The Imperial Corridor Fleet

[Dagrill]

No, because the term 'combat vessel' is defined in the same passage that says a sector has about 1000 of them.

"Each sector of the Imperium theoretically has a group of fleets numbering about 1000 ships. This number includes combat vessels such as cruisers, carriers, battleships, and some escorts; it does not include auxiliaries, support ships, and scouts." [RbS:27]​

The only real wiggle room there is what escorts are included in the 'some escorts'. It's obviously that not all escorts are included. My take is that it is only a handful of atypical escorts that are as big as light cruisers.

The main reason for that assumption is that the Imperial Navy needs its combat vessels to average as big as possible because even assuming that every single one of them are 20,000T and up, it still only accounts for half the canonical naval budget. You need to assume that the maintenance costs are twice the 10% of original cost that TCS talks about. If you include piddling 5000T escorts in the number, let alone 3000T destroyers, the fleet size goes from being hard to believe to being really, really hard to believe.
Hans

Hi Hans,

I forgot about the Fleet Escort, but to my mind it is a normal sized destroyer, a large escort included in your 1,000 combat ships.

I would suggest that all Escorts under 1,000 tons are not included, I have not decided whether the 1kt DE should included or not.

Regards

David

 

[Vladika]

Vladika, First my apologies. IMTU I move to 1/2 fuel "home rule" at TL16 but where refining and usage are improved.
My intention was to remind everyone not of the TL but the various scales some CT/MT ships. We can discuss the 1/2 fuel "home rule" and it's usage. I have not looked in T5 to see, if it's mentioned.

My stats we're unchanged from TL15 with the fuel improvement for power, jump and refinement as the result. A breakthrough that requires an updated power plant.

Nothing to apologize for. I'm more following this thread as it is interesting in and of itself, rather than a vested interest in Corridor.

Every now and then I'll ask a question or interject a comment, but all in all I'm just following along.

 

[Dagrill]

Canon states Destroyers are not counted as "Warships" in the 3I... Nor are Escorts. Which basically means that the 3I only counts cruisers and battleships as warships. (Destroyers and Escorts are auxiliaries in the IN.) Getting offended by it won't change it.

Actually I'm wondering if canon is just poorly worded there, it states in FSotSI
that Destroyers AND Cruisers are Auxiliaries in the description of Batrons on page 8, but that is just another way of stating the major units in the Batron are the BB's and the 'Auxiliaries' aren't intended to stand up to other BB's.
We tend to think of Auxilaries as support ships like supply ships & tankers, but in the context of Battleship actions ALL other ships are just auxiliaries, or observers.

I personally see Cruisers and Destroyers as warships all capable of visiting a foreign government to show the flag, with the implication of force behind it.

Kind Regards

David

 

[Drakon]

Why would Carriers be in a CruRon? Just interested in your point of view.

Because they did not want to use the term Carron?

 

[Drakon]

Actually I'm wondering if canon is just poorly worded there, it states in FSotSI
that Destroyers AND Cruisers are Auxiliaries in the description of Batrons on page 8, but that is just another way of stating the major units in the Batron are the BB's and the 'Auxiliaries' aren't intended to stand up to other BB's.
We tend to think of Auxilaries as support ships like supply ships & tankers, but in the context of Battleship actions ALL other ships are just auxiliaries, or observers.

I personally see Cruisers and Destroyers as warships all capable of visiting a foreign government to show the flag, with the implication of force behind it.

Kind Regards

David

That may be the problem. Compared to a BB, a destroyer is almost nothing. In RL navies, destroyers act as screens, pickets and essentially body guards of the bigger ships. But a destroyer's primary design and purpose is as a weapons platform, not a tender, not a courier, not a supply ship. Destroyers destroy. Destroyer escorts destroy those who try to attack whatever they are escorting.

 

[aramis]

Actually I'm wondering if canon is just poorly worded there, it states in FSotSI
that Destroyers AND Cruisers are Auxiliaries in the description of Batrons on page 8, but that is just another way of stating the major units in the Batron are the BB's and the 'Auxiliaries' aren't intended to stand up to other BB's.
We tend to think of Auxilaries as support ships like supply ships & tankers, but in the context of Battleship actions ALL other ships are just auxiliaries, or observers.

I personally see Cruisers and Destroyers as warships all capable of visiting a foreign government to show the flag, with the implication of force behind it.

