OTU Only: Fleet Organization

[Matt123]

Just one persons interpretation of these various fleets. Even if you disagree, hopefully it throws an interesting perspective.

Some "canon" squadrons:

V&V
Cruron 4221 (16 ships)
-2 Heavy Cruisers
-1 Strike Cruiser
-3 Destroyers
-4 Close Escorts
-6 Auxillaries/Couriers

The inclusion of a Strike Cruiser would indicate this fleet is intended for system raids against soft targets deep (4-10 parsecs) behind enemy lines. The fleet needs to be self sufficient and remain combat effective as long as possible before withdrawal is necessary. The escorts (Destroyers and Close Escorts) protect the three capital ships from nuisance attacks in soft systems (eg: SDB's, fighters) while the fighters carried by the Strike Cruiser conduct surface attacks on system outposts and possibly the main world if it is lightly defended. In either case supported by spinal meson fire where risk to the capital ships is minimal.

The real benefit of this fleet is not the damage it inflicts, but in the resources the opponent must divert from main fleets in order to combat it. Three Cruisers are a formidable force that will typically require a Batron, assuming the Strike force does not flee which of course it will. This dynamic increases the need to Batrons in every reachable system covering every(or many) refueling point. Or if resources are scarce (which they will be in a war) dispersing multiple BBs to merely inflict damage sufficient to encourage the Strike Fleet to head home for repairs.

High Passage 5
810th Fleet (34 ships)
Batron 490 (14 ships)
-1 Uzshu Battleship
-1 Kokirraks Battleship
-3 Gormandoacy Destroyers
-3 Chrysanthemum DE's
-6 Fleet Couriers

A very light Batron that would retreat in the face of serious opposition, but would be used to dominate the flanks of a fleet, particularly to stop infiltrators intent on commerce raiding or Strike Fleets either entering or leaving their area of operations.

The six destroyers will typically dominate refuelling points in a system, leaving the BB's to support the destroyers. The Fleet Couriers in addition to fleet communications, will also serve as pickets in enemy systems, using their range to monitor systems up to J3 away safely.

Cruron 87 (20 ships)
-8 Sarmonocci Light Cruisers
-3 Gormandoacy Destroyers
-6 Chrysanthemum DE's
-3 Workhorse Ordinance Carriers

Two possibilities spring to mind. Escort support for a Batron like BatRon 154 below or for chasing down (non-capital ship) infiltrators in rear areas where the Cruron may be split into three or more elements to force an infiltrator into confrontation. Ideally this will force it to flee and short of jump fuel, it will flee to the outer system. A DE will then stay on picket to ensure its ultimate surrender or death by fuel starvation.

SM Campaign
Batron 154 (8 ships, 7 riders)
-1 Lurenti Tender/ 7 Nolikian Riders
-7 PF Sloan Escorts
200 fighters

Battle Riders are Alpha Strike fleets, best used in force to guarantee overwhelming odds. Losses if retreat is required can be crippling. BatRons will typically have supporting fleets that will contain the requisite escorts and auxiliary craft. The Fleet Admiral, typically controlling multiple Batrons, will also have Fleet Couriers attached.

Crurons like Cruron 87 above can screen the Tender should retreat be necessary, but losses will occur. Keep in mind any fleet that might result in 7 Battle Riders fleeing in the middle of combat will chew up 8 Light Cruisers. But at least the BRs will hopefully be recovered. Harking back to the escort discussion, this is a case where the CruRon has a specific escort role, placing them in the main line outside of this role risks the fleet in later engagements. In HG breaking through the thin line of Cruisers to attack a defenceless Tender loaded with BRs is every Admirals dream.

High Passage 5
Cruron? (5 Ships)
-1 Tempest Cruiser
-1 Gormandoay Destroyer
-2 Gazelle CE
-1 Scout

The inclusion of a Scout for communication, light escorts and single Cruiser indicates this is a fleet most likely used for waving the flag in safe areas. A Cruiser serves well to remind most imperial worlds that the Imperial fleet can dominate theirs at will, yet also shows Imperial respect that the Imperium will on occasion conduct port visits with a Capital ship, not just 400ton Patrol Cruisers. The underlying message is that there is teeth behind Patrol Cruisers.

