Naval Ship Types

[CliffBates]

I would like to set up a discussion on the various types of ships used over the scope of the OTU.

As we know the classes that we have seen in various products of the CT universe were:

Dreadnought
Carrier
Fleet Tenders
Cruiser
Battle Rider/Monitor
Destroyers
Escorts [includes Corvettes (see the Lucifer class produced by FASA)]
Scouts
Couriers


I found this rather interesting site made by Andrew Moffatt-Vallance (who is the creator of the High Guard Shipyard program):
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/ships/TCshptyp.htm

There he gives the ship types used by the Terran Confederation during the Interstellar War periods.

Per Moffatt-Vallance's website we have:
Battleships
Battlecruisers
Frigates
Sloops
Missile boats
Mother Ships
Raiders
Bomb Ketches
Guardships

Does anyone have any clue of the standards of the Ziru Sirka?

 

[salochin999]

I would like to set up a discussion on the various types of ships used over the scope of the OTU.

I'm currently settled on separating them by function first and then size where appropriate.

battle fleet
- capital ships (battleship, carrier, dreadnought)
- fleet escorts (varying sizes and capabilities over time)
- fleet recon (fighters)
- fleet auxiliaries
- fleet couriers

cruisers (defined primarily as detached duty) (size by role)
- merchant escort / anti-piracy / local patrol / fleet courier
- regional patrol / fleet recon
- raider
- deep raider

size labels that might fit with those four broad cruiser roles might be
- corvette (aka very light cruiser)
- frigate (aka light cruiser)
- cruiser / heavy cruiser
- battle cruiser

.

so a capital ship squadron might go something like
1 x capital ship
1 x escort carrier (local recon)
3 x fleet escorts (size and type varying over time)
1 x courier (corvette)
2 x auxiliaries

a battle fleet would be
- varying number of capital ship squadrons
- one or more frigate squadrons operating as fleet recon in surrounding systems

colonial cruiser fleet
- one or more frigate squadrons for regional patrol (aka main trade routes)(operate solo or in pairs)
- one or more corvette squadrons for local patrol (aka backwaters)(operate solo or in pairs)

imperial cruiser fleet
- extra recon squadrons (frigate)(operate solo or in pairs)
- raider squadrons (heavy cruiser)
- deep raider squadrons (battle cruiser)

#

plus various specialists like assault and troop transport

 

[CliffBates]

I would like to point people to the The Traveller Imperial Encyclopedia Wiki treatment of the military ships. [Here is the link to the page]

In this page there are some bits some size recommendations per class and type.

One point here is that the TIE Wiki page seems to see Frigates as subordinate to Destroyers in size.

I would like to hear your thoughts on this?

 

[Condottiere]

It also depends on the ambiance you want to create, as a terminology theme can evoke certain eras or concepts.

I recall having a go at calling all capital ships of a specific navy man 'o' war, cruisers frigates, and escorts sloops.

 

[Redcap]

It's an interesting - and somewhat divisive, for some - question. Do you dump traditional ways of thinking out the disposal vent, and go with new thinking, or stick with traditional thinking that could wind up leaving you hauled backwards through your Grannie's old mangler?

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't" comes right to the front of the mind, it has to be mentioned!

This said, and as mentioned on other threads recently as well, it's the mission that defines what the ship will do, not necessarily it's book classification.

I think Salochin999's on the right track, but unfortunately, that listing's far too unwieldy. It needs to be simple, easy to remember in the heat (so to speak), and easy to put into practice.

However, as revealed by Cliff, Salochin was soundly beaten to the punch several years ago, by Andrew Moffatt-Vallance and his TC(IW) ship class descriptions.

So, on balance, I'd go with the Moffat versions.

 

[Matt123]

I found this rather interesting site made by Andrew Moffatt-Vallance (who is the creator of the High Guard Shipyard program):
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/ships/TCshptyp.htm

Well spotted, that was interesting. It was also remarkably similar to the Gurps book on the Interstellar Wars and I'm pleased to spot the same author contributed to that effort, which I did not realise before. The Interstellar Wars is one of my favourite periods and I can strongly recommend picking up the Gurps book on it. Yes it does cover briefly the forces of the [FONT=arial,helvetica]Ziru Sirka.
[/FONT]

 

[salochin999]

It also depends on the ambiance you want to create, as a terminology theme can evoke certain eras or concepts.

I recall having a go at calling all capital ships of a specific navy man 'o' war, cruisers frigates, and escorts sloops.

Yeah, that's my thing. I was thinking what ambience I wanted first and then seeing if it could be made to fit.

For example there's the carrier group model - where escorts are critical and the ship labels become relative size labels.

Then there's the ships of the line model where escorts aren't critical and the ship labels become more mission orientated.

