Traveller Equivalent of Carrier Battlegroup?
- Thread starter Jame
- Start date
In the fighter debate, I would like to contribute
the following points.
1. The traveller universe most closely resembles the pre-air navies. Armor counts and big guns usually win.
2. The term fighter is a misnomer. The role of fighter is more analagous to that of the torpedo armed gunboats of WW1.
3. Ships of the Line are deployed to batter each other with spinals, the only weapons that can consistently penetrate other capital ships defenses. One can imagine what several hundred baterries of defense lasers and missles would do to an attacking force of fighters. That would be per capital ship by the way, not to mention outlying destroyer/frigate screens.
4. Pilots are expensive. The idea of mass fighter attacks overwhelming the dreadnaught is plausible in a few scenarios, but what navy is willing to sacrifice that kind of manpower in a single engagement?
5. This is not to say that fighters and carriers have no role in the traveller universe. The carrier would be most useful in planetary assaults as a platform for close air support. I believe that is why they were assigned to assaultrons in Fighting Ships. The other role of fighters/carriers would be system dominance in a siege role. Large numbers of fighter would be useful in patrolling the outer bodies and belts in a system and cleaning out remaining SDB's as well as providing a picket against reinforcements jumping in "behind" the main blockade fleet.
6. Outside of atmosphere, fighters are simply small, lightly armed craft, even in large numbers.
7. In my humble opinion, the naval battle will be decided by the major combatants, the battleships and cruisers, just as they were in the ages of wind power and pre-WWII Navies.
Comments and dissenting opinions are certainly welcome.
Good Gaming to all!
SocMeth
the following points.
1. The traveller universe most closely resembles the pre-air navies. Armor counts and big guns usually win.
2. The term fighter is a misnomer. The role of fighter is more analagous to that of the torpedo armed gunboats of WW1.
3. Ships of the Line are deployed to batter each other with spinals, the only weapons that can consistently penetrate other capital ships defenses. One can imagine what several hundred baterries of defense lasers and missles would do to an attacking force of fighters. That would be per capital ship by the way, not to mention outlying destroyer/frigate screens.
4. Pilots are expensive. The idea of mass fighter attacks overwhelming the dreadnaught is plausible in a few scenarios, but what navy is willing to sacrifice that kind of manpower in a single engagement?
5. This is not to say that fighters and carriers have no role in the traveller universe. The carrier would be most useful in planetary assaults as a platform for close air support. I believe that is why they were assigned to assaultrons in Fighting Ships. The other role of fighters/carriers would be system dominance in a siege role. Large numbers of fighter would be useful in patrolling the outer bodies and belts in a system and cleaning out remaining SDB's as well as providing a picket against reinforcements jumping in "behind" the main blockade fleet.
6. Outside of atmosphere, fighters are simply small, lightly armed craft, even in large numbers.
7. In my humble opinion, the naval battle will be decided by the major combatants, the battleships and cruisers, just as they were in the ages of wind power and pre-WWII Navies.
Comments and dissenting opinions are certainly welcome.
Good Gaming to all!
SocMeth
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
IMTU, I decided that the Aslani love fighters (they give all those surplus males some space fighting to do) and so I came up with house rules that allow fighters to attack capital ships with some hope of success. Basically I allow the fighters to "datalink" together in squadrons of 10, which adds their weapons into batteries with larger USP factors and this also improves their computer USP factor, up to the maximum for the fighter's TL. OTOH, I say that if a battery hits a group of fighters, it kills as many fighters as the battery's USP factor.
So it still requires =vast= numbers of fighters. My Aslani carriers are always dispersed hulls so they can launch all their fighters at once without messing around with launch tubes, and I put hordes of fighters on them. My 20,000 dton CVL carries 300 fighters. My Aslani fleet carriers have over 2000 fighters. I keep most of the pilots in low berths until they're needed. I even put fighters on all Aslani combatants over 1000 tons. I say that the Aslani think of the fighters as "detached turrets" that can be used to supplement the ship's firepower.
In really big fleet combats I have the Aslani fighters in wings of 100 fighters each.
I did this to make the Aslani seem different and to make fighters more useful, because it is correct that according to strict High Guard rules fighters without big computers (which really don't seem like fighters, somehow) are useless against serious warships.
