. TEiF was a book co-written by Eric, so why the two be writing that reset? I'd expect the two to stick to the timeline they had started, not shift things around again.

It's really baffling, and the plot of the next book doesn't help at all. Why are we hearing about Lt. Bolgeo now? What possible reason does RFC have for going back 20 T-years in the timeline and adding more viewpoints and more characters?

That sounds more like George R. R. Martin, because just when he should be concluding plot lines, he goes and opens the plot more with yet another pretender to the throne.

Theemile wrote:

Puidwen wrote:Might have a point. What about all those great big forts galton had? They obviously had industrial capacity, so as you say where are all their grazer torpedos?

They did have graser heads on missiles - where what was a stripped light cruiser graser mount (at ~1.5Ktons) powered by a full up ship fusion reactor(3.5-5Ktons) in the Graser torpedo, suddenly got shrank to 20-30Tons and mounted to the front of a "super" Cataphract missile which could stealthy go 60% of light speed with no one noticing until the last second.

Of course the whole point of the graser torp is that the beam can stay on for 3 whole seconds, allowing the small graser beam to loiter and burn through defenses. Of course flying past at c fractional speeds does not allow much time for a beam to loiter... which defeats the original purpose of the device. and if you shrink by a factor of 100+, how much output power is it really going to have?

Sorry, I find the whole plot of "To End in Fire" contrived at this point. I find no interest in arguing over the fine points, because there is so much handwavium here, just to move the plot along to the right point (whatever that is), and the logic just feels twisted to the point of breaking.

Yes, but, as I suggested in one of my threads, if the g-torps have some sort of tracking ability to engage target as soon as it is in range and remain on target as long as possible, then 1-3 seconds time-on-target should still be much more effective than a traditional warhead.

penny wrote:

Theemile wrote:
They did have graser heads on missiles - where what was a stripped light cruiser graser mount (at ~1.5Ktons) powered by a full up ship fusion reactor(3.5-5Ktons) in the Graser torpedo, suddenly got shrank to 20-30Tons and mounted to the front of a "super" Cataphract missile which could stealthy go 60% of light speed with no one noticing until the last second.

Of course the whole point of the graser torp is that the beam can stay on for 3 whole seconds, allowing the small graser beam to loiter and burn through defenses. Of course flying past at c fractional speeds does not allow much time for a beam to loiter... which defeats the original purpose of the device. and if you shrink by a factor of 100+, how much output power is it really going to have?

Sorry, I find the whole plot of "To End in Fire" contrived at this point. I find no interest in arguing over the fine points, because there is so much handwavium here, just to move the plot along to the right point (whatever that is), and the logic just feels twisted to the point of breaking.

Yes, but, as I suggested in one of my threads, if the g-torps have some sort of tracking ability to engage target as soon as it is in range and remain on target as long as possible, then 1-3 seconds time-on-target should still be much more effective than a traditional warhead.

The Graser Torps I don't have an issue with - the Graser Missiles, I do - The graser torps attacked at <<10% the speed of light, the Graser Missiles attacked at ~50% of light, limiting their engagement time (and acquision time, for that matter), not to mention the 1-2 magnitude smaller package, so a weapon that is vastly undersized, underpowered, has no time to burn through, and no time to acquire, is considered a threat? These things should not have been able to burn through an SD's armor, let alone blow up a dozen of them.

penny wrote:

Theemile wrote:
They did have graser heads on missiles - where what was a stripped light cruiser graser mount (at ~1.5Ktons) powered by a full up ship fusion reactor(3.5-5Ktons) in the Graser torpedo, suddenly got shrank to 20-30Tons and mounted to the front of a "super" Cataphract missile which could stealthy go 60% of light speed with no one noticing until the last second.

Of course the whole point of the graser torp is that the beam can stay on for 3 whole seconds, allowing the small graser beam to loiter and burn through defenses. Of course flying past at c fractional speeds does not allow much time for a beam to loiter... which defeats the original purpose of the device. and if you shrink by a factor of 100+, how much output power is it really going to have?

Sorry, I find the whole plot of "To End in Fire" contrived at this point. I find no interest in arguing over the fine points, because there is so much handwavium here, just to move the plot along to the right point (whatever that is), and the logic just feels twisted to the point of breaking.