Also over the timeline of HG from TL7-15 it may have switched over from one to the other over time.

edit

I don't know if anyone has ever gone through HG TL by TL to see what was optimal at various times i.e. best fleet at TL 10, best fleet at TL 11 etc but if the importance of escorts went up and down as different weapons or defenses were developed then I'd imagine the size of escorts would go up and down.

 

[salochin999]

I would like to point people to the The Traveller Imperial Encyclopedia Wiki treatment of the military ships. [Here is the link to the page]

In this page there are some bits some size recommendations per class and type.

One point here is that the TIE Wiki page seems to see Frigates as subordinate to Destroyers in size.

I would like to hear your thoughts on this?

From comments on other threads it seems that is a Euro vs US thing.

In both cases it seems to have meant "small cruiser" (where "cruiser" here is used in the functional sense) but with different definitions of "small" so in one case it was smaller than destroyer and in the other bigger.

 

[CliffBates]

Well spotted, that was interesting. It was also remarkably similar to the Gurps book on the Interstellar Wars and I'm pleased to spot the same author contributed to that effort, which I did not realise before. The Interstellar Wars is one of my favourite periods and I can strongly recommend picking up the Gurps book on it. Yes it does cover briefly the forces of the [FONT=arial,helvetica]Ziru Sirka.
[/FONT]

I love the Interstellar Wars book, it was something I ran into after buying T5.

What is interesting is the Terrans unlike Vilani didn't uses missles on their midsized Jump ships. Rather they resorted to Missle Boats, a kind of pre-Battle rider. The missle boats were the Elite core of the Terran Navy it is said.

 

[CliffBates]

Well spotted, that was interesting. It was also remarkably similar to the Gurps book on the Interstellar Wars and I'm pleased to spot the same author contributed to that effort, which I did not realise before. The Interstellar Wars is one of my favourite periods and I can strongly recommend picking up the Gurps book on it. Yes it does cover briefly the forces of the [FONT=arial,helvetica]Ziru Sirka.
[/FONT]

I love the Interstellar Wars book, it was something I ran into after buying T5.

What is interesting is the Terrans unlike Vilani didn't uses missles on their midsized Jump ships. Rather they resorted to Missle Boats, a kind of pre-Battle rider. The missle boats were the Elite core of the Terran Navy it is said.

There is a cultural issue at play here and perhaps it will be one factor shaping both design and weapon selection and operational tactics.

Look at Jefferson P. SWYCAFFER's Traveller universe, no spinal mounts, no meson weapons. But TL 15 otherwise. Yes the Vilani had PAs, big ones but their weapon of choice were missiles. The Terrans opted for lasers and focused on next directions of energy weapons.

Now with T5 with Hops and Skips along with Disintegrators, this will change tactics drastically. Also it will make large shios a big targer, as is the problem in today's 21st century naval environment.

Also given that technology development doesent happen evenly across all areas, as the big advantage in Biological and Computers the Terrans had over the Vilani, could the emergence of weaponized antimatter happen before the use of it for power. So at TL 17 antimatter pwerplants and weapons such as disintegrators are.... but early nukes were fission not fusion and happened at least -1 TL lower before hyd fusion nukes emerged...... so early an
Antimatter warhead perhaps start to emerge at the height of TL 15 but definitely by 16. And these will give the same effect in star ship battle that missles did for 20th century naval warfare.

Also paths not taken why not have bottled fusion energy warheads... they aren't nukes but when detonated release a directed fusion charge upclise and personal and eating away at a ships armor. Thsse are possible at TL12/13 but perhaps the Victory of the Terrans lead to the view of energy weapons were the key to dominance? But what if a people didn't have that historical influence shaping their thinking of warfare!?

Just a thought.

 

[Redcap]

Missiles are relatively cheap, as are the boats that fire them; frigates, Destroyers, etc, are fairly expensive. Missiles can be effective in mass swarms - imagine 300 of the buggers per target. You'd be dropping masonry in your shorts getting a "VAMPIRE VAMPIRE VAMPIRE, FAAAAAAASANDS OF THE *****!" call.

It's cost-effectiveness, the pure and simple economics of war: Which is cheaper: lots and lots of Missiles or lots of ships?

You do the maths

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

From comments on other threads it seems that is a Euro vs US thing.

In both cases it seems to have meant "small cruiser" (where "cruiser" here is used in the functional sense) but with different definitions of "small" so in one case it was smaller than destroyer and in the other bigger.

