Jump number for Bombardment Cruiser

[savage]

Mothballed

We know these ships can last more than 40 years.

Yes 40 years is a good starter ship. Why give players brand new shinny ships?

Traveller's Digest 7 discusses Mothballing and mentions ships hundreds of years old. Also TNE references...

As for me, I based my TNE campaign on it and created home rules to improve it.

There was a discussion on how to convert US WWII battleships into missile platforms and a few other things. When we're talking about keeping TL13, TL14 ships in service (assuming their Imperium) there will always be advocates for newer is better.

 

[Carlobrand]

Yes 40 years is a good starter ship. Why give players brand new shinny ships?

Traveller's Digest 7 discusses Mothballing and mentions ships hundreds of years old. Also TNE references...

As for me, I based my TNE campaign on it and created home rules to improve it.

There was a discussion on how to convert US WWII battleships into missile platforms and a few other things. When we're talking about keeping TL13, TL14 ships in service (assuming their Imperium) there will always be advocates for newer is better.

Newer is better, However, there's no practical difference between a TL14 hull and a TL 15 hull; even if you gutted the thing and replaced every wall and circuit, you'd save between 10% and 15% of cost by reusing the TL14 hull. The hull is a shell with massively strong walls; in the case of the AHL for example, that's something on the order of 6 inches of bonded superdense armor, and that's a lightly armored ship. The ship is huge, so getting in and out with the machinery is not all that challenging. The 12 million credit cost of an AHL hull is equal to a million or so man-hours of paid labor, 500 men for a year - if it costs anything less than that to remove the innards, you've saved money on the hull. Depending on how long the machinery itself is good for, you may only need to do overhauls to be able to reuse some of the significant machinery, thereby gaining additional savings.

The oldest AHLs are almost 120 years old as of the start of the 5th Frontier War, so the Imperium has had TL14 for at least that long. Any TL13 ships would either be older than that or the product of local lower-tech manufacture, so it's not clear whether the Imps would actually have any TL13 ships for conversion. At any event, they're likely to have many more TL14 retirees available for the honor. Nonetheless, even a TL13 convertee is likely to fair reasonably well over the typical TL12-and-under defending world, especially if the computer's upgraded to fleet norm.

For me, I tend to think that's the reason the classic "standard" hulls are so cheap - they just take in the old worn out Free Traders, pull out all the original hardware, put in new hardware and, voila, a new ship costing millions of credits less than it would have had you fashioned the hull from scratch.

 

[savage]

newer is better

Newer is better, However, there's no practical difference between a TL14 hull and a TL 15 hull; even if you gutted the thing and replaced every wall and circuit, you'd save between 10% and 15% of cost by reusing the TL14 hull. The hull is a shell with massively strong walls; in the case of the AHL for example, that's something on the order of 6 inches of bonded superdense armor, and that's a lightly armored ship. The ship is huge, so getting in and out with the machinery is not all that challenging. The 12 million credit cost of an AHL hull is equal to a million or so man-hours of paid labor, 500 men for a year - if it costs anything less than that to remove the innards, you've saved money on the hull. Depending on how long the machinery itself is good for, you may only need to do overhauls to be able to reuse some of the significant machinery, thereby gaining additional savings.

Yes a huge time savings is available. I've been through that. Newer can be better but when militaries experiment we sometimes find something in need of rework.

Jeff M Hopper,
On a side note, I think that reactivating a ship for a specific bombardment mandate could be over stepped easily. Stepping outside the vessels ability.
For example, a battleship from WW2 would not make a great mini-carrier.

 

[Vladika]

For example, a battleship from WW2 would not make a great mini-carrier.

Not today, but PRE WWII Cruiser hulls made pretty good WWII, and beyond, fleet carriers.

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

Jeff M Hopper,
On a side note, I think that reactivating a ship for a specific bombardment mandate could be over stepped easily. Stepping outside the vessels ability.
For example, a battleship from WW2 would not make a great mini-carrier.

Possibly, but a WW2 battleship is not the equivalent ship of the line for the Third Imperium.

Most line ships have a spinal mount and many bay weapons. Retrofitting a smaller spinal mount can free up a few thousand tons for a squadron or more of fighters with possibly launch tubes as well running parallel to the spinal mount. Bays for weapons can be emptied of the weapons and small hangers for gigs and armed ship's boats installed. The old spinal mount could be reused or sold off to a planetary government loyal to the 3I for space defense. Same thing as the bay weapons.

 

[aramis]

Possibly, but a WW2 battleship is not the equivalent ship of the line for the Third Imperium.

