Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

Torch frigates?

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Torch frigates?
Post by JenBurdoo2   » Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:48 pm

JenBurdoo2
Ensign

Posts: 11
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:35 am

Just finished Cauldron of Ghosts and am a little confused about the frigates. I have the impression there are two different types -- one that's basically an upgraded LAC and one that's a smaller destroyer. The smaller destroyer is the one I'm interested in. I'm interested in its size and capabilities -- this goes for the older types like those that were used before they became obsolete, too. What were their crew sizes and tonnages? How did they compare to destroyers? What were the ones that founded the Manticoran Navy like? The ones from CoG seem to be large enough to hold shuttles that can hold up to 30 marines, so they sound more "conventional" than the LAC style.

Is a frigate intermediate in size, crew and firepower between a hyper-courier boat and a destroyer?

Is there a description of HMS Osprey, one of Honor's early assignments, anywhere?
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by kzt   » Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:06 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

It's one model. David has regretted his initial description of the Torch frigates. A lot.

The CoG description (which I can't recall off-hand) is the one to use.

There is a pretty fair assortment of sizable things that are needed for an actual hypercapable ship that are not needed for a LAC. If you want to put an actual weapon load on the ship in addition it will be pretty darn big compared to a LAC.

For example, the smallest RMN DD we have data on is the Falcon class, which is 70,000 tons and dates back to 1856. I suspect the Torch frigates are in the same size range.
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:09 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 9092
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

JenBurdoo2 wrote:Just finished Cauldron of Ghosts and am a little confused about the frigates. I have the impression there are two different types -- one that's basically an upgraded LAC and one that's a smaller destroyer. The smaller destroyer is the one I'm interested in. I'm interested in its size and capabilities -- this goes for the older types like those that were used before they became obsolete, too. What were their crew sizes and tonnages? How did they compare to destroyers? What were the ones that founded the Manticoran Navy like? The ones from CoG seem to be large enough to hold shuttles that can hold up to 30 marines, so they sound more "conventional" than the LAC style.

Is a frigate intermediate in size, crew and firepower between a hyper-courier boat and a destroyer?

The Torch frigates we're describe as being somewhat similar to a pair of shrikes back too back, but that's kind of a superficial comparison.

We don't have a lot of details on the older frigates. I get the idea that they were more practical before laserheads. You could afford combatant with minimal missile (and counter missile) storage when even light ships usually needed to close to energy range.

The Call of Dity series talks a small amount about the ships Manticore had back them, but the tech was do different that they're hard to compare. The one semi-modern frigate we gave specs on is the Siliesian Gryf-class. SITS ship book says it's a 1868 design, 53,500 tons, 324m ship. Carries a broadside of 6 tubes, and 1 laser; but it carries only 4 CM tubes and 6 PDLCs total (I assume 1 CM and 2 PDLC on each broadside; and 1 of each for hammerhead chase defense)

Ok the SCN is a crapoy navy, but that seems like a lethally overgunned, under defended design.
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by fallsfromtrees   » Sun Dec 14, 2014 8:12 pm

fallsfromtrees
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1960
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 10:51 am
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Jonathan_S wrote:
JenBurdoo2 wrote:Just finished Cauldron of Ghosts and am a little confused about the frigates. I have the impression there are two different types -- one that's basically an upgraded LAC and one that's a smaller destroyer. The smaller destroyer is the one I'm interested in. I'm interested in its size and capabilities -- this goes for the older types like those that were used before they became obsolete, too. What were their crew sizes and tonnages? How did they compare to destroyers? What were the ones that founded the Manticoran Navy like? The ones from CoG seem to be large enough to hold shuttles that can hold up to 30 marines, so they sound more "conventional" than the LAC style.

Is a frigate intermediate in size, crew and firepower between a hyper-courier boat and a destroyer?

The Torch frigates we're describe as being somewhat similar to a pair of shrikes back too back, but that's kind of a superficial comparison.

