Archives

Title Posted
Kinetic anti-ship attacks Oct 2002
Maneuver, combat and missiles Oct 2002
Marines aboard ship Oct 2002
MetalStorm missile tubes Oct 2002
Post-battle debris concerns Oct 2002
FTL LACs Oct 2002
LACs as parasites Oct 2002
<em>Shrikes </em>and <em>Ferrets </em>are not fighters Oct 2002
Q-ships Oct 2002
Q-ships as convoy escorts/raiders Oct 2002

Filters

Narrow the posts above by selecting a series or specifying a keyword.

Options

Pearls of Weber

A collection of posts by David Weber containing background information for his stories, collected and generously made available Joe Buckley.

c-Fractional pod-based missile attack plan II

  • Series: Honorverse
  • Date: May 24, 2009

Most of the other issues you've raised vis-à-vis the Mesan pods are answered by two basic considerations. First, my comments about cee-fractional strikes were predicated on the [way?] the people wanted these things to come looking in at 80 or 90% of light-speed. The Mesan ships are down to only 20% of light-speed when they deploy their pods, which means that they're coming in at only somewhere around 60,000 KPS instead of 270,000 KPS. Moreover, they were specifically designed for this specific operation. You can think of it as the equivalent of the Japanese adapting their torpedoes for the Pearl Harbor attack so that they didn't drive as deep and bury themselves in the harbor mud when they were dropped. Each pod is equipped with specially designed ablative shielding which obviously wouldn't stand up to the erosion of weeks and weeks of .9 cee travel but is tough enough to survive this attack profile, especially since they're going to be given their long-range targeting information from pre-deployed sensor platforms. In other words, what needs to be protected is their relatively short-range sensors, not what they'd be using to [acquire] targets at long range for themselves.