Kind Regards

David

FSotSI really NEEDS to be decanonized, for many reasons (not the least of which is that none of the designs are legal, before or after the design sequence errata).

 

[savage]

FSotSI really NEEDS to be decanonized, for many reasons (not the least of which is that none of the designs are legal, before or after the design sequence errata).

Please elaborate. You want to decanonize an MT book is news to me. Those designs we're built before the errata? Are you discussing the power problem, where redesign is needed or something else?

 

[rancke]

FSotSI really NEEDS to be decanonized...

All right, stop it RIGHT there!! Who are you and what have you done with Wil?!?


Hans

 

[Dagrill]

That may be the problem. Compared to a BB, a destroyer is almost nothing. In RL navies, destroyers act as screens, pickets and essentially body guards of the bigger ships. But a destroyer's primary design and purpose is as a weapons platform, not a tender, not a courier, not a supply ship. Destroyers destroy. Destroyer escorts destroy those who try to attack whatever they are escorting.

Thank you, I have just realised that the auxiliary section of MT FSotSI only has tankers in, Destroyers and DE's have there own section which further supports my view,

Regards

David

 

[aramis]

Please elaborate. You want to decanonize an MT book is news to me. Those designs we're built before the errata? Are you discussing the power problem, where redesign is needed or something else?

All right, stop it RIGHT there!! Who are you and what have you done with Wil?!?


Hans

Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium presents data that, while on its face looks good, not one of the large ship designs can be replicated with the MT design sequences. I've tried. At the very least, the errata is 75% of the book needing fixing.

I've never been happy with it. There's a reason it's often called Shattered Ships...

 

[savage]

Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium presents data that, while on its face looks good, not one of the large ship designs can be replicated with the MT design sequences. I've tried. At the very least, the errata is 75% of the book needing fixing.

I've never been happy with it. There's a reason it's often called Shattered Ships...

:rofl: I forget some of these little things.
Are any designs correct? I notice that all designs are changed in the errata for Rebellion, etc. but nothing from MT:FSotSI


13 years of COTI for me. Only 2000+ posts, I'm not very talkative.

 

[Dagrill]

Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium presents data that, while on its face looks good, not one of the large ship designs can be replicated with the MT design sequences. I've tried. At the very least, the errata is 75% of the book needing fixing.
I've never been happy with it. There's a reason it's often called Shattered Ships...

Ah, I purchased it on Drivethru before I got the MT rules on the T5 CD, so
I haven't been able to check until recently and getting to grips with T% ha taken most of my spare time.

Regards

David

 

[savage]

I haven't been able to check until recently and getting to grips with T% ha taken most of my spare time.

Regards

David

There have been mistakes in Traveller since inception. Those difficult publishing deadlines, having many products in the process at once, etc.

I'd like to see the T5 errata so i can at least do something with the book. o:

Every real ship ever built has also had problems. I prefer coming up with work arounds. Some are hard to overlook like the 800dt Merc Cruiser plans. The T4 FS seems worst.

 

[savage]

I believe the Imperium actually had about 330+ fleets. They, 3I, lied about everything else, Depots, Fleet sizes, etc.

 

[rancke]

Why would Carriers be in a CruRon? Just interested in your point of view.

They're regarded as combat vessels [RbS:27] and they are cruiser-sized and thus partake of the cruiser's size-related vulnerability.


Hans

 

[rancke]

I've slept on this and I have the following proposal, 4 Capital ships per Bat/Cru squadron is the peacetime establishment, they are fleshed out with ships kept at ready status at Depots & recalled reservists in the event of a local war to 8 ships per squadron, some critical squadrons are kept at 8 ships per squadron, like the one in 5 Sisters.

I've been thinking it over for a couple of decades and my proposal is that the theoretical norm is 8 capital ships (aka combat vessels or heavy combatants) per squadron organized in four divisions. For a variety of reasons, the true average prior to the Rebellion is closer to 7 per squadron. Squadrons include a number of light combatants and auxiliaries that we don't have any numbers for (establishing some norms might be useful). Most regular fleets have 8-10 squadrons, and the proportion of BatRons to CruRons are around 2:6. Fleets also have additional squadrons of light combatants and auxiliaries. Again, we don't have any canon figures for these.

Several years into the Rebellion, the typical squadron is down to 4 capital ships plus some auxiliaries (frwer than before the Rebellion).