Most line ships have a spinal mount and many bay weapons. Retrofitting a smaller spinal mount can free up a few thousand tons for a squadron or more of fighters with possibly launch tubes as well running parallel to the spinal mount. Bays for weapons can be emptied of the weapons and small hangers for gigs and armed ship's boats installed. The old spinal mount could be reused or sold off to a planetary government loyal to the 3I for space defense. Same thing as the bay weapons.

Heck, the spinal could be pulled entirely, and a dozen launch tubes repacing it, plus hangarage, for dozens of heavy fighters, if trying to make a flatbed.

 

[Carlobrand]

...On a side note, I think that reactivating a ship for a specific bombardment mandate could be over stepped easily. Stepping outside the vessels ability.
For example, a battleship from WW2 would not make a great mini-carrier.

It would not make a great mini-anything. :devil:

As to whether it could serve as a carrier, depends on the role. Strip the main turrets, chop about the aft half of the superstructure down to main deck level. Enclose the current rear deck, put a landing deck above it with an elevator to the original deck and enough ceiling clearance to use the original deck as a helo storage bay. Internally, rework the powder magazine and other such spaces for quarters for marines. It would make a serviceable helicopter assault carrier, though no doubt less than ideal. Could also handle VTOL aircraft. Question would be whether the need justifies the cost: the ship would offer better protection than anything else afloat, but it'd be rather expensive to move around, carrying all that extra weight of armor. However, the refit might go faster than building a new assault carrier from scratch, and there are specific circumstances where a well-armored assault carrier just might be useful.

They did conversions like that prior to WW-II. Aircraft carriers Lexington and Saratoga were laid down as battlecruisers but were converted to carriers in the midst of their construction. They weren't quite as efficient as a purposebuilt carrier, but they were fairly effective for the time: Lexington and Saratoga simulated a successful air attack on Pearl Harbor almost a decade before the Japanese attack. Ended up costing what a purpose-built carrier would have cost, but since the Navy had already invested several million in the battlecruisers and would otherwise have had to scrap them (a treaty thing), it came out ahead.

As an aside, Saratoga has the distinction of having been sunk by an atomic bomb. She and a number of other ships were used by the U.S. to evaluate the effects of atomic blasts on ships at sea.

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

Heck, the spinal could be pulled entirely, and a dozen launch tubes repacing it, plus hangarage, for dozens of heavy fighters, if trying to make a flatbed.

Yeah, if you want a complete carrier. A Bombardment cruiser would not share the same characteristics. You would want a spinal mount and fighters and bay weapons so that you could devastate a world surface.

 

[aramis]

Yeah, if you want a complete carrier. A Bombardment cruiser would not share the same characteristics. You would want a spinal mount and fighters and bay weapons so that you could devastate a world surface.

Only if you have meson guns. P-Beam spinals are useless against atmosphere s more dense than trace atmospheres. Of course, that means TL's 10-12...

 

[savage]

point made

My point exactly Carlobrand. Thanks for being verbose.

Also a single starship with a single spinal mount meson is not a challenge factor for any technically superior world. Our Earth today could launch a formidable assault against a single (as an example) 500kdt Imperium battleship. The real difference is when a TL15 Imperium ship is purpose built for planetary assault.

Even if we're put a single WWII battleship with a couple harriers against North Korean. This requires a fleet...now a carrier, with atomics, drones, etc. It's an entirely different ballgame.

 

[Vladika]

...Our Earth today could launch a formidable assault against a single (as an example) 500kdt Imperium battleship...

You have my interest. Just what would/could earth use against such a ship at Meson Spinal ranges? Ballistic missiles (Not designed for anything other that a ballistic launch)? Who would/ could deploy anything else?

We (the USA & Russia) do have a few "near space" fighters but their weaponry isn't nuclear and I can't see anything else in the current enventory making a dent in a 500kdt Imperium battleship...

 

[savage]

missiles

You have my interest. Just what would/could earth use against such a ship at Meson Spinal ranges? Ballistic missiles (Not designed for anything other that a ballistic launch)? Who would/ could deploy anything else?

We (the USA & Russia) do have a few "near space" fighters but their weaponry isn't nuclear and I can't see anything else in the current enventory making a dent in a 500kdt Imperium battleship...

