Kin of the Stars

Please sign in to post.
Kin of the Stars

A community for the fans of Crest of the Stars, Abh culture, anime, technology, science fiction, video games, and friendly conduct.


    Space combat?

    Share
    avatar
    AlexT
    Kilo-commander
    Kilo-commander

    Number of posts : 542
    Imperial Credits : 7816
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by AlexT on 4/16/2009, 4:48 am

    Hundreds, but if we apply scientific knowledge and logic then hundreds become dozens Smile
    There's a propblem with that idea of yours...those fake ships need to be as heavy as real ships then that mean you'll need to waste a lot of resources as well as transporting them effectively may be a problem... And i realy doubt that mines are that stupid. They have many different ways to determine their target. Remember - they are expensive so nobody will save on cameras, radars, commlink etc etc. So mines are basicaly a small ships.

    I believe there's no better defense agains mines than fast point defense lasers. The only problem is their relatively low power output - the mines are probably well armored or even shielded since why would you bother installing bubble generator and not installing shield generator or good armor?

    I think Lt. not need to worry because there's not that many mines - an average ship can carry up to 8-10 i think. Exception is only those large mine-deployment ships which are not that numerous in the fleet...
    avatar
    Schwenkdawg
    Rear Flyer
    Rear Flyer

    Number of posts : 113
    Imperial Credits : 6854
    Registration date : 2009-03-25
    Age : 28
    Location : Ardmore, PA

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Schwenkdawg on 4/17/2009, 3:43 am

    Oh, i have no problem with patrol ships (the 8-10 mine ones), because they're also equipped and even specialized for ship to ship combat (railguns, lots of armor, lasers, etc). Its the sheer number of mines utilized in combat that bothers me. however, limited as my scientific and sci-fi knowledge is, i couldn't come up with a feasible way that they could be countered. thats why i threw this one at ya'll
    avatar
    mitsuki lover
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2325
    Imperial Credits : 10712
    Registration date : 2009-04-10

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by mitsuki lover on 4/17/2009, 11:29 am

    I guess now would be the time to ask just how many mine ships does each Abh fleet possess?
    Better yet how large are the Abh fleets?
    avatar
    JGZinv
    Admin
    Admin

    Number of posts : 667
    Imperial Credits : 7906
    Registration date : 2009-03-17
    Age : 31
    Location : 9468 Parallel World Dr. Artifact USA Earth

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by JGZinv on 4/17/2009, 3:11 pm

    Um.... big?


    _________________
    True power comes not from strength, but from the soul and imagination
    avatar
    mitsuki lover
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2325
    Imperial Credits : 10712
    Registration date : 2009-04-10

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by mitsuki lover on 4/18/2009, 7:37 pm

    They would have to bigger than Star Fleet to take all the damage they take.
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/18/2009, 9:13 pm

    Well, I don't read many scifi because I know they all have faults if I scrutinize them. My general knowledge is vaster than those authors wether that be techonology or science. I take my detailed explanations from these not from some scifi, except series specific stuff.

    Mitsuki, I have most answers in the Laburec Library, but to make it short Abh fleets consists of small fleets which consists of 'platoons' which consist of (a-)teams. lol
    The basic building block/assignment/mission are the same from the basic unit up to the fleet.
    roughly these numbers of ships can be seen 3,6,24,100+,500+,2000+,10000+,100000-150000+
    This is only the military fleet, theree is still the merchant fleet.
    I think I did some estimate (pretty good) calculation back on AN.
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/19/2009, 4:04 pm

    In the case of mine warfare, what I was thinking is that of course you have your heavy mine layers strictly because mines seem to work best used en masse. That being said; however, what if each enemy had balanced numbers in terms of missiles/mines/large propelled ordinance to throw at each other? I would think then what one would do is turn to the fast moves such as assault ships, (essentially tiny fast moving crusiers *I hate wrong poor class naming in this universe*).

    What if in the next case enemies are matched in this case? Well I'm thinking that there should be the implimentation of a heavier and larger vessel that is built to take down capital ships without use of mines. These, as I call them, would be dedicated gun platforms with turreted EM Cannons. These turrets may also be loaded with specialist ammunition such as some sort of stellar canister shot as a clumsy counter to mines.

