Very Specific CT Fighter Sidebar

[jawillroy]

I'm experimenting with a small-ship, LBB2 Proto-TU: So, setting aside the impotence of fighters in HG:

In LBB2 combat, it's taken as a given that large numbers of missile armed fighters can overwhelm a starship: it's a great way of adding hardpoints to a fight. So it seems that battle fleets would field a great many fighters, and that the initial engagement would be between opposing fighter wings. Each wing launches missiles at the other; in what I've played out so far, it seems inevitable that all the missiles will make contact. No?

Assuming like numbers of standard lbb2 fighters armed with missiles, that means that each wing will be taking the other's missiles on the chops, and the victory goes to the side who lucks out the most on damage rolls.

That doesn't seem like the sort of scenario a navy's going to want to bank on: it reads like Antietam in Space.

I can see some improvement if you up the computer in the standard fighter to be able to handle ECM; that should significantly improve a wing's ability to survive initial engagements and carry the fight to the opposing carriers.

It occurs to me that laser-armed fighters might be able to perform well against a like number of missile armed fighters: their armament can reduce some of the missile fire leveled against them. But they can't produce the sheer volume of fire that missile-packing fighters can, they can't hit as hard, and they're not much use against anything with a decent computer.

In LBB2 You can pop a pretty big computer in a ship's boat, have some laser capability along with missile capability, but you sacrifice 2/3 of the hardpoints you can deliver with your basic 10-ton death-sled.

So again, setting aside HG and later systems, how would you design a fighter to be able to win and survive a screen vs. screen combat, and be able to serve usefully against the opposition's starships?

 

[mike wightman]

Read the ship's boat skill - fighters can get a throw to avoid taking the hit.

And/or borrow from Battlestar Galactica and have a raptor like EW escort for the fighters that can provide the ECM modifier the fighters need to be more survivable, like the modified ship's boat you mentioned.

Finally you can always equip your fighter with a laser and 2 missiles...

On a side note I'd have robots flying the fighters loaded with ship's boat 4 and ship's tactics 4 programs.

 

[jawillroy]

Read the ship's boat skill - fighters can get a throw to avoid taking the hit.

I'd never really cottoned on to that particular rule, at least in terms of incorporating it with LBB2 combat: it always seemed to be an appendix left over from an earlier edit. I might try playing it out that way next time I smoketest, though, if only because it kicks more variables in play...

a raptor like EW escort for the fighters that can provide the ECM modifier the fighters need to be more survivable, like the modified ship's boat you mentioned.

Interesting model! I expect that formations would have to stay pretty closely packed for this to work...

Finally you can always equip your fighter with a laser and 2 missiles...

With strict LBB2 I'd have to experiment with a militarized SB; I suppose if I really wanted to I could use HG for designing a greater variety of fighters to be used in LBB2 combat, but I'm trying to stay in the proto-traveller realm.

On a side note I'd have robots flying the fighters loaded with ship's boat 4 and ship's tactics 4 programs.

I think I'd experiment with a number of other navies using robot fighters: I don't think my imperial nobility would EVER stand for the automation fighters! They're too closely tied to their myth of gallantry.

 

[samuelvss]

Hail the Astromech!

I agree, except that I would not see it as a dynamic of making the best fighter. That is like trying to figure the best armament to hang on a current era jet fighter-bomber: it's going to be a mixed package of airframes that delivers the best punch. You may want to arm some with all missiles, have them empty their racks in three turns (rounds? - I get confused), and return to reload. In the mean time, you have the bulk of the fighters armed as Mike suggests.

On the robots, you have an astromech who can fly better, while the human pilot acts as the NWO (for squids) or GIB (for USAF) during the actual combat, but is the man-in-the-loop.

The gig / armed SB (I think it can sport 2 lasers in LBB2?), gives some staying power to the screen.