I would expect an Imperial Diplomatic Attaché to be on board whose main role is to dine and schmooze with local dignitaries along with the Cruiser Captain.

 

[McPerth]

Well, see that's the point.

You can have all of the "canonical" fleets you want, but if the fleets don't work, according to the mechanics of the GAME, then they don't work. And you don't build them, fly them, or play them.

The dichotomy of Big Ship universe of Book 5 vs the Little Ship universe of Book 2 doesn't help either. A 400dt SDB is simply not an effective combatant in a Big Ship universe. Neither is a 300dt Close Escort. They're not threatening nor helpful. They can't protect anything, and can't hurt anything.

They can certainly be effective as a utility ship, just like a Ships Boat is. If you want to picket one in a system as a scout so it can jump out at the first sign of trouble, then great. But then it's not really escorting anything, all alone in the dark, is it?

So, you can have as expansive of a view as you like, but when the dice hit the table, all that matters is the actual mechanics of combat as described in the game rules.

And in that view, those ships, and their role, aren't really effective at all.

As you say, the mechanics of the game make such small ships useless, for CT:HG (and MT, as is quite close to it).

See that in MgT;HG Expanded Space Combat even those small ships, each with 3-4 turrets, may do some damage on capital ships, and a swarm of them may well even destoy one, making them somewhat useful, even in large ships battles.

I cannot talk about other versions, as I don't know them enough.

 

[Condottiere]

I'm revisioning the Solomani Navy, based on their Fighting Ships.

Their ship composition is canonically extremely unbalanced, skewing towards large numbers of capital ships (they expect to be taking on the Imperium), practically no cruisers and destroyers for all intents and purposes, and lots of light combatants, because the Navy is expected to take over the roles usually performed by what's usually assigned to the Imperium Scouts.

This unbalance is recent, probably starting since they rebuilt their military post War of Imperial Aggression, stopped bothering to build cruisers, and surprisingly, destroyers. Game mechanics, it seems based on the Adventure Class ship designs, which would currently mean an upper limit of two kay tonnes.

My revisioning has the Solomani Navy emphasizing commonality to simplify logistics, especially regarding jump drives, which means all capital ships have standardized tonnages.

I also divided by the Confederation into three military districts, which can concentrate on enveloping the Imperium occupied systems of the Solomani Sphere in three directions, while still facing two other potential threats, the Aslan and the Hivers, while keeping the central district as a strategic reserve.

 

[Dagrill]

Well, see that's the point.

You can have all of the "canonical" fleets you want, but if the fleets don't work, according to the mechanics of the GAME, then they don't work. And you don't build them, fly them, or play them.

And in that view, those ships, and their role, aren't really effective at all.

But in real life we had British Destroyers escorting Artic Convoys during the Great Patriotic War and getting crushed when they went toe to toe with German Capital units and all the worlds navies did not say Destroyers are pointless and stop building them....

The problem is that in RL cheap attrition units are useful and the Game does not reflect RL by forcing gamers to spread their budgets to cover the other assets are Navy needs.

Kind Regards

David

 

[Condottiere]

It's also scale.

Pre Great Patriotic War Destroyer Leaders were a tad short of two kay tonnes; Traveller ones range from three to ten kay.

Battleships averaged around forty kay to an unaverage sixty kay plus for the Yamatos; Traveller battleships start at two hundred kay, and seem to max out at half a million, though there are supposedly larger super dreadnoughts than the Tigresses.

 

[Matt123]

It's also scale.
...

You get a feel for that in Gurps Interstellar Wars which explores Humanities first contact with the Vilani from TL 10-12 (roughly). Destroyers around 1-2,000 ton, Battleships from 30,000 ton. Plus a very good read.