    I planned to simply make up that class of ship in my first Seikai fanfic, but . . . I failed in the prolouge and first chapter. Anyhow, . . . that's my random take.
    avatar
    mitsuki lover
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2325
    Imperial Credits : 10712
    Registration date : 2009-04-10

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by mitsuki lover on 4/20/2009, 4:42 pm

    You mean something like a modern battleship.
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/20/2009, 6:03 pm

    Indeed. I mean I would think in space it would be fairly effective provided correct implementation. there are things I wish to discuss about this non-existent class of ships that should or shouldn't be implemented.
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/20/2009, 9:48 pm

    I understand your aim. My answers will be close to reality since Seikai is more realistic.

    You proposal is not feasible for various reasons.
    The reason for the existence of battleships is that their defenses and firepower overwhelm other ships. In the age of space combat that is no longer possible. The armor or shield can no longer sustain a hit 100% of the time. Even a small ship could bring up fire power which can overwhelm any armor e.g. fusion warhead missile.
    In order to turret the electromagnetic cannon it has to be BIG. A cannon weight probably more than 20000 tonnes even with light superconducting material (3-4 g/cm^3). [if volume 4x4x600 m *1/4 = 2400m^3 ~ 84-9200 ts ]
    The mechanical stress require the turret to be more than 100 m big, probably closer to 200 m.
    The power needed to turn that thing is another matter.
    Of course you will mount three on a turret to make it more feasible....and at least two turrets...probably three at the minimum...probably at least six to be satisfied.
    So the ship would be big, heavy, pretty much not very steerable. For the same mass and personnel the opposition could crank out more attackships and in summe bear more weapons, hence, more fire power for the same mass.

    In terms of weapon systems of any kind you have to consider power generation, armor/defense, offensive power, and mobility. Another also important aspect is mass or cost which you usually ignore but not when the difference is very big.
    The side which can put more in a smaller shell always wins.

    I think the best counter to attackship is a better attackship or smaller but more efficient and equally powerful ships. This is an approach the People's Sovereign Stellar Union tried with their non-planespace ships being faster etc.
    As is the munition cannot be smaller, because either the warhead cannot be smaller for the same power or the fuel necessary cannot be reduced. Both mines and EM cannon missile need fuel to steer.
    The EM cannon is needed for range so this thing cannot just be dropped either.
    The weapon that comes close to match it is the plasma cannon or in this case anti-proton cannon, but the disadvantage is range which is much less.
    Another idea would be a drone ship, however, the drones have to be shipsized in order to mount the necessary weapons, power, propulsion systems.
    This is an approach the People's Sovereign Stellar Union tried with their shipsized mines, but with no weapons.

    If anyone has another idea please do come forward even you think it's not good, we can still get better ideas or understanding from them.
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/21/2009, 2:17 am

    Well in that case I meant to characterize a different weapon system that did not use EM.

    What I imagined is something along the lines of Gauss Cannons (or Railguns). You can pack plenty of specialist and powerful munitions in to relatively small weaponry like this I presume.

    In terms of smaller ships, there already are plenty of fast moving attack craft; however, what I want to bring up is what is left to attack the enemy with assuming we have a balance of forces (much like Skaresh; however, no frigate class ships for the Abhs were present). What would counter the larger classes besides more ships of similar sizes just brawling (a style which both Spoor and Dusanyu call brutish not that it matters to me). What I was considering was something along the lines of WWII battleships (with of course updated weaponary). It doesn't SEEM like a bad idea to me. . . at the very least it would be a surprising design if anything at that (assuming the overall design is bad . . . I need to quit inserting parethensis statements).

    Anyhow sorry to have taken so much time
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/21/2009, 6:29 am

    Well, what you want is change the natural rule of intersellar warfare, meaning a means to reduce the number of ships and weapons 'allowed' to be used in battle. Something like Star Trek. Only then can you have old naval warfare.