So it still requires =vast= numbers of fighters. My Aslani carriers are always dispersed hulls so they can launch all their fighters at once without messing around with launch tubes, and I put hordes of fighters on them. My 20,000 dton CVL carries 300 fighters. My Aslani fleet carriers have over 2000 fighters. I keep most of the pilots in low berths until they're needed. I even put fighters on all Aslani combatants over 1000 tons. I say that the Aslani think of the fighters as "detached turrets" that can be used to supplement the ship's firepower.
In really big fleet combats I have the Aslani fighters in wings of 100 fighters each.
I did this to make the Aslani seem different and to make fighters more useful, because it is correct that according to strict High Guard rules fighters without big computers (which really don't seem like fighters, somehow) are useless against serious warships.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
What sort of capacity do you have the datalink program taking up? What is the program's TL and Cost?
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
I have now thought about how Datalink might work in Classic Traveller space combat, and I post my thoughts here for review and comment.
I also include my house rules on how datalink works in High Guard (Book 5) combat.
Datalink software for Classic Traveller starships under the Book 2 rules.
Datalink is a routine computer program that allows ships running datalink to share each other's active software as long as the ships remain in communication with each other. Datalink costs MCr 3 to purchase and uses 2 spaces of CPU to run. It can be written by player character using the rules for writing computer programs, requiring Computer-3 and Electronics-3 skill and a roll of 10+. Datalink first becomes available at TL9.
The maximum number of ships that may be datalinked together is effectively unlimited but will rarely be more than ten. It's usually not necessary to datalink more than a few ships to get all the needed computer capacity. Datalink has a range of one-tenth light-second (0.1 LS). If any datalinked ship gets more than 0.1 LS away from the nearest ship it was datalinked with, that ship is dropped from the datalink.
Datalinked ships may share any programs that are running on the computers of any ship in the datalink. Datalink itself may not be shared; each ship that wants to be part of a datalink must have its own copy of datalink running on its own computer.
Example: Four 10t-fighters with Mk2bis computers are going on patrol together. Each computer has a CPU capacity of 6. The flight leader wants to be able to deal with serious combat, just in case. He assigns each fighter to carry the following software (the CPU space each program takes up is in parentheses after the program name):
Flight Leader - Datalink(2), Predict-3(1), Gunner Interact(1), Maneuver/Evade-5(2).
Wingman #1- Datalink(2), Target(1), Multi-Target-2(1), Anti-Missile(1), Launch(1).
Element Leader - Datalink(2), Maneuver/Evade-5(2), Gunner Interact(1), Return Fire(1).
Wingman #2 - Datalink(2), Target(1), Anti-Missile(1), Launch(1), Select-3(1).
Note how things are set up. Each element of two fighters has the basic software needed to fight shared between the two fighters of that element (Gunner Interact, Launch, Target, Maneuver/Evade, Anti-Missile). This allows the Flight Leader to split his fighters into two 2-ship elements if needed. But as long as they all stay together they gain the ability to all use Predict-3, Return Fire, and Select-3 if they need to.
Datalink in HIGH GUARD (Book 5) rules.
Datalink allows fighters to link together to form Fighter Squadrons of 10 fighters or even Fighter Wings of 100 fighters.
Fighter Squadrons (VFS)-10 identical fighters may be grouped into a fighter squadron. They move and fire as one unit. A VFS has an effective computer rating of the computer rating of that fighter type plus 1 per fighter in the VFS, to a maximum USP no greater than the best computer available at the fighter's TL. The weapons of the fighter type comprising the squadron are gathered together into firing batteries, one for each weapon type, each battery consisting of as many weapons of that type as carried in all 10 fighters of the squadron.
Fighter squadrons should be written up as small ships with their own Ship Data Card. They take damage just like a ship, except that all hits are treated as Weapon hits. A VF Squadron is destroyed once any one weapon battery it has is reduced to factor-0. All weapons of a VF Sqdn always bear on any target.
Once formed, a VF Sqdn may not be voluntarily broken up by the owner.