 

[Dagrill]

You get a feel for that in Gurps Interstellar Wars which explores Humanities first contact with the Vilani from TL 10-12 (roughly). Destroyers around 1-2,000 ton, Battleships from 30,000 ton. Plus a very good read.

Yes, the comparable HG scenario is more sending 50kt Ghalalk's against 500kt Tigress'. My apologies a more accurate RL comparison would more be Torpedo Boats against Battleships (which is why destroyers were invented to protect the Battleships from the Torpedo Boats).

I do feel that the cost of warships in TCS is too low, I especially dislike the bit that allows you to build 10 times your budget as your initial fleet, as it gives planetary navies like Glisten and Mora ridiculously huge fleets.

Kind Regards

David

 

[Meteoric Assault]

You get a feel for that in Gurps Interstellar Wars which explores Humanities first contact with the Vilani from TL 10-12 (roughly). Destroyers around 1-2,000 ton, Battleships from 30,000 ton. Plus a very good read.

I actually liked that supplement

 

[Condottiere]

Costs really aren't realistic, which makes it more of a strategic simulation.

 

[aramis]

You get a feel for that in Gurps Interstellar Wars which explores Humanities first contact with the Vilani from TL 10-12 (roughly). Destroyers around 1-2,000 ton, Battleships from 30,000 ton. Plus a very good read.

I actually liked that supplement

Note that, due to computer requirements, CT HG has size limits by TL.

TL	Max Td	Max G
5	600	0
7	1000	2
8	1000	5
9	4000	6
A (10)	10,000	6
B (11)	50,000	6
C (12)	100,000	6
D (13)	1000000	6
E (14)	—	6
F (15)	—	6

A TL11 capped era (like GTIW) can only build to 50KTd.

I like the concept, I dislike the numbers chosen by Marc, Frank, and Loren.

 

[Condottiere]

I see that more as a limitation on successful jumping tonnage.

 

[mike wightman]

Note that, due to computer requirements, CT HG has size limits by TL.

TL	Max Td	Max G
5	600	0
7	1000	2
8	1000	5
9	4000	6
A (10)	10,000	6
B (11)	50,000	6
C (12)	100,000	6
D (13)	1000000	6
E (14)	—	6
F (15)	—	6

A TL11 capped era (like GTIW) can only build to 50KTd.

I like the concept, I dislike the numbers chosen by Marc, Frank, and Loren.

HG2 states that the computer size is the minimum computer for that hull, not the maximum hull size that can have that computer, thus you can actually build ships of up to 1t less than the next TL minimum.

 

[salochin999]

Well, see that's the point.

You can have all of the "canonical" fleets you want, but if the fleets don't work, according to the mechanics of the GAME, then they don't work. And you don't build them, fly them, or play them.

The dichotomy of Big Ship universe of Book 5 vs the Little Ship universe of Book 2 doesn't help either. A 400dt SDB is simply not an effective combatant in a Big Ship universe. Neither is a 300dt Close Escort. They're not threatening nor helpful. They can't protect anything, and can't hurt anything.

They can certainly be effective as a utility ship, just like a Ships Boat is. If you want to picket one in a system as a scout so it can jump out at the first sign of trouble, then great. But then it's not really escorting anything, all alone in the dark, is it?

So, you can have as expansive of a view as you like, but when the dice hit the table, all that matters is the actual mechanics of combat as described in the game rules.

And in that view, those ships, and their role, aren't really effective at all.

My take on this is to handwave the names of the ship types simply mean different things in different contexts.

In the 3I 95%+ of the people, GDP, productive capacity etc is concentrated in a handful of systems so those systems and the systems which link them are the important bits and that's where you want the battle fleets.

However you still need to know what's going on in the other systems so you might also want squadrons of cheap ships that act as a light cavalry screen.

(Then on top of that you might have a commerce raider category also.)

So in theory you could have a neat division between BSU squadrons and SSU squadrons where the BSU squadrons might have 50k dton "escorts" while the SSU squadron have 400 dton "escorts".

IMTU i just add "patrol" in front of the name to designate the SSU versions.

