The role of various ship types in the Imperium

[BluWolf]

Modern navies have evolved over the last few thousand years as a response to mission and threat environments. Each ship could more or less be said to have a tactical and a strategic mission. How that ship is designed and equiped is a response to its particular role with in the navy.

Is there somewhere in canon that defines what these roles are for the various classifications of ships? or did people just start willy-nilly and arbitrarily making up ship classifications?

For example; carriers in the modern navy completely replaced Battleships as the major capitol ship type for its ability to project power ashore for a government in a variety of roles. Essentially, battleships did not have the range that carriers did.

So, besides being very kewl, is there a reason why there would be "space" carriers in the future??

 

[themink]

One of the reason carriers are powerful in a modern navy (To the extent that they are the only "capital" ship that anyone builds is that they have a longer strike range than battleships, they can engage without risking themselves and (fundamentally) a launched fighter can destroy any other ship!

Being hit by an air to sea missile from a fighter does a huge amount of damage to a ship. A Naval battle quickly becomes a "Naval air" battle - whoever gets their air to strike the opponent fleet wins the battle.

This is adjusted slightly based on the presence of "defensive" assets such as Aegis cruisers - but in princle it is still true.

If (somehow) ships were armoured so heavily that current air-sea missiles didn;t affect them, a nuke will still flatten a fleet. Fighters can carry nukes - it is an easy equation.

Traveller is a game in which either there are small ships (100-1000dt) or big ships (many 100kdt). In either case, armour has a ridiculusly large value - keep in mind that traveller missiles are larger than modern air-sea missiles and have advanced as the same rate as everything else - So how does any ship survive multiple hits from missiles! The answer is a nasty hack:-

In the orgional CT (books 2) the correct combat vessel was a carrier - because bigger craft had to have a lot of "padding" arround each turret without anything "useful" top do with it (from a military point of view).

In the Move to Highgaurd, Marc clearly wanted actions to be determined by large ship combat - so he allowed enough armour to stop missiles. To maintain this Nuclear dampers made an appearance - So you couldn't equip your fighters with Nukes.

So if you are fighting major fleet actions, fighters have a purely ancillary role.

I still use small ship traveller - So fighters are important - carriers are in the 300-800 ton range!

 

[Liam Devlin]

Ahh, but for those whose FTRS DO carry shipkillers (det nukes), the Carrier class ship is an invaluable fleet asset.

Considering some ships by early Terran Confederation taking on 6-12 FTRS to the 300 FTRS of the 3I, FTR-Carriers have usually been classified as Crurons. and may even be found with ASLTrons.
FTRS, besides (IMTU) providing screening and patrolling duties, can also with the Battle Bridge, engage in Lidar/ladar handoffs for the missiles from Big ships at a distance. In planetary roles, Close Air support (CAS), suppression of enemy Space/ or ground based Ftrs comes to the fore. (ASLTRON based squadrons.)
Even certain cruisers pack a handful of Ftrs-as seen in GT's 101 ships(Solomani/ Imperial designs). Spotters, Recce roles are only scratching the surface of what FTRS can do.

Equipped without missiles(det nukes) leaves the open ended what other munitions can be carried/ launched. How about, Jamming drone missiles? decoys? Sensor drones (to extend & hand off back to Mothership/ rest fo squadron?

In the TNE, a surviving "carrier" makes an instant Vampire fleet, the perfect tool for a Puppeteer Virus...(all those eyes and hands to do the mainframes' deviltry! YUS!)--and watch the PC's sweat trying to duck and dodge this mama-jama!

 

[trader jim]

Now theres anold Battle Wagon...looks like its been around .....seen a lot of combat.....OOPPPPPSSS.....look what written on the side....

LIAMS wast management services.....owell....whatever grabs ya!!!!

hes FINALLY made Captain of something.....an old GARBAGE SCOW!!!!!

 

[Liam Devlin]

And makes the perfect licensure for a Q-ship. Common place, battered looking outside, just the thing to surprise a fellow like you with Pop-up turrets and hatches for the Fusion guns to smoke to a cinder with.

We scow for stellar garbage alright--yer kind, Jimbo!

 

[trader jim]

Yeah right......armed with cast off rebuilt military junk....AND i just told the Menace to Navigation Boys about you and that Q-ship pile of Junk.....they are now looking for you!!!!....

 

[BluWolf]

FTRS, besides (IMTU) providing screening and patrolling duties, can also with the Battle Bridge, engage in Lidar/ladar handoffs for the missiles from Big ships at a distance. In planetary roles, Close Air support (CAS), suppression of enemy Space/ or ground based Ftrs comes to the fore. (ASLTRON based squadrons.)

OK, qualify this statement. Why would these large capitol ships NEED patrols and screening?

Is it a limitation of sensor range? Can FTRs GET to an area faster than a sensor signal? Can they manuever further than a carriers sensors? It certainly not to have "eyes" on target?

What is all this Lidar/ladar stuff?

