So how many Squadrons are in an SDB Factor?

[Garnfellow]

At what point does a heavy SDB become a monitor? I know of lots of references to monitors, but are there any canonical examples other than the Empress Troyhune planetoid monitor in HG?

 

[McPerth]

At what point does a heavy SDB become a monitor? I know of lots of references to monitors, but are there any canonical examples other than the Empress Troyhune planetoid monitor in HG?

Does it matter?

Any jumpless ship deployed to defend a system becomes de facto a SDB, be it rated as fighter, light SDB, heavy SDB, monitor or tenderless BR (or even a jump damaged CA or BB).

And each SDB factor in FFW (or similar games, should they exist) may represent a squadron of fighters/light SDBs, a handful heavy SDBs, a monitor or BR or even some Deep Meson Sites or other ground based defenses (that seem to be forgotten in FFW).

 

[Garnfellow]

Does it matter?

Any jumpless ship deployed to defend a system becomes de facto a SDB, be it rated as fighter, light SDB, heavy SDB, monitor or tenderless BR (or even a jump damaged CA or BB).

And each SDB factor in FFW (or similar games, should they exist) may represent a squadron of fighters/light SDBs, a handful heavy SDBs, a monitor or BR or even some Deep Meson Sites or other ground based defenses (that seem to be forgotten in FFW).

From a wargame perspective, sure it doesn't matter.

But that said, I think the SDB designation actually represent a specific tonnage range of non-jump capable craft. Within that range you might have distinct classes like regular SDBs, heavy SDB. But above that range you're looking at something different: a monitor.

From a RPG perspective, I think it matters for precisely the reason you point out -- I would like to determine some rough equivalences for SDB factors. A wing of light fighters might be 1 SDB factor. A 75,000t monitor might be 10 SDF factors. A meson site might be 100.

I think it would be interesting to have a budget of 300 SDB Factors and break that into 10 monitors, 2 SDB wings, and 1 deep meson site. Or whatever.

 

[whulorigan]

Different rulesets have stated different tonnage ranges, I believe. CT was 100-1000dton, IIRC.

So here is my thought for a big-ship universe:

If it is a ship in the ACS tonnage-range, it is an SDB.
If it is a ship in the BCS tonnage-range, it is a Monitor.

 

[McPerth]

But that said, I think the SDB designation actually represent a specific tonnage range of non-jump capable craft. Within that range you might have distinct classes like regular SDBs, heavy SDB. But above that range you're looking at something different: a monitor.

I think on SDB factors more as an overall effect than a specific tonnage. So an SDB factor may be more or less SDBs according their training and readines state too, not only their tonnage.

And even the same tonnage will have different effect according it it is in form of a few 50000 dton ships or the equivalent tonnage in 400 dton SDBs (that would be useless in HG combat against high TL capital ships).

At what point does a heavy SDB become a monitor? I know of lots of references to monitors, but are there any canonical examples other than the Empress Troyhune planetoid monitor in HG?

At what point a DD becomes a Cruiser?

If we asume this question as equivalent (I'm not sure at this point), we could assume the answer to be equivalent too: at the point it mounts a spinal weapon.

If so:

• a turret only armed SDB would be a Light SDB
• a bay armed SDB would be a Heavy SDB
• a spinal armed SDB would be a Monitor (this would include tenderless BRs)

Is that more useful to you?

 

[Garnfellow]

I think on SDB factors more as an overall effect than a specific tonnage. So an SDB factor may be more or less SDBs according their training and readines state too, not only their tonnage.

I agree, and I think it's much more useful as a fuzzy approximation. T4 Imperial Squadrons calls them "SDB squadrons," but doesn't attempt to quantify the number of SDBs much less the tonnage or TL.

If so:

• a turret only armed SDB would be a Light SDB
• a bay armed SDB would be a Heavy SDB
• a spinal armed SDB would be a Monitor (this would include tenderless BRs)

Is that more useful to you?

I think that's a very useful taxonomy.

 

[whulorigan]

• a turret only armed SDB would be a Light SDB
• a bay armed SDB would be a Heavy SDB
• a spinal armed SDB would be a Monitor (this would include tenderless BRs)

I agree, and I think it's much more useful as a fuzzy approximation. T4 Imperial Squadrons calls them "SDB squadrons," but doesn't attempt to quantify the number of SDBs much less the tonnage or TL.