 

[aramis]

having done the math before, traveller never reflected the actual ability to get a ship out of the way of incoming fire. A 1/10 second light-speed lag (pretty long range, actually) means that a 6Gfighter is able to move 2*0.5*(0.1^2)*60=1.2m. For a fighter, this is actually a significant chunk.

distance covered = 2 *0.5T²A
I'll explain the terms:
the 2 is due to two legs (data from target to firer and fire from firer to target)
0.5 standard correction for distance covered under constant acceleration
T²time in seconds, squared. again, part of standard acceleration formula
A acceleration in m/s/s (which in traveller is 10m/s/s per G, while real world is 9.8m/s/s)

Once the distance moveable is at least half the minimum apparent size*, an individual shot is no longer sufficient to hit; below that, hitting is a matter of sufficient accuracy of the weapon; above that it becomes saturation of the probable location and/or correct prediction of movement.

 

[mike wightman]

Arrgg - I forgot that the 10t fighter can only have one laser or three missile racks, unlike the other small craft (too used to HG designs I suppose).

Notice the ship's boat is 2MCr cheaper? Add a model 1 computer and you have the same capability as the 10T fighter for the same cost, but with a slightly better weapon option, not to mention the option of upgrading the computer further.

 

[jawillroy]

below that, hitting is a matter of sufficient accuracy of the weapon; above that it becomes saturation of the probable location and/or correct prediction of movement.

I've always figured that LBB2 laser fire worked that way, and that each round of firing was actually pattern fire... I'd figured that missiles would be able to correct their trajectories as they got closer and time lag disappeared.

I guess I'm not sure how to apply your numbers beyond this. I'm missing something, right?

 

[jawillroy]

Notice the ship's boat is 2MCr cheaper? Add a model 1 computer and you have the same capability as the 10T fighter for the same cost, but with a slightly better weapon option, not to mention the option of upgrading the computer further.

I had, and so I employ them as a template for heavy fighters. Model/1, phooey - stick a model 2 or 3 in there, and you've got a boat that can hit a ship with a laser. I imagine planetary defense forces would have a lot of these, with magazines and staterooms for long term cruising: that's what an SDB looks like IMTU. When considering carrier-based fighters, though, the ship's boat is expensive in tonnage: that thirty tons can carry your (albeit accurate) laser and a pair of missile racks, or it can carry 9 racks on 3 hulls. Can that ship's boat take on three 10-ton fighters and win?

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Some thoughts.

While I haven't sunk hours and hours into the Ship's Combat System in any version of Traveller (need real players for that) but IMTU I go with an ECW Craft with lots of computer and sensor power. Think either EA-6 Prowler (the Queer) or the EA-2 Hawkeye or even the S-2 Viking ASW. (yes it's true, big time Navy geek )

With sufficient power to radiate the Support Craft can stand off as per SOP now and direct fighters into targets and illuminate targets for batteries.

That being said I use modern naval/air combat for my base, not sure how canon it is, but why not use what I got.

 

[pendragonman]

There is always the Space Superiority fighter wing coupled with a Ship/Ground attack fighter wing idea.

You know, have an anti-fighter fighter design to suppress the opponents attack craft or to clear the missiles out of the way for your attack craft.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

True....

But I heard the Imperium had Retired the old Tomcat in favor of multi-role fighters.

 

[jawillroy]

One thing that tends to sour me on the EW escort model is that it means its charges have to stay very close to it for it to be much use. I mean, if you've got your EW boat half a light second away from its fighters, any information it'll be getting is a half second old, and any countermeasures transmitted will arrive a second late. It seems as though it would be easy to defeat.

So you can have your dedicated EW boat but it's going to be flying in a (relatively) tight formation with its fighters, and be as much of a target as they are.

On the other hand, perhaps fighters in targeting range of a target can be used to guide missiles fired from ships that are themselves *out* of target range? The fighter as a forward observer?

 

[pendragonman]

One thing that tends to sour me on the EW escort model is that it means its charges have to stay very close to it for it to be much use. I mean, if you've got your EW boat half a light second away from its fighters, any information it'll be getting is a half second old, and any countermeasures transmitted will arrive a second late. It seems as though it would be easy to defeat.

So you can have your dedicated EW boat but it's going to be flying in a (relatively) tight formation with its fighters, and be as much of a target as they are.