Yes, but, as I suggested in one of my threads, if the g-torps have some sort of tracking ability to engage target as soon as it is in range and remain on target as long as possible, then 1-3 seconds time-on-target should still be much more effective than a traditional warhead.

Theemile wrote:The Graser Torps I don't have an issue with - the Graser Missiles, I do - The graser torps attacked at <<10% the speed of light, the Graser Missiles attacked at ~50% of light, limiting their engagement time (and acquision time, for that matter), not to mention the 1-2 magnitude smaller package, so a weapon that is vastly undersized, underpowered, has no time to burn through, and no time to acquire, is considered a threat? These things should not have been able to burn through an SD's armor, let alone blow up a dozen of them.

Still. If the g-missiles can maximize time-on-target, it should be significantly more effective. Time-on-target measured in even one second compared to a millisecond.

And if all else is equal ... match point.

I also mentioned in another thread that 3-second firing grasers have a tactic traditional warheads don't. They can begin firing at their maximum range and hold target even up until it passes with a rotating function. But the Doppler effect of a firing graser ever increasing in intensity held for even a second should outperform even traditional warheads which fire for a mere ... millisecond?

If max range is a LS (which seems very optimistic) and you are moving at 80% C you have 0.8 sec. At 50,000 km it’s 0.2 sec and a much easier to target platform.

But you certainly are not fitting a CA class graser and PS in a 300ton missile. So your weapon probably won’t be made to operate for more and .5 sec once. But that seems challenging, grasers are will understand tech in the honorverse, so making one that small should be impossible.

kzt wrote:If max range is a LS (which seems very optimistic) and you are moving at 80% C you have 0.8 sec. At 50,000 km it’s 0.2 sec and a much easier to target platform.

But you certainly are not fitting a CA class graser and PS in a 300ton missile. So your weapon probably won’t be made to operate for more and .5 sec once. But that seems challenging, grasers are will understand tech in the honorverse, so making one that small should be impossible.

..and we're not even discussing targeting - moving that speed, they should have difficulty tracking targets due to the Tau between them and their targets, have issues in changing trajectory in their terminal phase due to their velocity, and issues seeing through the Bow shock that made them visible, in addition to the normal issues Honorverse missile have in targeting and tracking undamaged units with a load of ECM.

BTW welcome back Cthia

kzt wrote:If max range is a LS (which seems very optimistic) and you are moving at 80% C you have 0.8 sec. At 50,000 km it’s 0.2 sec and a much easier to target platform.

But you certainly are not fitting a CA class graser and PS in a 300ton missile. So your weapon probably won’t be made to operate for more and .5 sec once. But that seems challenging, grasers are will understand tech in the honorverse, so making one that small should be impossible.

Noted. But perhaps you are much too quick to accept limitations on an unknown weapon belonging to an unknown navy, who, btw, has already shown tech that shouldn't be possible. As far as targeting, these things can strafe.

I already suggested that their range might be greatly extended, since we assume LDs are eggshells that would want to engage from as far away as possible. I see no reason the breakthroughs of the LDs grasers wouldn't be incorporated into its missiles.

Theemile wrote:

kzt wrote:If max range is a LS (which seems very optimistic) and you are moving at 80% C you have 0.8 sec. At 50,000 km it’s 0.2 sec and a much easier to target platform.

But you certainly are not fitting a CA class graser and PS in a 300ton missile. So your weapon probably won’t be made to operate for more and .5 sec once. But that seems challenging, grasers are will understand tech in the honorverse, so making one that small should be impossible.

..and we're not even discussing targeting - moving that speed, they should have difficulty tracking targets due to the Tau between them and their targets, have issues in changing trajectory in their terminal phase due to their velocity, and issues seeing through the Bow shock that made them visible, in addition to the normal issues Honorverse missile have in targeting and tracking undamaged units with a load of ECM.

BTW welcome back Cthia

Strafing mode may somewhat solve any targeting issue.

BTW, strafing mode is another tactic that is available only on MA grasers.

@kzt: Also consider what 60% of C would do to the Doppler effect of said missiles. I would not want to experience the Doppler effect of a train's whistle traveling at such speeds. Or be on the ship.

Thanks for the welcome!