Example: 10 ten-ton TL-13 flattened sphere 6-G fighters with Mk 1 computers, armor-3, one missile rack, one sandcaster and one beam laser would form a VF Sqdn with a USP of:
VFS #001 VF-0606772-370000-60004-0
1 1 1
Note that the size code did not change, the fighters still get the full benefit of their small size for the to-hit die roll modifier.
Fighter Wings (VFW)-Fighters may grouped into Fighter Wings of 100 fighters (10 squadrons of 10 fighters each). The entire VFW moves and fires as one unit. A VFW has an effective computer rating of the lowest effective computer rating of any VF sqdn in the VFW, plus 1 per fighter squadron, to a maximum USP no greater than the best computer available at the TL of the lowest TL fighter in the fighter wing. The squadrons comprising a Fighter Wing do not have to be identical. The lowest USP for acceleration of any VFS in the VFW is used as the acceleration USP rating for the entire VFW. The armor rating of a VFW is the average armor rating of all the VFS in the Wing, rounded down.
Example: a VFW is composed of 1 squadron with armor-12, two with armor-10, four with armor-5, and three with armor-0. The VFW's armor USP will be 5 (52/10=5.2 rounded down).
A VFW should be written up as a small ship with its own Ship Data Card. They take damage just like a ship, except that all hits are treated as Weapon hits. A VFW is destroyed once all weapons it has are reduced to factor-0. All weapons of a VFW always bear on any target.
Once formed, a VFW may not be voluntarily broken up by the owner.
The same TL-13 fighter formed into a full-strength VFW would look like:
VFW #001 VF-0606773-370000-60004-0
A A A
Note that the size code did not change, the fighters still get the full benefit of their small size for the to-hit die roll modifier.
I also include my house rules on how datalink works in High Guard (Book 5) combat.
Datalink software for Classic Traveller starships under the Book 2 rules.
Datalink is a routine computer program that allows ships running datalink to share each other's active software as long as the ships remain in communication with each other. Datalink costs MCr 3 to purchase and uses 2 spaces of CPU to run. It can be written by player character using the rules for writing computer programs, requiring Computer-3 and Electronics-3 skill and a roll of 10+. Datalink first becomes available at TL9.
The maximum number of ships that may be datalinked together is effectively unlimited but will rarely be more than ten. It's usually not necessary to datalink more than a few ships to get all the needed computer capacity. Datalink has a range of one-tenth light-second (0.1 LS). If any datalinked ship gets more than 0.1 LS away from the nearest ship it was datalinked with, that ship is dropped from the datalink.
Datalinked ships may share any programs that are running on the computers of any ship in the datalink. Datalink itself may not be shared; each ship that wants to be part of a datalink must have its own copy of datalink running on its own computer.
Example: Four 10t-fighters with Mk2bis computers are going on patrol together. Each computer has a CPU capacity of 6. The flight leader wants to be able to deal with serious combat, just in case. He assigns each fighter to carry the following software (the CPU space each program takes up is in parentheses after the program name):
Flight Leader - Datalink(2), Predict-3(1), Gunner Interact(1), Maneuver/Evade-5(2).
Wingman #1- Datalink(2), Target(1), Multi-Target-2(1), Anti-Missile(1), Launch(1).
Element Leader - Datalink(2), Maneuver/Evade-5(2), Gunner Interact(1), Return Fire(1).
Wingman #2 - Datalink(2), Target(1), Anti-Missile(1), Launch(1), Select-3(1).
Note how things are set up. Each element of two fighters has the basic software needed to fight shared between the two fighters of that element (Gunner Interact, Launch, Target, Maneuver/Evade, Anti-Missile). This allows the Flight Leader to split his fighters into two 2-ship elements if needed. But as long as they all stay together they gain the ability to all use Predict-3, Return Fire, and Select-3 if they need to.
Datalink in HIGH GUARD (Book 5) rules.
Datalink allows fighters to link together to form Fighter Squadrons of 10 fighters or even Fighter Wings of 100 fighters.
Fighter Squadrons (VFS)-10 identical fighters may be grouped into a fighter squadron. They move and fire as one unit. A VFS has an effective computer rating of the computer rating of that fighter type plus 1 per fighter in the VFS, to a maximum USP no greater than the best computer available at the fighter's TL. The weapons of the fighter type comprising the squadron are gathered together into firing batteries, one for each weapon type, each battery consisting of as many weapons of that type as carried in all 10 fighters of the squadron.