I think that's a very useful taxonomy.

And that is a better breakdown than my idea. I'll second McPerth's definition.

 

[Drakon]

Arr Laen B7969AC-A 9898 SDB=100 Sqn=2CR(5-2-1 J1 PSL) Bns=1000-A TU=2x5Jump,1x10Inf
Daekvagul A769AAA-D SDB=1500 Sqn=BR(6-4-3 J3 PSL),CR(5-3-2 J3 PSL),AR(6-0-0 J2 SL) Bns=15000-D TU=5CInf,2x1CArmd,2x20ElInf,2x5Jump
Ackaeck B586757-9 E69B SDB=1 Sqn=0 Bns=150-9 TU=10Inf,5Inf
Anglorr C546877-7 SDB=5 Sqn=0 Bns=200-7 TU=20Inf
Kughoelvor A657978-C SDB=120 Sqn=1BR(4-3-3 J2 PSL) BNs=12K-C TU=1x1CInf,1x10Inf
Uekhourg A677A74-D SDB=15C Sqn=1BR(6-5-4 J2 PSL),1CR(5-3-3 J3 PSL),1AR(6-0-0 J2 SL) Bns=100K-D TU=4x5CInf

These are defending forces, planetary protection forces, aren't they? I am trying to figure out what forces the Vargr would employ in their conquest of Corridor Sector. As well as what forces Lemish has available for defense.

 

[Garnfellow]

Has anyone tried to stat out the cost for a deep meson gun site using the Fire, Fusion, and Steel rules? And would those costs be applicable to 1105? I'm curious what a TL 13 or TL 15 version would cost.

I took a look last night and it was quite a bit more than I wanted to bite off.

 

[JFGarber]

...At what point a DD becomes a Cruiser?

• a turret only armed SDB would be a Light SDB
• a bay armed SDB would be a Heavy SDB
• a spinal armed SDB would be a Monitor (this would include tenderless BRs)

...

This is the taxonomy that I follow IMTU. Also, for jump capable: no spinal = destroyer or less and spinal = cruiser or better.

 

[savage]

Has anyone tried to stat out the cost for a deep meson gun site using the Fire, Fusion, and Steel rules? And would those costs be applicable to 1105? I'm curious what a TL 13 or TL 15 version would cost.

I took a look last night and it was quite a bit more than I wanted to bite off.

I did it in T20. The problem is not designing the weapon but doing an interesting device in real world terms. Mining the site, varying power sources, planetary sensors, etc. are not heavily covered OTU. One would think a DMG would be flexible.

 

[Hyphen]

It's similar to building a ship.

For mining, start with the cost of hollowing out a planetoid. Assume you're cutting a sphere the size of the weapon (so it can gimbal in all directions). Add a bit more for vertical shafts.

For the weapon, install a weapon, fuel, and a power plant as per your ship design rules-of-choice.

Add "staterooms" and associated life support; airlocks, and so on. Rec rooms. Maybe multiply it a few times to account for six months worth of supplies (just in case). I'm thinking Cheyenne Mountain, right?

In order to simulate what the pointing machinery would cost, install enough grav generators to lift the weight of the weapon so you can point it anywhere you choose.

Probably add a meson screen against return fire, "bridge" and computers.

Then add at least three sets of sensors, possibly with meson comms to connect them (by this point, their MCr cost will be small compared to the rest of the cost). Six sets would be better - remembering that no sensors = no targetting. Some could be off-planet (nearby moons are handy) or heavily-stealthed deep-space satellites. (Obviously I've read too much Honor Harrington.)

Allow multiple DMGs to share the sensor net. A single lock-on could be shared by multiple weapons, for example.

And now I probably should stop telling you all of Tavonni's secrets, we have Sword Worlders incoming...

 

[Condottiere]

Outside the weapon, fire control and energy, would think the gimbals would be the most expensive part of a deep site meson weapon system.

 

[savage]

It's similar to building a ship.

For mining, start with the cost of hollowing out a planetoid. Assume you're cutting a sphere the size of the weapon (so it can gimbal in all directions). Add a bit more for vertical shafts.

For the weapon, install a weapon, fuel, and a power plant as per your ship design rules-of-choice.