We don't have a lot of details on the older frigates. I get the idea that they were more practical before laserheads. You could afford combatant with minimal missile (and counter missile) storage when even light ships usually needed to close to energy range.

The Call of Dity series talks a small amount about the ships Manticore had back them, but the tech was do different that they're hard to compare. The one semi-modern frigate we gave specs on is the Siliesian Gryf-class. SITS ship book says it's a 1868 design, 53,500 tons, 324m ship. Carries a broadside of 6 tubes, and 1 laser; but it carries only 4 CM tubes and 6 PDLCs total (I assume 1 CM and 2 PDLC on each broadside; and 1 of each for hammerhead chase defense)

Ok the SCN is a crapoy navy, but that seems like a lethally overgunned, under defended design.

As they have been described - a very fragile eggshell with a very big hammer.
========================

The only problem with quotes on the internet is that you can't authenticate them -- Abraham Lincoln
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Theemile   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:06 pm

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5378
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Jonathan_S wrote:
JenBurdoo2 wrote:Just finished Cauldron of Ghosts and am a little confused about the frigates. I have the impression there are two different types -- one that's basically an upgraded LAC and one that's a smaller destroyer. The smaller destroyer is the one I'm interested in. I'm interested in its size and capabilities -- this goes for the older types like those that were used before they became obsolete, too. What were their crew sizes and tonnages? How did they compare to destroyers? What were the ones that founded the Manticoran Navy like? The ones from CoG seem to be large enough to hold shuttles that can hold up to 30 marines, so they sound more "conventional" than the LAC style.

Is a frigate intermediate in size, crew and firepower between a hyper-courier boat and a destroyer?

The Torch frigates we're describe as being somewhat similar to a pair of shrikes back too back, but that's kind of a superficial comparison.

We don't have a lot of details on the older frigates. I get the idea that they were more practical before laserheads. You could afford combatant with minimal missile (and counter missile) storage when even light ships usually needed to close to energy range.

The Call of Dity series talks a small amount about the ships Manticore had back them, but the tech was do different that they're hard to compare. The one semi-modern frigate we gave specs on is the Siliesian Gryf-class. SITS ship book says it's a 1868 design, 53,500 tons, 324m ship. Carries a broadside of 6 tubes, and 1 laser; but it carries only 4 CM tubes and 6 PDLCs total (I assume 1 CM and 2 PDLC on each broadside; and 1 of each for hammerhead chase defense)

Ok the SCN is a crapoy navy, but that seems like a lethally overgunned, under defended design.


Adding to what the others have said, the minumium hyper-capable craft is a Dispatch Boat - these mass ~40K tons and have a crew of 12 - and 0 defenses or weapons. So everything needed to make a warship is on top of this ~40K ton floor. The the case of the convenntional Gryf class mentioned above, the ~14K ton difference between the 2 (besides the growth of the hull) is living space, enviro and supplies for ~110 spacers, a 2nd reactor, the weapons and defenses, ECM, trageting systems, etc. There just isn't alot of room there.

In the comparison to a classic LAC, you see alot of parts are sacrificed for economy that appear on a DB. Before Manticore's series 282 LACs on the Wayfarer class in HAE, no LACS could max out their compensator. LACs had a max accel of ~410 Gs or so, while a DD at 100% could hit 520 Gs - the reason is LACS didn't carry the large and expensive Alpha nodes needed by warships to make hyper sails - they only used beta nodes which didn't have enough power to make a full power wedge. Adding Alpha nodes to the older designs, would probably bloat their tonage from the 10Kton average we've seen to ~30Ktons, never mind the hyper generator, Warshawski sensors, and the deeper bunkers needed for an extended voyage.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Armed Neo-Bob   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:54 pm

Armed Neo-Bob
Captain of the List

Posts: 532
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:11 pm

JenBurdoo2 wrote:Just finished Cauldron of Ghosts and am a little confused about the frigates. I have the impression there are two different types -- one that's basically an upgraded LAC and one that's a smaller destroyer. The smaller destroyer is the one I'm interested in. I'm interested in its size and capabilities -- this goes for the older types like those that were used before they became obsolete, too. What were their crew sizes and tonnages? How did they compare to destroyers? What were the ones that founded the Manticoran Navy like? The ones from CoG seem to be large enough to hold shuttles that can hold up to 30 marines, so they sound more "conventional" than the LAC style.