Fighter squadrons should be written up as small ships with their own Ship Data Card. They take damage just like a ship, except that all hits are treated as Weapon hits. A VF Squadron is destroyed once any one weapon battery it has is reduced to factor-0. All weapons of a VF Sqdn always bear on any target.
Once formed, a VF Sqdn may not be voluntarily broken up by the owner.
Example: 10 ten-ton TL-13 flattened sphere 6-G fighters with Mk 1 computers, armor-3, one missile rack, one sandcaster and one beam laser would form a VF Sqdn with a USP of:
VFS #001 VF-0606772-370000-60004-0
1 1 1
Note that the size code did not change, the fighters still get the full benefit of their small size for the to-hit die roll modifier.
Fighter Wings (VFW)-Fighters may grouped into Fighter Wings of 100 fighters (10 squadrons of 10 fighters each). The entire VFW moves and fires as one unit. A VFW has an effective computer rating of the lowest effective computer rating of any VF sqdn in the VFW, plus 1 per fighter squadron, to a maximum USP no greater than the best computer available at the TL of the lowest TL fighter in the fighter wing. The squadrons comprising a Fighter Wing do not have to be identical. The lowest USP for acceleration of any VFS in the VFW is used as the acceleration USP rating for the entire VFW. The armor rating of a VFW is the average armor rating of all the VFS in the Wing, rounded down.
Example: a VFW is composed of 1 squadron with armor-12, two with armor-10, four with armor-5, and three with armor-0. The VFW's armor USP will be 5 (52/10=5.2 rounded down).
A VFW should be written up as a small ship with its own Ship Data Card. They take damage just like a ship, except that all hits are treated as Weapon hits. A VFW is destroyed once all weapons it has are reduced to factor-0. All weapons of a VFW always bear on any target.
Once formed, a VFW may not be voluntarily broken up by the owner.
The same TL-13 fighter formed into a full-strength VFW would look like:
VFW #001 VF-0606773-370000-60004-0
A A A
Note that the size code did not change, the fighters still get the full benefit of their small size for the to-hit die roll modifier.
I absolutely agree here. The well-known SF concept of the small, agile fighter destroying the large, plodding star cruiser stems from the false analogy:
fighter = aircraft
star cruiser = naval ship
As you wrote, a fighter is more equivalent to a very small boat. When you take into account relative sizes, it's not even the equivalent of a proper MTB, more that of the miniscule motorboats deployed by Italy or Germany as last-ditch measures.
Regards,
Tobias
After four pages, I forget if I asked this: what role does each type of ship do in each type of fleet, if fighters are ignored.
What would a battleship, its battle cruisers/heavy cruisers, light cruisers and escorts do in a strike fleet? What tactics do it use?
Same for a patrol group and an assault group?
What would a battleship, its battle cruisers/heavy cruisers, light cruisers and escorts do in a strike fleet? What tactics do it use?
Same for a patrol group and an assault group?
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
Jame asked,
So, a full battlegroup with battleships (BB) uses those BB for the serious firepower, to kill enemy BB and cruisers (CR). The battlegroup CR are used to kill enemy CR and destroyers (DD), and they snipe at enemy BB when they think they can get away with it. DD and other escorts kill each other and fighters (VF), plus (IMTU) using their defenses to thicken the defenses of the bigger ships (especially CR, which need the help more). DD usually don't bother shooting at BB since they can't penetrate their defenses, but they might try ganging up on an isolated CR. In the OTU, VF pretty much just shoot each other, there's nothing else they can hurt except maybe a DD.
In a raiding group built around a CR squadron, the CR play the role of the BB in a battlegroup: they fight everything bigger (although they'll usually try to run from anything bigger if they possibly can) and act as the big guns against everything else. DD and VF play their same roles.
In a patrol or escort group built around some DD, the DD are the biggest boys and they have to do it all, although VF are more useful here since often the worst opposition expected are enemy DD and some pirate/privateer ships. VF are very useful against such ships, or to keep the freighters rounded up.
In any kind of group, carriers (CV) play mothership and usually keep out of harm's way, sending in the "detachable turrets" (their fighters) to do the dirty work. Some CV are strike carriers, armed and armored like CR and so capable of acting like CR if needed.