So for example using some of the canon squadrons mentioned

V&V
Cruron 4221 (16 ships)
-2 Heavy Cruisers
-1 Strike Cruiser
-3 Destroyers
-4 Close Escorts
-6 Auxillaries/Couriers

say it's a raider squadron with 10k to 50k ships i.e. their destroyers are 10k and the cruisers 50k

High Passage 5
810th Fleet (34 ships)
Batron 490 (14 ships)
-1 Uzshu Battleship
-1 Kokirraks Battleship
-3 Gormandoacy Destroyers
-3 Chrysanthemum DE's
-6 Fleet Couriers

main battle squadron with 50kt to 500kt ships i.e. their escorts are 50kt

Cruron 87 (20 ships)
-8 Sarmonocci Light Cruisers
-3 Gormandoacy Destroyers
-6 Chrysanthemum DE's
-3 Workhorse Ordinance Carriers

say that's a patrol (aka boondocks) squadron with 1600 dton cruisers and 400 dton escorts

just stick "strike" or "patrol" in front of the ship type.

 

[savage]

A TL11 capped era (like GTIW) can only build to 50KTd.

I like the concept, I dislike the numbers chosen by Marc, Frank, and Loren.

What number would you choose? I always thought it should be cost related not TL. Size is based on need or determination to build bigger.

 

[aramis]

What number would you choose? I always thought it should be cost related not TL. Size is based on need or determination to build bigger.

Technology limits the size of real world structures. Theoretically, without being Lifted from above, buildings proably cannot get much above 2km tall; the largest internal volume structure currently is about 398,000 cubic meters... 28.5 KTd... That's the Boeing assembly plant.

I'd prefer the limits on hull sizes to cap around 50KTd at TL 15, and 500 Td at TL9.

 

[savage]

Technology limits the size of real world structures. Theoretically, without being Lifted from above, buildings proably cannot get much above 2km tall; the largest internal volume structure currently is about 398,000 cubic meters... 28.5 KTd... That's the Boeing assembly plant.

I'd prefer the limits on hull sizes to cap around 50KTd at TL 15, and 500 Td at TL9.

So, you really just saying you prefer a small ship universe.

The comparable of buildings to starships really doesn't work. Yes, some buildings lift themselves up. But the size of those facilities was based on cost and need to complete the required task, more than technology. Closer to the comparison a wet ships require buoyancy to stay afloat. Assuming a space ship does not intend on landing it makes things a bit more simple. FTL vessels covered in CT High Guard have a greater defined scale, within the technology range. Yet, a culture must decide what the ROI is on the investment in scale to accomplish their tasks. The Tigress, for example, is rather pricey to operate.

 

[Condottiere]

The aircraft assigned tend to cost more than the carrier.

Though that may change with disposable drones and twelve billion buck carriers.

The Tigress supposedly represents the all in one mindset, and a believe that fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station.

 

[aramis]

So, you really just saying you prefer a small ship universe.

No. Not at all. I've no objections to a plausible big ship universe - the problem is, a big ship universe is limited by materials, unless the drives are Alcubierre type Warp Drives (where the ship isn't moving, the ship is being dragged by a moving bubble of spacetime).

I'm saying that a unified structure expected to do 6G's dynamic acceleration probably isn't going to exceed the size of a static 1G loaded structure.

Mostly that's due to combined factors of compressive strength limits upon metals and the square-cube law of scaling. (Past a certain load, they become soft plastics, rather than rigid.) With scaling - the structural load increases as the cube of the scaling factor, but the strength of structural members is a function of the cross-sectional area, which increases as the square of the scaling factor, which means your volume of needed structure goes up by the scaling factor raised to the 1.5 power.

Since the designs showns tend to resemble monoquoque designs, armor thickness should also increase as the 1.5 power of the scaling factor...

It's a major disconnect from reality in Traveller. All editions.

Known quantity, too.

 

[savage]

I'm saying that a unified structure expected to do 6G's dynamic acceleration probably isn't going to exceed the size of a static 1G loaded structure.