Is a frigate intermediate in size, crew and firepower between a hyper-courier boat and a destroyer?

Is there a description of HMS Osprey, one of Honor's early assignments, anywhere?


For Osprey, look in HoS at the Noblesse and drop about 8 or 10 thousand tons; fewer weapons, but about the same crew (300 for Troubadour in HotQ), for reasons of endurance.

Conventional frigates like the John Brown class are smaller, conventional warships; they are designed with a hammerhead for mounting weapons; beam and missile armaments are mostly broadside; with sidewalls and point defenses. Although they might be the size of a pre-war destroyer, a frigate is supposed to have the long range cruise endurance of a cruiser, so you need a larger crew, and there is a lot less space inside for expendables like missiles.

The Nat Turner had spinal mount grasers; they also used some sort of magazine similar to the rotary magazine for the Shrike; but they are also the downgraded "export" version of Manticoran systems, and there is no textev that they have off-bore tech. They do have ftl comms equivalent to what Erewhon was using.

Rob

Text: Cauldron of Ghost, chapter 11.

Cauldron of Ghosts wrote:Frigates were simply too small and fragile to have any significant role in modern naval combat. The roles the frigate had once filled were now filled by destroyers in any navy which aspired to be anything more than a system-defense force, and even destroyers were experiencing a steady upward creep in size and tonnage. There was still a role for small warships—indeed, a larger one than they had played in the better part of a century—but that role was played by LACs, not frigates, thanks to the revolution in warship technology which had come out of the Havenite Wars, especially where LACs were concerned.

<snip

Up until very recently, Torch’s tiny navy consisted entirely of the fifteen frigates built for it by the Hauptman Cartel: seven of the John Brown class and eight of the newer Nat Turner class. The John Brown class were modernized conventional frigates while the Nat Turner class were the more fancy hyper-capable Shrike equivalents.

That situation had changed radically when Luiz Rozsak handed Torch the heavy cruiser Spartacus and all the other captured warships which had surrendered to him after the Battle of Torch, but that gift—magnificent though it had been—was something of a problem in its own right. The primary reasons the Royal Torch Navy had consisted solely of frigates prior to the battle were fairly straight-forward. First, they were the cheapest hyper-capable ships Torch could afford, and even that had been possible only because of the Hauptman Cartel’s generosity. Second, (and even more importantly), they made ideal training platforms.


Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Jonathan_S   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:02 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 9092
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:Conventional frigates like the John Brown class are smaller, conventional warships; they are designed with a hammerhead for mounting weapons; beam and missile armaments are mostly broadside; with sidewalls and point defenses. Although they might be the size of a pre-war destroyer, a frigate is supposed to have the long range cruise endurance of a cruiser, so you need a larger crew, and there is a lot less space inside for expendables like missiles.

The Nat Turner had spinal mount grasers; they also used some sort of magazine similar to the rotary magazine for the Shrike; but they are also the downgraded "export" version of Manticoran systems, and there is no textev that they have off-bore tech. They do have ftl comms equivalent to what Erewhon was using.

I'm not sure the Nat Turner-class actually had Shrike style rotary launchers.

Somewhere (that I'm not finding quickly) RFC said that any significant advantage of a rotary launcher over a normal one was lost you you wanted to carry more rounds that fit into the revolver of the launcher. He implied that the Ferrets went back to a more conventional magazine and launcher because it chewed up too much volume to give them an "on mount ready magazine" in the form of the rotary launcher, but also a main magazine and feed tubes to reload the revolver.

That trade-off probably give them a bit slower "burst" firing rate than a Shrike but the extra missiles given them much more firing endurance.

