Wolfs Shipyard Forum

The new forum for Wolf's Shipyard
It is currently Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:30 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2384 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155 ... 159  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 12:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:00 am
Posts: 232
Location: Europe
Got it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
Meugen06 wrote:
Got it.


I will have some more ships to post (today or within a few days) which might be what you're looking for.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:17 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
Some more fleet auxiliaries...

The Solace class rescue ship was a tested and well liked ship, and in the 1960s when the Fleet began looking to replace the war built auxiliary transports, they decided to convert three examples into something that would fill the need. The resulting Lake class, of which Lake Silverton is the 8th example, carried on the reputation so ably won by the Solace. They were defensively armed and had comfortable quarters and a good volume percentage for cargo, and based on crew feedback the Fleet ordered them into general production.

Image

The next three classes are considered "packet", in that they are armed with standard line of battle weapons and possess the capability (though often not the ammunition) to operate in more than just a defensive mode.

When the Ravager and Preserver sister classes were fielded, the Fleet saw an opportunity to create a larger version of the Lake class for a fraction of the cost of designing a new hull from the ground up. The Shire and Point classes, for the Fleet and Colonial Guard respectively, were identical except for the armament. The Shires lost some of the side guns, but since the ship wasn't expected to stand in the line of battle, this was an accepted loss, especially since the armaments were for defensive use only. The Guard's version, the Point class, was often leased to civilian operators (generally smaller lines than the Big 3, but occasionally one of them would pick up a lease) and then contracted to fill the same roles as they would have if the Guard operated them. The only difference is that they lack the red and gold hull identification stripes that a Guard crewed ship carries.

Image

Image

Image

The final ship came on line after the highly successful Myrmidon class assaultstar was inducted into the fleet. The Fleet wanted a fast, well protected ship that could operate in contested space should the need arise. Unlike the Lake, Shire, and Point classes, the Summit class was armored in line with a battlestar and her magazines carried both defensive rounds and offensive kinetic rounds.

The hangar deck lost half the Raptor nests that operated directly from the hangar and instead saw them replaced by enclosed leisure spaces. Armored shutters could seal these new spaces and protect them from enemy fire.

What resulted from the redesign was a ship that, without trying, created a sweet spot that no-one realized was needed. Her hangar was able to handle anything in the Colonial inventory, and with a little work, could even support one of the new Fast Patrol ships. Her extensive lift capacity and volume allowed her to be converted into everything from the fast packet that she was designed as, to command ships, training ships, long range survey ships, and even hospital ships.

Image

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
kfeltenberger wrote:
El Jefe wrote:
I agree with 50stone, block desginations are "universally" used here on earth.


Are you sure the US Navy knows this? ;-) They classify the differences in ships as "Flights", such as the Arleigh Burke Flight I, Flight II, and several versions of the Flight IIA.


You are now experiencing something that I learned after BRAC. There is a right way, there is a wrong way and then there is the Navy Way. The Navy Way at times not one thing to do with either right or wrong it is just institutional.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
kfeltenberger wrote:
TurboCoupeTurbo wrote:
Hey Kurt, do you have a break down on the size of the Colonial Fleet in Lady Hecate?

Seems like your Colonies are on a large scale ship building spree with all the new designs coming into service. Not that we mind ;)


Yes, the Colonial fleet is rather large in Lady H, but they're not crazy numbers and based on real demographics and ships in service. The total numbers that I originally came up with had about 734 battlestars and 600 assaultstars (like Pyrois or Izanami), about 1334 other assultships, and about 12000 other combatant warships (gunstars, escorts, etc.).

This was based on the US Navy pennant list compared to active and reserve personnel and then as a percentage of total US population, then extrapolated to a population the size of the Colonies. If I wanted to be really nit picky, I'd go back to about 1985 or so and use the pennant list of ships that were in service then, given that was 40 years after the end of WW2 and BSG happened 40 years after the end of the Uprising.

I need to revisit the numbers because these are based on a population total that is about 72% of canon. I was thinking the Colonial population was 20 billion when it was 28 billion plus. Most likely the numbers in the thread below will be about 1.35-1.4 times what is listed.

http://www.phpbbplanet.com/shipyard/viewtopic.php?t=4215&mforum=shipyard


Or it could have been that the technology and overall firepower of the newer ships allowed the total number of ships to fall and have a greater overall combat power and effectiveness.

The Army Rifle squad in the 1980s of 11 men in two fire teams of five men and a squad leader had a greater fire power potential than the WWII US Army Rifle squad of 10 men. The M1 Rifles and the BAR in the rifle squad honestly did not have the same fire power as the M16A1 rifles and the M203 grenade launchers of the early 80s rifle squad. The average soldier was also able to carry a lot more ammo than he could with the M1 - M1919A2 combination.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:55 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
EMSpier wrote:
Or it could have been that the technology and overall firepower of the newer ships allowed the total number of ships to fall and have a greater overall combat power and effectiveness.

The Army Rifle squad in the 1980s of 11 men in two fire teams of five men and a squad leader had a greater fire power potential than the WWII US Army Rifle squad of 10 men. The M1 Rifles and the BAR in the rifle squad honestly did not have the same fire power as the M16A1 rifles and the M203 grenade launchers of the early 80s rifle squad. The average soldier was also able to carry a lot more ammo than he could with the M1 - M1919A2 combination.