On the other hand, perhaps fighters in targeting range of a target can be used to guide missiles fired from ships that are themselves *out* of target range? The fighter as a forward observer?

The EW fighter is actually a regularly designed fighter of that class, with the weapons loadout exchanged for an EW Pod. Then they can keep right up with the squadron.

 

[jawillroy]

The EW fighter is actually a regularly designed fighter of that class, with the weapons loadout exchanged for an EW Pod. Then they can keep right up with the squadron.

That might work for me, then, although I think it bends (if not breaks) the LBB2 rules: You get your SB with a big computer, and a mess of dinky cheap fighters flying tight with it. Leaven that with a few laser fighters (fighter escorts!) so as to make sure the other guy's ecm isn't defeating your entire offensive capability.

On the other hand, you can do it this way: rather than being a lumbering 3000-ton hulk, have the carrier clock in at 6-800 tons, and have it fast enough to keep up with the fighters. Abandon the "fighter screen" model and have the fighters in pattern around the mother ship as external hardpoints. Rely on the carrier's computers for ECM, and have its own weapons load shift over completely to lasers: fighters do fine at delivering missiles but seldom have enough computer power to be really effective laser platforms: the big boats do that better.

Actually, even without the ECM rule fiddle, something like this might be a good way to go.

 

[mike wightman]

I do allow fighters to control the terminal guidance of the mothership's missiles - it gives the interesting scenario of do you keep your fighters at home to help bolster your defence or do you send them to punch a hole in the enemy's screen for your missile barrage?

 

[jawillroy]

I do allow fighters to control the terminal guidance of the mothership's missiles - it gives the interesting scenario of do you keep your fighters at home to help bolster your defence or do you send them to punch a hole in the enemy's screen for your missile barrage?

There's the additional problem of "do I launch the missiles to make the whole approach along with their fighter-guides, or do I wait until the fighters have made contact: and if I wait for the fighters to make contact, how long do they have to survive contact while they wait for the missiles to show up?"

 

[sabredog]

There is always the Space Superiority fighter wing coupled with a Ship/Ground attack fighter wing idea.

You know, have an anti-fighter fighter design to suppress the opponents attack craft or to clear the missiles out of the way for your attack craft.

l.

If you want to overwhelm the enemy defenses with missile fire, then the most efficient way is with fighters that are like spaceborne torpedo/bombers. Just arm them with missile racks. But that means that after they ripple off their missiles they will be empty and vulnerable. So you need to send them in behind a screen of laser armed fleet interdiction (read F-14) fighters that can intercept incoming missiles before they hit the capital ships and incoming fighter wings.

The laser fighters can also then attack incoming enemy fighters after incoming missiles are gone. If the torpedo bombers are slightly slower than the laser fighters, say 4-5g instead of 6, then the laser fighters will be able to clear a path well in advance of the T/B's, or at least catch up with them if they launch later.

The T/B's don't have to be as agile as the laser fighters anyway because they can launch at a longer range then turn for home afterwards. And since there's nothing to say that the laser has to go in the nose, why not say it's in the tail to allow the T/B to accelerate towards the target to maximize the missile's launch and intercept speed while also providing some degree of protection from pursuit fighters?

Also, does anyone use or have any idea of what a reasonable radius of the ECM program would be? I know the rules say "in contact" with the ship (marker, miniature, etc..), but I've always assumed that because the marker for the ship will be so much bigger than the actual ship that "contact" meant about a 5 cm zone of effect around the ship for programs like ECM originating from the center point of the marker. Any missile passing through that is effected.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I'm experimenting with a small-ship, LBB2 Proto-TU: So, setting aside the impotence of fighters in HG:

In LBB2 combat, it's taken as a given that large numbers of missile armed fighters can overwhelm a starship: it's a great way of adding hardpoints to a fight. So it seems that battle fleets would field a great many fighters, and that the initial engagement would be between opposing fighter wings. Each wing launches missiles at the other; in what I've played out so far, it seems inevitable that all the missiles will make contact. No?

Assuming like numbers of standard lbb2 fighters armed with missiles, that means that each wing will be taking the other's missiles on the chops, and the victory goes to the side who lucks out the most on damage rolls.