    The EM cannon is a railgun just very big. I assume the type you meant is like the new Battlestar Galactica or Battle Tech. Well, this is a possibility, but it fires dump munition or very limited action or less powerful munition, hence armor gets feasible. To make up you will have to fire lots of stuff at the enemy. You will also have to keep the enemy in 'sight'. Physically you will spend a more engery for the same mass of munnition because of waste engery of each shot.

    To further this you could fire shotgun like munition, although, separation isn't ideal as you don't have air to do that for you for free. You will have to have the extra fuel included.
    Or use proximity explosions. In any case you still will end up filling space with weaponry/munitions. That's just not avoidable if you have serious warfare.

    The only way to limit is to limit ship number for some reason. Except personnel, I don't believe a space faring civilisation cannot effort vast fleets.
    avatar
    AlexT
    Kilo-commander
    Kilo-commander

    Number of posts : 542
    Imperial Credits : 7816
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by AlexT on 4/21/2009, 7:40 am

    I think the only factor that can make any manuvers & counter-fire reasonable in space (and thus make combat more spectacular and less predictable) is usage of "delayed action weapons". What i mean is - be it mine, missile, anti-proton or plasma cannon they all need time to reach their target making evasive manuvers possible and effective. You can even shoot your own guns/missles to intercept enemy fire.
    I believe that "beam" weapons are very energy unefficient even in reality - it's a lot easier to shoot bolt of plasma at the enemy via magnetic field accelerator than waste megawatts of energy creating dense laser beam.

    So i can easily imagine battle of 2 fleets that is virtualy useless at long range simply because their offensive and defensive capabilities are matched at range so they have to fight up close - sea style Smile

    The other way to "fix" boring combat is shields. You can virtualy explain anything by using specific type of shields. Unfortunately Seikai shields are pretty "boring" as i remember - they make some weapons almost totaly useless.

    As for drones and fighters - in Seikai there's none because shields are to blame. In order to do any damage you need significant firepower or ship will simply ignore you. Roil - is the smallest possible and is not very effective, but i think Morioka invented them because he though that battles of larger ships become boring too Smile

    But what worries me in Seikai more than battles is lack of "tactical" variety. It's always Abhs vs UMK (and their friends). No pirates, no rogue planets, no factions and no politics...It would be ok if Abhs wasn't as strong as all other powers combined, but since they are even stronger - it makes interstellar politics of other nations kinda non-important..
    But i guess Morioka never had intention to turn Seikai into rpg\gaming universe. Shame - now we have a lot of work on our hands Smile

    P.S. I want to try drawing some space battle scene in full color...if anyone got interesting idea - let me know Smile
    avatar
    JGZinv
    Admin
    Admin

    Number of posts : 667
    Imperial Credits : 7906
    Registration date : 2009-03-17
    Age : 31
    Location : 9468 Parallel World Dr. Artifact USA Earth

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by JGZinv on 4/21/2009, 12:35 pm

    Heh, sounds more like you're missing the Tachyon element, which was all about the mercs, pirates, and barons.

    Another thing you guys are missing, is environmental elements. There could be a nebula that inhibits weapons or
    a large asteroid field. Then it would have another element. We don't have nebula restrictions implemented in tachyon,
    but we did have some asteroid maps. Which are often used for cover, traps, or just a momentary distraction.

    There's also gravity roids, which draw you to them like a gravity well. On at least one map these are clustered together so you can't escape and eventually are beaten between the rocks until you explode.


    _________________
    True power comes not from strength, but from the soul and imagination
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/21/2009, 12:56 pm

    Although, what you say does have merrits, it's useless in the real world.
    1. No one is living in those kind of environment, no civilisation, no worth figting for.
    As a commander I would just skip those areas and let you defend it for naught.
    It's called island hopping.
    This is related to the super battle ship so I will say while the ship takes a long time to get around and you defend useless land I would go around and conquer your home.
    2. A natural disadvantage applies to both sides.
    3. As I told AlexT before Nebulars and Asteroid fields aren't populated as in scifi. There is still open space and you actually wouldn't know it's a nebular. It's far from as dense as a fog, but admittedly from 300000 km distance you might see some haze.
    Countless probes/satellites have flown through the asteroid belt and the rings of saturn without a scratch and they weren't anything close to be able to avoid collisions.