Since the designs showns tend to resemble monoquoque designs, armor thickness should also increase as the 1.5 power of the scaling factor...

It's a major disconnect from reality in Traveller. All editions.

Known quantity, too.

Major disconnect, yeah, it's scifi. The work around for all of this is the future metal technology introduced in Traveller, Bonded Superdense, for example.
We can tell from our work with space structures today that the old or even new design methods are inadequate. Still predicting performance of structural scale based on fiction metals is precarious. And after all is said and done, toss in anti-gravity tech. o:

 

[salochin999]

I'm trying to determine the structure of the Imperial Navy based upon existing canon source in order to calculate the size and distribution of the Fleets.

The Rebellion Sourcebook (p 27-31) describes a sector fleet of about 1000 combat vessels, plus an unknown number of smaller support ships. These are divided into (on average) 16 numbered fleets, 16 reserve fleets, and one named fleet. RbS implies the named (sector) fleet is an organizational layer, and the ships are assigned to either one of the numbered or reserve fleets.

Grand Fleet (p 58-59) also describes a sector fleet of about 1000 combat vessels. But only about half ("nearly 500 of its 1000 ships are assigned to the Subsector Fleets.") of the ships. These are one Cruiser squad, plus several 6-8 Fleet Destroyers, 6-8 Escort destroyers, and a larger number of smaller Escorts. The other half of the combat ships are assigned directly to the named (sector) fleet. These are the major war fighting elements, including the all the BatRons and most of the cruisers.

There are two differences between these descriptions: The first is the obvious : in the Milieu 990, the sector fleet has direct control of the majority of the Combat vessels. Whereas in the Rebellion era, the sector fleet has (depending upon the point of view) the sector fleet has control of none of the combat vessels (they're under the subsector fleet control), or all of them (the sector fleet is overview control of the subsector fleets).

My take on this is it's a hedgehog defense.

Each sub-sector or maybe more accurately the alpha cluster in each sub-sector construct and maintain a colonial fleet to defend the important bits of the sub-sector i.e. themselves.

They also contribute tax for the construction of the IN reserve fleets which are under sector fleet command and mostly held back at various bases ready to be massed for counter attacks.

All of this being adjustable to circumstance so in some cases a reserve fleet might be assigned to a sub-sector command to bolster defense or a colonial fleet might be ordered to reinforce a reserve fleet or a reserve fleet is based forward as bait (e.g. Pixie).

But generally a hedgehog system with a colonial fleet for local defense of the important bits and IN reserve fleets as the manouever component.

A *bit* like the Roman Ala system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ala_(Roman_allied_military_unit)

The second is the nature of the fleets seems to have changed. Grand Fleet describes the fleets with more smaller (escort and patrol size) vessels, where RbS has more capital ships.

If energy weapons work on the basis of if you double the range then the power at the end is divided by four then that seems to me to create a fundamental choice.

If you put everything into one big long range weapon then you can potentially hit first and win before the other side is in range. This option would then require escorts to act as point defense to prevent swarming.

(i'll call that the dreadnought option for the sake of argument)

(a carrier is like this option where the planes are the equivalent of a spinal gun)

The alternative would be a capital ship which was a mixture of long range and short range weapons.

(i'll call that the battleship option)

Which of these two options was optimal might vary back and forth depending on technology.

For example say the limit was the size of ship that could be built but you could always build a weapon / power supply big enough to fill the ship size - then the dreadnought option might be optimal.

On the other hand if the limit was max weapon size (energy throughput) or max power supply (input) then you might as well go with the battleship option because you can't build one big weapon to fill the ship.

So if tech advanced erratically: advances in max ship size vs advances in max weapon size then the optimal build: dreadnoughts + escorts vs battleships, might vary over time.

(For example if max ship size was partly a function of jump drive then you might see the dreadnought option lagging each jump improvement if it takes a while for weapon tech to advance to the new ship sizes i.e.
mature TL11 = dreadnought
new TL12 = battleship
mature TL12 = dreadnought
new TL13 = battleship
etc)