Destroyers are large escorts (combat ships) and are included in the numbers of ships available, whilst the Midu Agashaam is 3kt, I think most Destroyers are 5-10kt, the largest approaching light cruiser size are flotilla leaders.

Destroyers are escorts in the 1000-3000T range as the examples in FS shows. There are larger escorts (as exemplified by the Sloan), but except for some overlarge experimental versions, the largest escort is 5,000T. [FS:9]


Hans

P.S. I think the Tigresses stationed in Five Sisters are single divisions of a broken-up squadron used primarily to make a point and are there only intermittently.

 

[savage]

...theoretical norm is 8 capital ships (aka combat vessels or heavy combatants) per squadron organized in four divisions. For a variety of reasons, the true average prior to the Rebellion is closer to 7 per squadron. ...proportion of BatRons to CruRons are around 2:6.
Several years into the Rebellion, the typical squadron is down to 4 capital ships plus some auxiliaries (frwer than before the Rebellion).


Destroyers are escorts in the 1000-3000T range as the examples in FS shows. There are larger escorts (as exemplified by the Sloan), but except for some overlarge experimental versions, the largest escort is 5,000T. [FS:9]


Hans

P.S. I think the Tigresses stationed in Five Sisters are single divisions of a broken-up squadron used primarily to make a point and are there only intermittently.

Sounds great. 2:6. But they are expensive batrons. I concur with the Five Sisters assessment. Having a group means that at least one can be on station at any time.
Escort Destroyers can run larger (the 10k cruisers). I'd say 1,000-10,000dt is appropriate. And then ranging those into categories;
Escort Destroyers 6k-10k
Light Destroyers 3k-6k
Destroyers 1k-3k

 

[rancke]

Sounds great. 2:6. But they are expensive batrons.

The ratio comes from the FFW countermix. And BatRons are expensive, sure. Since I'm trying to account for a huge naval budget, that's not a problem for me. For my calculations I go with an average battleship size roughly equal to the average of the three types we see in FS (333,000T). For cruisers I go with the average of the 8 cruisers and carriers in FS (58,000T)

I concur with the Five Sisters assessment. Having a group means that at least one can be on station at any time.

That wasn't what I meant. I think capital ships are usually deployed in divisions (though exceptions occur), and I think the Tigresses in Five Sisters were publicity stunts. YMMV.

Escort Destroyers can run larger (the 10k cruisers). I'd say 1,000-10,000dt is appropriate. And then ranging those into categories;
Escort Destroyers 6k-10k
Light Destroyers 3k-6k
Destroyers 1k-3k

"Escorts: Escorts are small ships of up to 5000 tons, and are meant to be light support craft for larger ships, primarily cruisers. Escorts are also widely used for convoy protection and commerce raiding roles." [FS:9] (Emphasis mine).​

I've been told that there is a 10,000T escort mentioned in FSotSI. Based on the quote above, I submit that an escort that size would be atypical. Which is fine by me, because I'm eager to minimize the damage done by the line that says that combat vessels include "some escorts". I think that to count as a combat vessel, an escort has to be atypically large and also that there aren't very many of those overlarge escorts.

The two 1000T combatants in FS are both called destroyer escorts. The 3000T combatant is called a destroyer. The 5000T combatant is called a fleet escort. One 400T combatant is called a close escort. Another 400T combatant (a whole bunch of them, actually) is called a patrol ship.

Perhaps 2000T ships are called light destroyers and 4000T ships are called heavy destroyers? Just a suggestion.


Hans

 

[Dagrill]

I believe the Imperium actually had about 330+ fleets. They, 3I, lied about everything else, Depots, Fleet sizes, etc.

Hmmm, the TRUE information must be available somewhere, if it's on a computer it can be hacked, if it's on paper it can be stolen (or copied)
and if it's in someone's mind it can be mind probed (psionically or mechanically).

Whilst I can understand one set of info for player's, the GM's info should be available somewhere.

Kind Regards

David

 

[Dagrill]

Hans
P.S. I think the Tigresses stationed in Five Sisters are single divisions of a broken-up squadron used primarily to make a point and are there only intermittently.

This probably isn't the correct thread for this discussion, but there is a IN base at Flammarion in the Sword Worlds, which just screams to have a Batron of Tigresses stationed at it. Enforcing the Red zone around the Droyne worlds a convenient excuse for a deployment nearby.

Regards

David