    So for this kind of naval warfare there needs to be a lot of restrictions.
    Although, i don't play much of those space combat games, I have seen enough galactic wars and waged enough battles to say that fleet battles are always massive.
    It's different for induvidual or squadron battles. That's almost always like the naval battles you guys want because the resources are so limited.
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/21/2009, 2:06 pm

    My final effort then would be to say a ship that is like the Space Battleship Yamato; however, simply much smaller (which I think it is far larger than most ships in this universe). I mean anti-material shots should work. In terms of Star Trek I actually do not, envision anything like what I'm talking about working (since ALL vessels are relatively fast moving) including cruisers and capital sized ships

    I plan to have another off-shoot discussion following the end of my "Gun Platform" class discussion.
    avatar
    JGZinv
    Admin
    Admin

    Number of posts : 667
    Imperial Credits : 7906
    Registration date : 2009-03-17
    Age : 31
    Location : 9468 Parallel World Dr. Artifact USA Earth

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by JGZinv on 4/21/2009, 4:00 pm

    there there spoor...

    we'll just have to get a mod together and prove it can work ^_^


    _________________
    True power comes not from strength, but from the soul and imagination
    avatar
    AlexT
    Kilo-commander
    Kilo-commander

    Number of posts : 542
    Imperial Credits : 7816
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by AlexT on 4/21/2009, 4:58 pm

    I remember discussion about Gun Platform at AN, but i still can't imagine it... Especialy when it comes to it's weapons.
    Btw, why build platform, you can just transform asteroid into one Smile Is there description of how it looks like?

    Some people mentioned seikai game rules set, but i guess nobody tried to do it, right? I'm not sure i know of any universe with space battles rules to adapt for Seikai though...
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/21/2009, 6:20 pm

    It should work in some way . . . I need to make improvements (in my mind) to what I envision this platform to be.
    avatar
    AlexT
    Kilo-commander
    Kilo-commander

    Number of posts : 542
    Imperial Credits : 7816
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by AlexT on 4/21/2009, 7:04 pm

    spoor356 wrote:It should work in some way . . . I need to make improvements (in my mind) to what I envision this platform to be.
    Don't forget to post it, i want to make a sketch. Very Happy
    I think details are not too important except for overal shape and most important - guns must be placed in very efficient way. It will depend on overal shape of course so i'd start with primitive - is it circle, square or triangle?

    I like asteroid idea too - it should be a lot cheaper using one than making it. After all unlike ship - gun platrofm has low mobility so it doesn't need much. Think about it. I just feel like Seikai universe has enough ships, but using asteroid as gun platform would be something fresh. Or use both Smile
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/21/2009, 10:06 pm

    Well, at our tech level an asteroid base offers the best armor and heatsink.
    But starting with Seikai tech level ships are better, if hey get better defense tech then it's asteroids again, then back to ships etc.
    If you read SNS4 from the beginning you should get hints on the satellite/asteroid defenses of the Kemal system which are destroyed in chapter 8. The attack is similary to one of two attack solutions in Legends of Galactic Heroes.
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/21/2009, 10:10 pm

    Well a few things. Because I call it a platform, doesn't mean it is
    stationary. It just is the basis of the type of weapon it bears (Big
    guns). I do not think it should remain still, then again I do know that
    this class may very well be exceptionally un-maneuverable and mildly
    slow.



    Now what I was thinking that it would appear something like two
    battleships placed on top of one another at the keel. For this case I
    do have an image that works out. I want them to to be twin-gun turrets since I think triple guns would just be trouble.

    Note that this class will also have one turret to port and starboard off the center "deck" much like the HMS Dreadnought Class. That being said, they'll be placed on either side of the ship not on the top and bottom off center. It is a bit difficult to explain that bit Imagine those two turrets being on the sides to hold the ships together at the keel, something like that.

    Anyhow, I've attached two images that should help. I hope to see the sketch soon.