Tactics: BB and CR with meson guns or spinal particle accelerators want to get close so they can do more damage, but they want to do it without taking so much damage on the way in that their spinal mounts are useless.
So the battle usually begins with a missile duel at long range as each side tries to reduce the firepower of the other's spinal mounts to a level where they're not too dangerous and you can accept the losses they'll inflict at close range.
It's difficult to win outright at long range since it's easier for ships to withdraw and missile fire slowly wears big ships down, it doesn't wipe them out in a "one-shot-zot" as a spinal meson gun does.
Close range battle with effective meson guns on both sides is mutual suicide, "submachineguns at ten paces" as David Weber puts a similar situation in the Starfire books. The side with more meson guns left will usually win, but it's going to be bloody.
If one side has meson guns and the other doesn't, the side without wants to keep it at long range and just keep pounding with missiles at least until those meson guns are out of action.
Basically, ships fight their own size and one size smaller enemies, plus bigger enemies if they have to or wind up being the biggest in the group.
So, a full battlegroup with battleships (BB) uses those BB for the serious firepower, to kill enemy BB and cruisers (CR). The battlegroup CR are used to kill enemy CR and destroyers (DD), and they snipe at enemy BB when they think they can get away with it. DD and other escorts kill each other and fighters (VF), plus (IMTU) using their defenses to thicken the defenses of the bigger ships (especially CR, which need the help more). DD usually don't bother shooting at BB since they can't penetrate their defenses, but they might try ganging up on an isolated CR. In the OTU, VF pretty much just shoot each other, there's nothing else they can hurt except maybe a DD.
In a raiding group built around a CR squadron, the CR play the role of the BB in a battlegroup: they fight everything bigger (although they'll usually try to run from anything bigger if they possibly can) and act as the big guns against everything else. DD and VF play their same roles.
In a patrol or escort group built around some DD, the DD are the biggest boys and they have to do it all, although VF are more useful here since often the worst opposition expected are enemy DD and some pirate/privateer ships. VF are very useful against such ships, or to keep the freighters rounded up.
In any kind of group, carriers (CV) play mothership and usually keep out of harm's way, sending in the "detachable turrets" (their fighters) to do the dirty work. Some CV are strike carriers, armed and armored like CR and so capable of acting like CR if needed.
Tactics: BB and CR with meson guns or spinal particle accelerators want to get close so they can do more damage, but they want to do it without taking so much damage on the way in that their spinal mounts are useless.
So the battle usually begins with a missile duel at long range as each side tries to reduce the firepower of the other's spinal mounts to a level where they're not too dangerous and you can accept the losses they'll inflict at close range.
It's difficult to win outright at long range since it's easier for ships to withdraw and missile fire slowly wears big ships down, it doesn't wipe them out in a "one-shot-zot" as a spinal meson gun does.
Close range battle with effective meson guns on both sides is mutual suicide, "submachineguns at ten paces" as David Weber puts a similar situation in the Starfire books. The side with more meson guns left will usually win, but it's going to be bloody.
If one side has meson guns and the other doesn't, the side without wants to keep it at long range and just keep pounding with missiles at least until those meson guns are out of action.
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
I highly appreciate that, it's copied and filed away for future use . . .
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Hey I learned alot in the last Traveller Fighter purpose thread.
(See the T20 Drednaughts what's the point thread that followed.
In MTU a CV is an auxillary not the core of a particular squadron. It would be included in an assault-ron to support ground ops. (Probably the only case where there would be more than one.) It would be added to a Cru-Ron to help keep the enemy escorts busy. It would be added to a BatRon to thicken missile defense. (Peep LAC use from War of Honor.) Added to a important Convoys to protect against smaller commerce raiders. And used at important planets to provide patrols of Merchant shipping when local resources aren't sufficient to maintain large quantities of fighters. But Carriers don't form the backbone of any squadron, unless it is a Convoy escort Squadron. (And in that case more of a Task Force.)Usually the Cruiser is the important ship not the Carrier and the backbone of the various Task forces. (The Assault-Ron would also have a 1-4 Cruisers assigned.)