Add "staterooms" and associated life support; airlocks, and so on. Rec rooms. Maybe multiply it a few times to account for six months worth of supplies (just in case). I'm thinking Cheyenne Mountain, right?

In order to simulate what the pointing machinery would cost, install enough grav generators to lift the weight of the weapon so you can point it anywhere you choose.

Probably add a meson screen against return fire, "bridge" and computers.

Then add at least three sets of sensors, possibly with meson comms to connect them (by this point, their MCr cost will be small compared to the rest of the cost). Six sets would be better - remembering that no sensors = no targetting. Some could be off-planet (nearby moons are handy) or heavily-stealthed deep-space satellites. (Obviously I've read too much Honor Harrington.)

Allow multiple DMGs to share the sensor net. A single lock-on could be shared by multiple weapons, for example.

And now I probably should stop telling you all of Tavonni's secrets, we have Sword Worlders incoming...

I handled most of it like a T20/TNE ship building exercise, but the asteroid idea had not occurred to me (12 yrs ago). Asteroid hollowing and digging deep shafts may have similarities in equipment, but would probably be significantly different techniques. The shaft is on a world with an atmosphere, gravity, etc. Take the deepest shaft in Siberia. That was an expensive TL7 undertaking. With the use of energy weapons a deep shaft may not be as pricey.
Here is the thing: It really depends entirely on the planet/planetoid/asteroid being mined. Traveller does not really address it.
Also, FF&S helps considers alternate energy sources. They stopped drilling in Siberia due to the heat on equipment more than money.

 

[JFGarber]

It's similar to building a ship.

...

Probably add a meson screen against return fire, "bridge" and computers.

...

I followed the same idea--build a ship underground, no drives. That said, I put no screens on it, assuming that the screen itself would react aggressively with solid matter. Fireworks would ensue.

Other perspectives?

 

[kilemall]

Probably a more useful model then that deepest bore are the two deepest mines- gold mines, in South Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TauTona_Mine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mponeng_Gold_Mine

But yes, heat will be an ever-present issue, although it could also be a source of power.

Don't forget to have sensor deception measures against ground penetrating radar and densitometers. Probably toughest to hide the access/resource shafts.

Advantage Zho again.

 

[Hyphen]

I didn't get around to mentioning the heat-transfer power supply to maintain the base at a minimal, almost non-detectable level (with the fusion plant on "idle", ready for a "warm-start" if required).

(I figured my post was long enough. ;-)

I did mention "shafts"; multiple, not singular, so you can (hopefully) still escape in case a well-paced return meson strike zaps a shaft.

Disguising them is another thing. I mean, really, making them an off-shoot of a genuine working mine site would surely be too, I don't know, _Edge of Darkness_-like?? ;-) ;-)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090424/

 

[Garnfellow]

So, order of magnitude, what would a deep meson gun site run for costs?

1,000MCr? 10,000MCr? 100,000MCr?

Asking on behalf of a friendly code F government.

 

[savage]

Cost: 3,312.318 MCr (4,140.397 MCr without discount)

I had a few early t20 designs buried, sea and orbital defense platforms posted. As mentioned, I'd been working on next generation.

http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/savage/1WorldOrder/My_Savage_Designs/Hades_DMG.html

http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/savage/1WorldOrder/My_Savage_Designs/Kragen_DSMG.html

 

[Garnfellow]

There is a great section in T20's Fighting Ships on Imperial monitors of the Rim War era, which partly explains why there are not many standard designs kicking around:

Monitors vary from not much bigger than a SDB, right up to Battleship size. Since they have to be constructed in system there is no real pattern or average model for those built by planetary governments, though the Imperial Navy Monitors have a more conventional pattern to them.

* * * * *​

The Imperial Navy has at least one squadron of Supermonitors, massing upwards of 750,000 tons, deployed to defend Capital, but as a rule very large “Battle” monitors are uncommon. Most custom-built non-planetoid monitors fall into the 5000-25,000 ton range, though the fact that no space need be allocated to Jump fuel makes these vessels about as capable as a fleet unit of double their size. The typical Imperial Heavy Monitor masses 25,000 tons, and a Light Monitor 5-10,000.

Fighting Ships also has a couple of standard Imperial monitors: the Seydlitz class strike monitor (TL 13, 5,000t) and the Vishe Class Light Monitor (TL 12, 1,200t).