    HMS Dreadnought:


    A Refit Bismarck (this class never existed, just plans of it do)
    avatar
    Almael
    Imperial Admiral
    Imperial Admiral

    Number of posts : 2455
    Imperial Credits : 13375
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Almael on 4/21/2009, 10:23 pm

    Very Happy
    Basicly what you want is what I did with my prestige class ship...but your design is not advanced because you may not grasp the intention behind the idea. Which is to bear as much fire power as possible at the least cost. In this case dreadnough is better than bismark.


    I forgot to address this last time:
    One year ago lasers are normally 10% effiecient but today they are about 50%.
    In any case they are better compared to plasma/ion/particle or whatever
    name you give those matter weapons. For one you need to keep those
    matter in a certain state then bring them to a certain state whic cost
    engery. Then you have to accelerate them. For laser you only need to
    put in energy and you get laser without the need to accelerate it.
    avatar
    AlexT
    Kilo-commander
    Kilo-commander

    Number of posts : 542
    Imperial Credits : 7816
    Registration date : 2009-03-18

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by AlexT on 4/22/2009, 9:23 am

    Almael wrote:
    I forgot to address this last time:
    One year ago lasers are normally 10% effiecient but today they are about 50%.
    In any case they are better compared to plasma/ion/particle or whatever
    name you give those matter weapons. For one you need to keep those
    matter in a certain state then bring them to a certain state whic cost
    engery. Then you have to accelerate them. For laser you only need to
    put in energy and you get laser without the need to accelerate it.
    You mean optical lasers? I'd compare them to particle beams first since both technologies are very real, here's some info:

    Spoiler:
    "The U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency started work on particle beam weapons as early as 1958[1] , two years before the first scientific demonstration of lasers. The general idea of particle-beam weaponry is to hit a target object with a stream of accelerated particles moving at near the speed of light and therefore carrying tremendous kinetic energy; the particles transfer their kinetic energy to the atoms in the molecules of the target upon striking, much as a cue ball transfers its energy to the racked balls in billiards, thus exciting the target's atoms and superheating the target object in a short time, leading to explosion either of the surface layer or the interior of the target. Currently, the materials for such weapons are "high-risk" and may not be developed for some time[1]."

    Next is plasma accelerator cannon. I tried to dig some info.
    Wikipedia states: "Plasma weapons use a small nuclear reactor or fuel cell or other type of advanced energy storage device to power an electromagnetic accelerator that fires a stream, pulse or toroid of plasma (i.e. very hot, very energetic excited matter)."

    There's alredy widely used "dense plasma focus" - "a plasma machine that produces, by electromagnetic acceleration and compression, short-lived plasma that is so hot and dense that it becomes a copious multi-radiation source."
    What's worth of note is that size of machine is not critical - energy density of the focused plasma is practically a constant over the whole range of machines, from sub-kilojoule machines to megajoule machines, only volume varies which means we can make smaller cannons too.

    There's also real plasma powered cannon, though it'sused to propell projectiles instead:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma-powered_cannon

    While plasma would be efficient in space due to lack of atmosphere - to make it realy effective we'd need ability to produce self-sustained plasma like ball lightning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning) and throw it at target via electromagnetic cannon.

    Most useful article about plasma weapons with all it's pros and cons is here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_rifle

    Unfortunately none of these gave me any real clues as for comparison between optical laser vs plasma accelerator energy efficiency, but i still think that laser is more power hungry and cannot be easily made into moving turret due to it's size Razz
    avatar
    spoor356
    Front Flyer
    Front Flyer

    Number of posts : 209
    Imperial Credits : 7810
    Registration date : 2009-04-19
    Age : 32

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by spoor356 on 4/22/2009, 11:08 am

    . . . either of those have nothing to do with what I proposed . . . and
    I could care less among the Bismarck or the HMS Dreadnought were more
    efficient or effective in battle.

    Though raises a question which I will start in a different thread: HMS Dreadnought vs German Battleship Bismarck.

    But again, that is besides the point and I just wanted to see something along the lines of those kind of vessels designed, etc.

    I do have more fodder for thought if the twin turreted ships just made
    comparing Bismarck to Dreadnought too easy . . . (even though we were
    NEVER supposed to)

    Another (non-existent) North Carolina Refit Class

    Sponsored content

    Re: Space combat?

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is 12/18/2017, 4:53 am