It would be hard to believe that the US and Russia do not have any orbital nuclear capability. Whether from aircraft delivery systems or anyone of numerous secret launches into space. The question really is how quickly can the militaries react and with what level of force. Unless someone on COTI has security clearance we will probably never know. And I certainly don't believe that we have 0% capacity. It may only be a couple of missiles each. Ok there is a difference between hitting the moon and a ship in planetary bombardment range (aka a monitor).
One other thing to remember is that having the ability and implementing that ability are two different things. Where this is really important to us is OTU. Thousands of years in the future many early space societies are aware of the existence of the Imperium. The question is what do societies in Traveller do to protect themselves from the some other guy's battlecruiser. That is what I'm trying to focus on.
Defenses are key as well. Missile defense, 300+ space fighters versus thousands of planetary craft... or put another way:
If we discovered a 11,000 world Imperium was on our doorstep. How long would it take to setup a solid defense plan...6 months with staged improvements?

 

[Carlobrand]

My point exactly Carlobrand. Thanks for being verbose...

Always a pleasure.

It would be hard to believe that the US and Russia do not have any orbital nuclear capability. Whether from aircraft delivery systems or anyone of numerous secret launches into space. The question really is how quickly can the militaries react and with what level of force. Unless someone on COTI has security clearance we will probably never know. And I certainly don't believe that we have 0% capacity. It may only be a couple of missiles each. Ok there is a difference between hitting the moon and a ship in planetary bombardment range (aka a monitor).
One other thing to remember is that having the ability and implementing that ability are two different things. Where this is really important to us is OTU. Thousands of years in the future many early space societies are aware of the existence of the Imperium. The question is what do societies in Traveller do to protect themselves from the some other guy's battlecruiser. That is what I'm trying to focus on.
Defenses are key as well. Missile defense, 300+ space fighters versus thousands of planetary craft... or put another way:
If we discovered a 11,000 world Imperium was on our doorstep. How long would it take to setup a solid defense plan...6 months with staged improvements?

Traveller gives the TL15 dreadnought a rather impressive array of defenses against nuclear missile attack. Depending on your version, it also makes nukes rather expensive - and they aren't exactly cheap in the modern world. While the production base of an industrialized TL8 world of 6 billion could indeed put a heck of a lot of ordnance into orbit, High Guard's rules about computers makes the job impossible: a Factor 9 damper operated by a Model/9 computer stops all of it. Heck, a Factor 6 damper operated by a Model/8 stops all of it; we'd be in trouble even if just a Zhodani cruiser shows up.

Tech level means modern Earth and her impressive arsenal are a good deal worse off than the Spanish Armada facing an Iowa-class battleship, at least so far as Traveller portrays it.

 

[Vladika]

...If we discovered a 11,000 world Imperium was on our doorstep. How long would it take to setup a solid defense plan...6 months with staged improvements?

11,000 world Imperium TL15 -vs- 1 Planet Earth TL 7-8???

Really, we would be toast :toast:

Badly burned toast :toast:

We would be lucky if all we were was toast :toast:

:toast::toast::toast:

 

[savage]

the point

11,000 world Imperium TL15 -vs- 1 Planet Earth TL 7-8???

Really, we would be toast :toast:

Badly burned toast :toast:

We would be lucky if all we were was toast :toast:

:toast::toast::toast:

Please, do not spin this. I suggested 1 500kdt TL15 cruiser against Earth.
Twisting it a bit is not impressive. Bruised sure...

However this was not the point. Even the Zulu taught the Brits a lesson in warfare. So please, get back to the point. A Bombardment Cruiser acting alone, converted from a Battlecruiser is a questionable approach.

Carlobrand,
You bring up good points. As always. And I'd have to bring up FAS.org to count the number of nukes, evaluate delivery systems. Earth has 10s of thousands of nuclear weapons...just have to get them to the target for direct hits. Turning our only tool for space access (shuttles) into museum pieces before a secondary system is completed is not too bright. Another note, ships boats, landing craft do not have dampers.

As mentioned, do the US and Russian (former USSR) have classified plans for satellite/orbital combat. We know that various space command groups have played with the Space Marine concept with the typical goal of delivery across the planet.

On another note, this would be an interesting scenario to play out. Numerous assumptions would need to be made. For example, both the US and Russia have extensive experience in booster rockets. Attaching Atlas rockets to another launch system. How well thought out these system are is an interesting speculation. The Russians depend heavily on this approach... we could go on and on about this one.

The real thread question was is a Battlecruiser fitting for a Bombardment Cruiser refit. Well, probably not without significant alterations.
Also, what size cruiser do you turn into Bombardment cruisers. A TL14 going into extended life refit?