In MTU a CV is an auxillary not the core of a particular squadron. It would be included in an assault-ron to support ground ops. (Probably the only case where there would be more than one.) It would be added to a Cru-Ron to help keep the enemy escorts busy. It would be added to a BatRon to thicken missile defense. (Peep LAC use from War of Honor.) Added to a important Convoys to protect against smaller commerce raiders. And used at important planets to provide patrols of Merchant shipping when local resources aren't sufficient to maintain large quantities of fighters. But Carriers don't form the backbone of any squadron, unless it is a Convoy escort Squadron. (And in that case more of a Task Force.)Usually the Cruiser is the important ship not the Carrier and the backbone of the various Task forces. (The Assault-Ron would also have a 1-4 Cruisers assigned.)
The carrier based Cruron demonstrated another example of how borken MTs Fighting Ships is. It shows the typical cruiser squadron contains 5 cruisers, 2 scouts, 4 escorts and an auxiliary (which I assume is the bulk ordnance carrier mentioned in canon) But look at the carrier Cruron it contains 1 carrier, 4 scouts, 1 transport, 1 tanker and 1 dromedary (a hybrid tanker/cargo ship) plus a bunch of fighter groups. Yet both are classified as Cruiser Squadrons. I know which one I would want to be with!
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I guess that would depend on which Traveller combat system you are using. The Aircraft, individually, in WWII weren't all that effective. Most strikes were 300+ aircraft. (Though probably 1/3rd of those were fighters in most cases.) Granted it didn't take all that many bombs or torpedoes to sink a ship but more often than not you missed. Once AAA got properly ramped up and fighters were flying CAP not even many got through to strike your ship. At the Battle of Midway, the Yorktown was hit by two waves of Carrier based aircraft and was still capable of 20 knots between strikes and was moving under its own power again before dark. (A Japanese Submarine then torpedoed it for a third attack.) Finally the US Navy used a Destroyer to finish the job and sink it. The same fate befell the Lexington, and the Wasp. The Yorktown was actually reported sunk twice at Coral Sea and three times at Midway. At Pearl Harbor The Japanese Strike (6 carriers) attacking a fleet at anchor in two waves with virtually no fighters on the strike only managed to actually destroy one Battleship. They did damage a further 8 but only two of the 9 did not see action during the war. (The Oklahoma just missed the end of the war.) How much of the time they spent repairing them and how much time refiting them is a matter of conjecture. (All 9 Battleships were considered obsolete by 1941 standards and all were refitted to 1942+ standards before putting back out to sea. (Matter of fact all 9 were scheduled to be scrapped within the next 12 months.) The Arizona went down to a bomb down the stack that broke the keel. (Putting it on the bottom in a hurry and accounting for about half the US Casualties at Pearl Harbor.)
In Traveller the Fleet battles tend to be more like the Battle of Jutland, (Except more ships would go to the bottom, especially under T20.) or The fight with the Graf Spee. Perhaps the engagement between the Prince of Wales, the Hood and escorts VS. the Bismark and the Prince Eugen.
The other big advantage of a Carrier strike during WWII was the over the horizon strike. You could attack your target without ever coming into view of it or exposing your ships to return fire. (Though you could get striked by their planes.)
Your Aircraft were about 8 times as fast as your Capital ships, in some cases more than 10 times as fast. That isn't possible in the Traveller rules. In Traveller most combatants especially Capital ships are just as fast as Fighters. At TL15 they even wind up being as agile as Fighters. Why send a Fighter wing when you can send a Bat-Ron and it will get there at the same time?
Today the Carrier may be virtually obsolete. The real reason for a Carrier is to show the flag but only the US has true Fleet Carriers. (Yes there are a bunch of Baby Carriers out there.) But when you can load a VLS Aegis Cruiser with 60 Tomahawk missiles launch them all at targets 1500 miles out and put them all in the air in 2 minutes. (A Carrier takes 4 minutes to Launch 32 aircraft under ideal conditions.) Use Predators and Satelites to find your targets before you launch the targets won't even know they are under attack until the Tomahawks cross the horizon at 500+ knots at around 50 miles. At the earliest. Of course you would have to reload after that strike. But that is one Cruiser and one of those missiles is enough to sink most targets. Put Nukes on them and you don't even have to get close.