Why do manned spacecraft when theoretically you could launch robotic drones?

On a side topic, how does one do a planetary invasion? Marines in streamlined landing craft (analogous to todays LST/LSDs)?

 

[BMonnery]

Originally posted by BluWolf:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> FTRS, besides (IMTU) providing screening and patrolling duties, can also with the Battle Bridge, engage in Lidar/ladar handoffs for the missiles from Big ships at a distance. In planetary roles, Close Air support (CAS), suppression of enemy Space/ or ground based Ftrs comes to the fore. (ASLTRON based squadrons.)

OK, qualify this statement. Why would these large capitol ships NEED patrols and screening?

Is it a limitation of sensor range? Can FTRs GET to an area faster than a sensor signal? Can they manuever further than a carriers sensors? It certainly not to have "eyes" on target?

What is all this Lidar/ladar stuff?

Why do manned spacecraft when theoretically you could launch robotic drones?

On a side topic, how does one do a planetary invasion? Marines in streamlined landing craft (analogous to todays LST/LSDs)?</font>[/QUOTE]ISTR sensor range is 2 light seconds (in CT, that's 600,000km, or one 2300AD Star Cruiser Hex) for military vessels. This means a military ship can't even see to the jump cutoff from a reasonable planet. On Earth an orbiting ship can detect incoming targets at just over 50 diameters. Checking just areas suggests at least 60 sensor platforms (that's an impossible figure due to overlap) are needed to provide all round detection of ships coming out of jump.

Thus fighters can be useful scouts in defence.

Bryn

 

[BluWolf]

I keep seeing references too diameters. 100d 50 d.

What is a diameter?

 

[Simon Jester]

Originally posted by BluWolf:
I keep seeing references too diameters. 100d 50 d.

What is a diameter?

Okay, you remember that jumpships run the chance of a misjump if they fire off their J-drives within a certain distance of any object creating a gravity well. That distance is essentially 100 times the largest measurement of the object. Since most objects creating gravity wells are planets and stars, both generally spherical, their largest measurements are their diameters. Hence, the 100 diameter limit on jump drives.

As for carriers and fighters, fighters allow a sentient being to go out and actually see what the carrier might be sensing without endangering the carrier itself. The carrier might be sensing that an unaccelerating object is putting out energy, but is not responding to communications attempts. It might be a Tigress with communications problems, or simply trying to avoid detection in preparation for an attack. Or it might be an asteroid with a mining station on it, whose inhabitants all came down sick. The primary advantage that crewed fighter has over a robotic drone is the human/vargr,whatever brain riding in it. Sometimes you really need a living person on the location to make sense of what is going on, and to do something about it.

Also, fighters allow a carrier to project power in many different locations at once, something that no other ship can do.

Simon Jester

 

[daryen]

Even looking at High Guard, I would say that fighters and carriers are critically important. The Imperium even started to standardize on them after the 5FW.

Its just their fighters were really big. They called them "Battleriders".

 

[BluWolf]

Thank you Simon. I thought that is what it might be but I have never read any Traveller stuff, other than Meilieu 0 (crap), so I was jsut guessing.

No one wants to take a stab at amphibious assault craft??

 

[BMonnery]

Originally posted by BluWolf:
Thank you Simon. I thought that is what it might be but I have never read any Traveller stuff, other than Meilieu 0 (crap), so I was jsut guessing.

No one wants to take a stab at amphibious assault craft??

Well, canon includes Jump Troops, the equivalent of Paratroopers today who jump from orbiting spaceships in ablative coffins and seize key points (probably the Surface-Space defences and landing zones).

The main body may simply (with grav vehicles) fly down from orbit rather than coming in dropships, although CT grav vehicles simply aren't fast enough to do this.

I'd guess you'd use small craft dropships, launched off an assault carrier, the size being dictated by the efficiency of the defences (heavily defended targets requiring more, smaller dropships).

Bryn
ex-Jump Rat, 6th Battalion (Jump), 4518th Infantry (The Duke of Reginas Own Huscarles) in another universe....

 

[MJD]

Landing ships/assault ships do exist. Some carry Marine units as small as companies, some use armored fire support/lander craft to convey troops to the ground.

Equivalents to LST/LPD/LCA etc do thus exist.

Also the equivalent of the Tarawa types - landing platforms with fighters, support craft and landing vehicles - are used by the Imperial Marines.

 

[StrikerFan]

Originally posted by BluWolf:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> FTRS, besides (IMTU) providing screening and patrolling duties, can also with the Battle Bridge, engage in Lidar/ladar handoffs for the missiles from Big ships at a distance. In planetary roles, Close Air support (CAS), suppression of enemy Space/ or ground based Ftrs comes to the fore. (ASLTRON based squadrons.)

OK, qualify this statement. Why would these large capitol ships NEED patrols and screening?

Is it a limitation of sensor range? Can FTRs GET to an area faster than a sensor signal? Can they manuever further than a carriers sensors? It certainly not to have "eyes" on target?