I think its more a "age of sail" vs "age of steam" thing.

in the age of sail, "frigate" described ships with (roughly) 20-50 guns. with both bigger and smaller warships in use. smaller ships were generally called sloops or brigs but it gets complicated

The term was used for medium sized warships that would, in later times, have been called heavy cruisers (such as theUSS Constitution). , as well as smaller ships (HMS Surprise, form the Aubrey–Maturin/ Master and Commander series). since small ships were generally unable to really hurt ships of the line, being armed similarly but with much weaker weaponry, the battlefleet didn't need escorts, just pickets and couriers, so at Trafalgar, the brits had 27 ships of the line and only 6 frigates.

as technology advanced, and ships switched to using fewer but more powerful guns, the role of the smaller frigates got taken over by the sloops (the next size down), and the larger ones evolved into cruisers.

the introduction of the torpedo, and the torpedo boat, borught need for a bug number of escorts to protect the battle line, which lead to the creation of (torpedo boat) destroyers, which became the standard small ship of the fleet. at Jutland, the British Grand Fleet had 37 capital ships (BB/BC), but over 100 screening destroyers and light cruisers.

Frigates as a ship type basically disappear for nearly a century between about 1870-1940, then reappears in WW2, when the brits used it for some classes of new anti-submarine convoy escorts (which were smaller and less capable than a destroyer, but about the same size and capability as the USN's Destroyer Escorts). Other classes, which were even smaller and based on less capable (but cheap and easy to make) civilian hull forms, were called corvettes (after a French name for a type of small frigate).

so, in the post war European navies, a frigate was a type of ship that was smaller than a DD. however, the USN reintroduced the term to cover some of its new cruiser sized ships specialised for AA work (as opposed to the anti-surface cruisers) while keeping their Destroyer Escorts to cover the type of ship the Europeans were calling a Frigate. Then, in the 1975 reclassification, the Americans switched to the European convention, and re-labelled their DEs as Frigates and their cruiser sized FFs as cruisers (Which closed a "cruiser gap" between the USN and the soviet navy, caused by the difference in naming conventions).

So, the 45-75 USN usage was closer to what was historically called a frigate, but was at odds with the contemporary European usage.

 

[nobby-w]

I would like to set up a discussion on the various types of ships used over the scope of the OTU.
...
Does anyone have any clue of the standards of the Ziru Sirka?

I've never seen anything in print about the Ziru Sirka fleets, certainly not in Cogs & Dogs or any of the alien modules (although I haven't read any T4/T5 material on the subject). However, I've done some stuff about this for a collapse-of-second-imperium setting, which I'll share here.

There is a bit of semi-apocryphal canon that suggests hull sizes around the 30kt mark used by the Terrans, although I'm not aware of any designs published by GDW or licensees. If you stick to vanilla High Guard, the maximum hull size allowed by a model-5 (TL11) computer is P (50,000 tons), which puts an upper limit on the ships fielded by the Ziru Sirka.

With that reasoning I did a few designs, some of which which remained in service with minor enhancements throughout the Rule of Man (i.e. could make a cameo in a game set around 2800AD). I wanted a Vilani line ship of some description, and a terran light cruiser and line ship.

One can make a 45,000 ton TL11 ship with a Factor-K particle accelerator, the largest spinal mount available at TL11. This had Jump-2, 3G, power plant 5 and Factor-6 hull armour. Although the rule system I used is not Vanilla HG (I did rules for 2t and 3t laser barbettes and missile magazines for bay weapons) a pure-HG ship wouldn't be wildly different.

A factor-D PA (the next smallest at TL11) isn't that much smaller or less power-hungry, so I doubt anyone would build a ship using it (for a TCS game at least). Note that there is specific mention of the Vilani not having meson accelerator technology.

Thus, you could assume that the main Vilani force would consist of J2/3G ships in the 40-50ktons range, armed with a factor-K particle accelerator. There might also be a class of faster ships with less armour, but I wouldn't think that's really the Vilani's style.

As a contrast, I did some Terran J3/2G ships, a 22,500 ton light cruiser armed with a Factor-L particle accelerator, and a 44,000 ton heavy cruiser armed with a Factor-K meson gun. I did play around with a battleship in the 75-100kt range, but one would probably never use a ship like that in a TCS game.

For the Terrans, I also did a few other designs:

• A 1,500t J3/6G missile escort armed with a single missile bay and some secondary armament. This type of ship is very difficult to hit due to the size and agility and can be very effective if deployed in swarms against a larger capital ship. You could easily build a similar class at TL11, possibly with less compromise on armour due to only needing fuel for a J2.
  
• A 4,500t escort with two missile bays, a repulsor and assorted secondary armament (Factor-6 sandcaster bays are a sweet spot at TL12). This was somewhat analagous to the Sloan class in S9: Fighting Ships.
  
• Various frigate and light warship designs.

 

[CliffBates]

At the Traveller' IE wiki you find The Terran ship Indomitable

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Indomitable_Class_Battleship

I think it should be interesting look see.