Torch of Freedom says "the Nat Turner-class—Hauptman had delivered to Torch were significantly more dangerous than most people might have expected. Effectively, they were hyper-capable versions of the Royal Manticoran Navy's Shrike-class LAC but with about twice the missile capacity and a pair of spinal-mounted grasers, with the second energy weapon bearing aft." If twice the missile capacity is overall (instead of per launcher) I guess that could just mean the aft hammerhead contains a clone of armorment of the forward one; right down to the same number of rotary launchers.
But if it's twice the capacity per launcher, so twice the sustained firing time, then I assume you'd have to go back to a Ferret style missile magazine and conventional tubes. (Which would let you shift missiles between tubes - that's the other downside of a rotary, no ability to pull missiles from an tube that's damaged, or facing the wrong way, to launch from your useful tubes. Of course with the rotary mag so close to the tube it's kind of hard to take direct battle damage to the tube that doesn't shred the missiles...)
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Theemile   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:19 pm

Theemile
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5378
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 pm
Location: All over the Place - Now Serving Dublin, OH

Jonathan_S wrote:
Armed Neo-Bob wrote:Conventional frigates like the John Brown class are smaller, conventional warships; they are designed with a hammerhead for mounting weapons; beam and missile armaments are mostly broadside; with sidewalls and point defenses. Although they might be the size of a pre-war destroyer, a frigate is supposed to have the long range cruise endurance of a cruiser, so you need a larger crew, and there is a lot less space inside for expendables like missiles.

The Nat Turner had spinal mount grasers; they also used some sort of magazine similar to the rotary magazine for the Shrike; but they are also the downgraded "export" version of Manticoran systems, and there is no textev that they have off-bore tech. They do have ftl comms equivalent to what Erewhon was using.

I'm not sure the Nat Turner-class actually had Shrike style rotary launchers.

Somewhere (that I'm not finding quickly) RFC said that any significant advantage of a rotary launcher over a normal one was lost you you wanted to carry more rounds that fit into the revolver of the launcher. He implied that the Ferrets went back to a more conventional magazine and launcher because it chewed up too much volume to give them an "on mount ready magazine" in the form of the rotary launcher, but also a main magazine and feed tubes to reload the revolver.

That trade-off probably give them a bit slower "burst" firing rate than a Shrike but the extra missiles given them much more firing endurance.

Torch of Freedom says "the Nat Turner-class—Hauptman had delivered to Torch were significantly more dangerous than most people might have expected. Effectively, they were hyper-capable versions of the Royal Manticoran Navy's Shrike-class LAC but with about twice the missile capacity and a pair of spinal-mounted grasers, with the second energy weapon bearing aft." If twice the missile capacity is overall (instead of per launcher) I guess that could just mean the aft hammerhead contains a clone of armorment of the forward one; right down to the same number of rotary launchers.
But if it's twice the capacity per launcher, so twice the sustained firing time, then I assume you'd have to go back to a Ferret style missile magazine and conventional tubes. (Which would let you shift missiles between tubes - that's the other downside of a rotary, no ability to pull missiles from an tube that's damaged, or facing the wrong way, to launch from your useful tubes. Of course with the rotary mag so close to the tube it's kind of hard to take direct battle damage to the tube that doesn't shred the missiles...)



Since they don't have broadside launchers, only bow and stern launchers, it stands to reason that the launchers they do have are off-bore capable. As such, shifting missiles isn't as necessary, since you can still use your oblique launchers in most or all firing conditions (depending on the tech level).

However, Like you, I always read it as they carried extra loads for each launcher, so my intreperation is that they had the Ferret type launcher - if memory serves, David's comment on the Ferrets NOT having the Shrike Rotary launchers was an outgrowth of a Nat Turner armament discussion.
******
RFC said "refitting a Beowulfan SD to Manticoran standards would be just as difficult as refitting a standard SLN SD to those standards. In other words, it would be cheaper and faster to build new ships."
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by Armed Neo-Bob   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:57 pm

Armed Neo-Bob
Captain of the List

Posts: 532
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:11 pm

Theemile wrote:
Jonathan_S wrote:I'm not sure the Nat Turner-class actually had Shrike style rotary launchers.