That doesn't seem like the sort of scenario a navy's going to want to bank on: it reads like Antietam in Space.

I can see some improvement if you up the computer in the standard fighter to be able to handle ECM; that should significantly improve a wing's ability to survive initial engagements and carry the fight to the opposing carriers.

It occurs to me that laser-armed fighters might be able to perform well against a like number of missile armed fighters: their armament can reduce some of the missile fire leveled against them. But they can't produce the sheer volume of fire that missile-packing fighters can, they can't hit as hard, and they're not much use against anything with a decent computer.

In LBB2 You can pop a pretty big computer in a ship's boat, have some laser capability along with missile capability, but you sacrifice 2/3 of the hardpoints you can deliver with your basic 10-ton death-sled.

So again, setting aside HG and later systems, how would you design a fighter to be able to win and survive a screen vs. screen combat, and be able to serve usefully against the opposition's starships?

Most of the starship combat we did in our Traveller days were the standard encounters and using the basic book. Usually a Scout verse a Type-T or somesuch. Fighters rarely entered the scene ... in fact, I can't think of a single fighter encounter.

Having said that, it was always my opinion that all the major and minor powers fielded a variety of fighters. Top of the line, second best, to antiquated, to multi-role to interceptors, to fighter-bombers (perhaps with limited jump capability). All sorts. Everything from the Viper from BSG, to the X-Wing from SW, to the Valkyrie from Macross.

Personally, I always thought the Rampart fighter was a little too basic, but a good model to build on.

 

[aramis]

I've always figured that LBB2 laser fire worked that way, and that each round of firing was actually pattern fire... I'd figured that missiles would be able to correct their trajectories as they got closer and time lag disappeared.

I guess I'm not sure how to apply your numbers beyond this. I'm missing something, right?

They are the justification for giving fighters a saving throw... if you double the max move, that's the maximum dimension which can be dodging.

So, if you have a fighter of 3x3x16m, you need at least 1.5m deflection from detecting the firing ping and the incoming laser.... A 3x4x8, depending on angle, needs 1.5 or 2m to make dodging worthwhile.

the formula tells you if you're small enough and far enough to make dodging work.

In short, it's the justification for ignoring evade programs as unrealistic... except for small craft at long ranges.

It also points out that far mroe important is accuracy of the weapon...


BTW, the preextant vector is immaterial to this calculation; the calculation is how far off from the head of the vector for the time you can be, and so the vector itself is factored out already (and reasonable vectors won't be enough of a fraction of C to make a significant difference...)

 

[jawillroy]

They are the justification for giving fighters a saving throw... if you double the max move, that's the maximum dimension which can be dodging...
In short, it's the justification for ignoring evade programs as unrealistic... except for small craft at long ranges.

It also points out that far mroe important is accuracy of the weapon...

Ah! It begins to come clear. Bear with me - that not only was college over back in 92, but also I went to a school which permitted me to ignore math entirely.

Although I see your point, now, I do think that the time lag you're using for the model is too short for traveller combat. Most civilian actions are going to be between half a light second and a quarter or so; the early stages of "detection" for them. Military actions are going to be between a light second or two, sometimes longer.

If you look at the middle range of 1 light second, if my (probably mistaken) math is correct, (unlikely) then even a measly free trader can manage a 1 meter shift. a 6 g fighter can bop around six meters. No?

A Digression
I'd say that there might be some value in capping the effectiveness of an evade program at the M drive capability of the ship: A Free Trader can't get better than -1, no matter who's at the helm or what's in the computer. Although I think this might not be a good idea, as it might have a detrimental effect on PC Fun.

And a question: shouldn't the G's applied to the equation be G's that are not being applied to straight acceleration? An evading free trader shouldn't be able to add to it's vector; a 6g fighter accelerating 6g heck-for-vinyl in a straight line shouldn't be able to evade. If it applies 3 G to evasion, it should be able to add 3 Gs acceleration to its vector. Right?

But this gets a little persnickety for an RP session, methinks. But then, this is Traveller, and persnickety GMs with no actual players (clears throat, points at self) are perfectly at home here...