Why do you need Aircraft today?
In Traveller the Fleet battles tend to be more like the Battle of Jutland, (Except more ships would go to the bottom, especially under T20.) or The fight with the Graf Spee. Perhaps the engagement between the Prince of Wales, the Hood and escorts VS. the Bismark and the Prince Eugen.
The other big advantage of a Carrier strike during WWII was the over the horizon strike. You could attack your target without ever coming into view of it or exposing your ships to return fire. (Though you could get striked by their planes.)
Your Aircraft were about 8 times as fast as your Capital ships, in some cases more than 10 times as fast. That isn't possible in the Traveller rules. In Traveller most combatants especially Capital ships are just as fast as Fighters. At TL15 they even wind up being as agile as Fighters. Why send a Fighter wing when you can send a Bat-Ron and it will get there at the same time?
Today the Carrier may be virtually obsolete. The real reason for a Carrier is to show the flag but only the US has true Fleet Carriers. (Yes there are a bunch of Baby Carriers out there.) But when you can load a VLS Aegis Cruiser with 60 Tomahawk missiles launch them all at targets 1500 miles out and put them all in the air in 2 minutes. (A Carrier takes 4 minutes to Launch 32 aircraft under ideal conditions.) Use Predators and Satelites to find your targets before you launch the targets won't even know they are under attack until the Tomahawks cross the horizon at 500+ knots at around 50 miles. At the earliest. Of course you would have to reload after that strike. But that is one Cruiser and one of those missiles is enough to sink most targets. Put Nukes on them and you don't even have to get close.
So much the better if the model need not be predicated on highly effective AA then.
As to a single Aegis armed with Tomahawks, there are limitations with cruise missiles, in terms of range, response time and cost. US cruise missles didn't have the range to strike at bin Laden in the late 90s and Afghanistan was a good example of where an orbiting a/c armed with JDAMs could provide a much quicker, cheaper response.
Good discussion.
As to a single Aegis armed with Tomahawks, there are limitations with cruise missiles, in terms of range, response time and cost. US cruise missles didn't have the range to strike at bin Laden in the late 90s and Afghanistan was a good example of where an orbiting a/c armed with JDAMs could provide a much quicker, cheaper response.
Good discussion.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I stand corrected. With current Aircraft design many strikes are carried out from bases within the United States. We need aircraft but Carriers are not as serious a requirement. And while they may be useful for short fused strikes against a mobile target in a far away land, they are no longer the best thing to have in a naval engagement. 80%+ of a CVBG is to defend the CV from various threats. The VLS Aegis Cruiser and Destroyers, the F-14 and the E-2c all were designed for one job, the fact that they can do other jobs is secondary to the fact that they were designed to defend a Carrier against a massive missile barrage. Beginning with early detection (E-2) Interception (F-14, which can track, descriminate and attack as many as 10 targets each at a range of 150+ miles) Secondary interception, SM2ER (Aegis long range missiles.) SM2MR (Aegis Medium range missiles) ASROC (Anti-submarine warfare) Surface vessels are too easy to find and attack. Submarines are a better option in modern Naval combat. As witnessed by the only naval engagement in the second half of the 20th century (Falkland Islands.) The primary ship killer was the aircraft and the Submarine. (The UK lost ships to Land Based Air and the Argentinians lost their ships inthe conflict to a Trident Submarine.) And the old theory that Naval ships have no business being in range of Land Based Air is still valid. Carriers are big floating targets in a Naval engagement. Of course since most of the conflicts that we have been involved in have had no Naval battles and the Carrier is great for supporting ground action the Carrier is still needed. (And with them and the US Submarine Fleet nobody on this planet is going to actually engage the US in a Naval Battle.) So perhaps they do serve a purpose.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I found the biggest problems with FSOTSI is the ships were seriously scaled up from the Suplement 9 equivalents. Especially the Cruisers and Destroyers. (Since they were only 5-20 years, tops after Suplement 9.) Cruisers in the 100KTon range, Destroyers in the 10KTon range and DE in the 5KTon range. THe MT ship design rules required this upscaling to accomplish the same capability that were in the earlier ships but they are definitely bigger and makes them out of scale with the rest of the OTU.