Somewhere (that I'm not finding quickly) RFC said that any significant advantage of a rotary launcher over a normal one was lost you you wanted to carry more rounds that fit into the revolver of the launcher. He implied that the Ferrets went back to a more conventional magazine and launcher because it chewed up too much volume to give them an "on mount ready magazine" in the form of the rotary launcher, but also a main magazine and feed tubes to reload the revolver.

That trade-off probably give them a bit slower "burst" firing rate than a Shrike but the extra missiles given them much more firing endurance.

Torch of Freedom says "the Nat Turner-class—Hauptman had delivered to Torch were significantly more dangerous than most people might have expected. Effectively, they were hyper-capable versions of the Royal Manticoran Navy's Shrike-class LAC but with about twice the missile capacity and a pair of spinal-mounted grasers, with the second energy weapon bearing aft." If twice the missile capacity is overall (instead of per launcher) I guess that could just mean the aft hammerhead contains a clone of armorment of the forward one; right down to the same number of rotary launchers.
But if it's twice the capacity per launcher, so twice the sustained firing time, then I assume you'd have to go back to a Ferret style missile magazine and conventional tubes. (Which would let you shift missiles between tubes - that's the other downside of a rotary, no ability to pull missiles from an tube that's damaged, or facing the wrong way, to launch from your useful tubes. Of course with the rotary mag so close to the tube it's kind of hard to take direct battle damage to the tube that doesn't shred the missiles...)



Since they don't have broadside launchers, only bow and stern launchers, it stands to reason that the launchers they do have are off-bore capable. As such, shifting missiles isn't as necessary, since you can still use your oblique launchers in most or all firing conditions (depending on the tech level).

However, Like you, I always read it as they carried extra loads for each launcher, so my intreperation is that they had the Ferret type launcher - if memory serves, David's comment on the Ferrets NOT having the Shrike Rotary launchers was an outgrowth of a Nat Turner armament discussion.


snipped my own remarks, for brevity.

I was thinking from the use of the term "Shrike" in describing the class, that they used rotary launchers in addition to the chase grasers; but I also assumed they mounted 4 sets on the broadsides, to make it act more like an older frigate. Ferret style magazines make a lot more sense, as there will likely be fewer questions about odd-looking shapes.

The frigates were built specifically for the Beowulf-based ASL, but even so, I think off-bore capability was left out; that is one of the major elements of Manticore's missile defense improvements, as well as vital to their new vessels offensive salvos. The frigates being unofficially in the hands of the Ballroom, gives too great a chance of a technology capture by Bad Guys.

I can't recall off-hand--the LAC missiles are a bit smaller than DD missiles--did RFC or Duckk or someone ever give a range estimate? This would have some implications for the use of the frigates with pods--if their fire control is optimized for pre-war SDM ranges, they wouldn't be as capable as a larger ship at, say, mk-16 ranges.

Rob
Top
Re: Torch frigates?
Post by drothgery   » Mon Dec 15, 2014 7:03 pm

drothgery
Admiral

Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:07 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

Armed Neo-Bob wrote:
Theemile wrote:Since they don't have broadside launchers, only bow and stern launchers, it stands to reason that the launchers they do have are off-bore capable. As such, shifting missiles isn't as necessary, since you can still use your oblique launchers in most or all firing conditions (depending on the tech level).


[...]

The frigates were built specifically for the Beowulf-based ASL, but even so, I think off-bore capability was left out; that is one of the major elements of Manticore's missile defense improvements, as well as vital to their new vessels offensive salvos. The frigates being unofficially in the hands of the Ballroom, gives too great a chance of a technology capture by Bad Guys.


Eh, either they have some broadside armament (which the Shrike and Ferret do not have), or they've got off-bore capability. The ships would be death traps without one or the other.
Top

Return to Honorverse