 

[Carlobrand]

Please, do not spin this. I suggested 1 500kdt TL15 cruiser against Earth.
Twisting it a bit is not impressive. Bruised sure...

I think Vladika just likes toast. He's been like this ever since he ran into that flame-headed Test boy.

However this was not the point. Even the Zulu taught the Brits a lesson in warfare. ...

Sometimes the old ways are still pretty effective. As I recall, during the period when they were dealing with the Zulu, the Brits were also still fielding lancers. On the other hand, it's not entirely clear the Zulu wound have made much headway against a WW-I machine-gun company, and spears don't work well against battledress. Certain tech changes the paradigm of war.

... Another note, ships boats, landing craft do not have dampers.

Excellent point. Putting a force on the ground against a prepared and resisting Earth would be very difficult. on the other hand, as you point out, we're discussing orbital bombardment.

On another note, this would be an interesting scenario to play out...

In one sense, it's been played out: Invasion Earth, the board game. And, by canon, a higher tech Earth lost, though there was a lot more in orbit than just one cruiser. (Or dreadnought - at 500 kdT, you're talking about a Tigress-class dreadnought.) There's a potential within the game systems to come up with a High Guard or MegaTrav based scenario where a single large ship duels with a TL8 earth and its thousands of nuclear missiles. I'd run it as a First Imperium Vilani ship, though - the tech level difference is more workable. Would be a most interesting exchange to game.

The real thread question was is a Battlecruiser fitting for a Bombardment Cruiser refit. Well, probably not without significant alterations.
Also, what size cruiser do you turn into Bombardment cruisers. A TL14 going into extended life refit?

I would want something heavily armored to resist the inevitable hits. TL14's fine since the armor there's no different from TL15. High agility to minimize the number of hits. So, look for some obsolescent ship that's both heavily armored and highly agile - which probably means it'll be something with a low jump range, but that's not a problem in a ship intended to be brought up after the space battle's settled. Best would be an obsolescent battlerider - they're typically heavily armored and highly agile, no jump range issue since that depends on the tender that's carrying them, no retreat problem since a planet can't punch through the front line and chase down my tender, and I wouldn't need to worry about putting an expensive jump drive into harm's way.

Size P or lower - less size penalty, still plenty of room for ordnance; battleriders don't tend to go above that anyway. Much smaller is better since this thing may end up getting smoked by ground-based meson fire; never put too many egg in one basket when playing against meson fire.

Retrofit to a Model/9 computer irrespective of the former TL - a cheap refit that makes a world of difference. Retrofit to a Factor 9 meson screen, 'cause - well, you know. Other than that, just make sure the weapons are appropriate to the orbital bombardment role - no PAs, heavy on the missile bays and so forth. There's not actually a need for a lot of change if you start with the right base design.

 

[Vladika]

Earth has 10s of thousands of nuclear weapons...just have to get them to the target for direct hits.

Weapons we can't get into space, let alone hit a TL15 500kt anything.

The missiles from a TL15 500kt anything will more than outnumber everything on earth and destroy it so many times over I don't even want to think about it. Even IF there were Nuclear Dampers, given HG rules quite enough of those missile are going to hit, nearly ALL of them. (Relative computer, Earth is a spherical "ship" with ZERO agility and, it's pretty big...DMs are all in their favor.)

As for the "Zulu" argument, your 11,000 planets vs 1 seems that the "Zulus" are them, not us. They also have twice the TL.

 

[Vladika]

I think Vladika just likes toast.

Rye toast with real butter and hot Russian Caravan tea please. Great breakfast.

 

[savage]

the point

Ok...toast is nice, black tea... we digress

Back to the point: The bombardment cruiser needs significant missile ammo(more than the typical cruiser), nuclear dampers, perhaps even backup systems, screens would be nice, and armor. A lot of armor. A slow ship is fine. It gets where its going and stays a while (J2, 1G?), numerous fighter squadrons, and point defense.

Remember she is alone...no support for an extended period.

Invasion Earth is a good example but I'd have to review the forces.

So perhaps a better concept to start with is as what TL does Earth (or any world fighting for freedom) have against a superior invader with a single ship. Lets skip the movies and books (WotW, ID4 was huge, Footfall, etc...) and think Traveller. :smirk:

 

[aramis]

TL 8 plandef isn't goitng to hit said cruiser, and she can p-Beam Any Single launch vehicle that breaks atmosphere. Unless she arrives already out of missiles, She can also airburst nukes and EMP the major urban areas.

Invasion: Earth Covers TL14 vs. TL115. It imposes huge TL Penalties. 5TL's makes for slaughter.