What is all this Lidar/ladar stuff?

Why do manned spacecraft when theoretically you could launch robotic drones?

On a side topic, how does one do a planetary invasion? Marines in streamlined landing craft (analogous to todays LST/LSDs)?</font>[/QUOTE]In my MT-based universe, larger ships carry both drones (for basic long-range sensing and spoofing) and usually at least some fighters (to provide long-range strike and intercept capability). Drones are not armed, fighters are. Neither fighters nor drones are faster than sensor signals (they'd have to be faster than light to do that, not possible under Traveller rules), but the mother ship's sensors only reach so far, and spreading out the fleet invites defeat in detail if an enemy can pounce on the dispersed units.

Small-scale invasions, or the lead-in to a large-scale invasion, are the province of jump troops. Larger scale invasions are conducted using standardized 400-dTon assault landers, big enough to land a company of armor or armored infantry at a time.

StrikerFan

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by trader jim:
Yeah right......armed with cast off rebuilt military junk....AND i just told the Menace to Navigation Boys about you and that Q-ship pile of Junk.....they are now looking for you!!!!....

-----------------------------------------
The first official denial from Jim on this topic has now been uttered! The truth follows soon enough.

heretically yours,

 

[Liam Devlin]

" FTRS, besides (IMTU) providing screening and patrolling duties, can also with the Battle Bridge, engage in Lidar/ladar handoffs for the missiles from Big ships at a distance. In planetary roles, Close Air support (CAS), suppression of enemy Space/ or ground based Ftrs comes to the fore. (ASLTRON based squadrons.)"

________________________________________________
OK, qualify this statement. Why would these large capitol ships NEED patrols and screening?

Is it a limitation of sensor range? Can FTRs GET to an area faster than a sensor signal? Can they manuever further than a carriers sensors? It certainly not to have "eyes" on target?

What is all this Lidar/ladar stuff?

Why do manned spacecraft when theoretically you could launch robotic drones?
___________________________________________
Bluwolf:
To be short and sweet about it, space is vast. Sensors only extend so far. The further you can extend your sensors (drones/ lidar/ladr handoffs etc, even FTRS) the more your mother ship/ the rest of the unti/ sqdn, fleet can see.

In battle, it pays to know more than the enemy does. Find Him first (job1); fix his location (job2); then F##K him up on your terms (job 3). Its a vast game of Hide n seek.

On a side topic, how does one do a planetary invasion? Marines in streamlined landing craft (analogous to todays LST/LSDs)?

Yes, MT-TNE have listed them. ASLT grav carriers for a platoon to company size element have been around awhile.
Orbital support, suppression of enemy planet's COACC (Combined Orbital/Aerospace Command/ Control) requires such things.
Enemy's defenses can include SAM's(TL-6)/ Planetary defense missiles (TL-8+); planetary meson guns (TL-12+); not to mention AAA flak (TL-5+)...Sensors, satellites to alert the world being attacked.
Attacking a world is a lot like goinfg after an island in ww 2. The fleet must suppress planetary fires to get their Marine Landing forces in (drop troops and Lift troops).

On Freelance Traveller, their is a "White Paper" article on planetary assault on that web site. Author is Rick Stump.
http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/plntasslt.html

Check it out!

Heretically yours,

 

[Ben W Bell]

One other thing to consider when asking if fighters are practical or not is the mindset of the naval architects and the Admirals. We all know from the rules books that fighters are not very effective against other fleet elements, but to the mind of the people in the Traveller Universe that may well be very different.

Just remember if you envisage battleships being taken down by swarms of fighters then by all means do that in your universe. It's your game so do what you want with it. I must say in my game the rules matter very little, it is the drama of the situations that count and the continued enjoyment and playability of the game that ultimately counts.

 

[Simon Jester]

Originally posted by BenBell:
One other thing to consider when asking if fighters are practical or not is the mindset of the naval architects and the Admirals. We all know from the rules books that fighters are not very effective against other fleet elements, but to the mind of the people in the Traveller Universe that may well be very different.

Just remember if you envisage battleships being taken down by swarms of fighters then by all means do that in your universe. It's your game so do what you want with it. I must say in my game the rules matter very little, it is the drama of the situations that count and the continued enjoyment and playability of the game that ultimately counts.

True.

IMTU, fighters aren't able to kill or even really disable Ships of the Wall (battleships, battlecruisers and monitors {non-jump battleships}) but they can damage them enough (by taking out sensor arrays and defensive turrets) that they are significantly easier for other Ships of the Wall to kill. And enough fighters can still destroy lighter warcraft.

Simon Jester

 

[TheColonel]

The target harrassment ability of small fighters would be enough to warrent their use. You would have to design ships to be able to take on close small targets. You would lose some space for large weapons. Fighters could(as stated) take out sensors or large weapons. And....nuclear dampers can't work all the time. Or...what about a nice matter/anitmatter missle? The TL to create one would be less than creating a working M/AM engine.