Let's step back and look at this academically...

While the M-16/M-60/M203 mix is implied to be better, let's also not forget that the tactics have also changed dramatically as well. Most combat is still single shots, not full auto, so in that regard the M-16 wins only by virtue of magazine capacity and total number of rounds that can be carried. However, the M-1 does have the advantage of range and penetration, turning what might be cover against 5.56 into nothing more than concealment. One could argue that the WW2 squad was better equipped for action in Iraq and especially Afghanistan given the ranges that targets were engaged.

That said,

While the tier 1 battlestar of 1999 was much more capable than the tier 1 battlestar of 1959, the year before the war ended, the same could be said about the Cylons, and probably was. The Colonials had no way of knowing that the new baseships had glass jaws and lacked any sort of kinetic threat. So, at least for Lady H, the numbers below are fairly accurate when based on a population of 28 billion and when looking at the active fleet.

Capital Asset (BS or AS)
Number of Battlestars.........1027
Number of Assaultstars.........840
Total BS and AS.................1867

Other Assault Ships
Number of Other Assault Ships.........1867

Gunstars
Number of Cruisers.........2053
Number of Destroyers.....5600
Number of Frigates.........2520
Number of Submarines.....6626
Total Gunstars..............16799

Total Combatant Warships........20532

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
kfeltenberger wrote:
EMSpier wrote:
Or it could have been that the technology and overall firepower of the newer ships allowed the total number of ships to fall and have a greater overall combat power and effectiveness.

The Army Rifle squad in the 1980s of 11 men in two fire teams of five men and a squad leader had a greater fire power potential than the WWII US Army Rifle squad of 10 men. The M1 Rifles and the BAR in the rifle squad honestly did not have the same fire power as the M16A1 rifles and the M203 grenade launchers of the early 80s rifle squad. The average soldier was also able to carry a lot more ammo than he could with the M1 - M1919A2 combination.


Let's step back and look at this academically...

While the M-16/M-60/M203 mix is implied to be better, let's also not forget that the tactics have also changed dramatically as well. Most combat is still single shots, not full auto, so in that regard the M-16 wins only by virtue of magazine capacity and total number of rounds that can be carried. However, the M-1 does have the advantage of range and penetration, turning what might be cover against 5.56 into nothing more than concealment. One could argue that the WW2 squad was better equipped for action in Iraq and especially Afghanistan given the ranges that targets were engaged.


As a former Grunt I have opinions. As an owner of a US Rifle Cal. .30 M1 that I enjoy shooting that at my age it beats me up on an 80 shot Regional Course and it sometimes is rough on me with a 50 shot National Match Course at my age. :) It doesn't get any better. We sometimes shoot in January and when the snow is flying and you can't see the 200 yard targets you wonder just how bad it really was at the battle of the Bulge or the Chosen Reservoir. At least the range for us was "one way not two way" and as miserable cold as it is at times I really felt for those guys.

The M-16 series of rifle the A1 being the pinnacle of development til the A2/A3/A4 series was probably the single most accurate rifle (out 0f the makers box) ever put in the hands of a draftee.

Having said that the Army went with the theory the Germans adopted in WWII that said the average Soldier won't be able to see a target much less hit it with any regularity beyond 350 yards. or 300 meters. The A2 was designed with the newer round with the requirement to penetrate a US M1 Helmet (WWII until the Kevlar was issued) at 600 meters. Those rifles with the old iron sights still had the same limitations even with the changes to the sights that the USMC demanded. (I'm glad they did.)

Where I worked one of the units supported people that were in and out of the sand boxes. One of the complaints from some of the Special Forces types was the "over penetration" of the standard round for the M16A2 and M4/M4A1 carbines in the CQB roles. They were trying to get the Armed forces to adopt a round similar to what our Police Forces SWAT types use but there was that Geneva Convention that kept getting in the way.

You may be interested to know (if you didn't) that the Corps has adopted the M4A1 Carbine as the standard weapon in the rifle squad the 16A2/4s being replaced and they are or have adopted a M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (a modified M4A1/Mi6A4 hybrid) in the rifle squad.

All of the rifles and carbines now have a magnifying scope on them to aid in both CQB and longer ranged marksmanship. The Army has also been doing the same thing but retaining the SAW in the rifle squads.

Just as an aside you can now shoot a AR15 flat top rife with a 4x scope in CMP matches. You are also now allowed to use a CAR-15 type with a scope also. Some of use the old school A2 I mean really most of the matches I shot in were 100 or 200 yard reduced range targets and I think I'll stay with the old A2 or my M1. I doubt I'll ever become a Distinguished Marksman and I just don't really have the time now to pursue it.

All in all the current Army Rifle Squad has more firepower than its' WWII/Korean War counter part. Those two light belt fed guns make a difference and the grenade launchers do also.

Sometimes I wonder do they ask the grunts? I didn't say the M16 series was better but for the average soldier I believe it may be. Just an opinion. The troops seem to love the M4. Go figure.

Yes tactics and such have changed but I don't think the mission statement for the Infantry Units have changed. They are just finding newer and more exciting ways to ; "Close with and kill or capture the Enemy by the use of fire and maneuver or to repel his attacks by fire."

The rules of engagement have changed also.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
kfeltenberger wrote:


Capital Asset (BS or AS)
Number of Battlestars.........1027
Number of Assaultstars.........840
Total BS and AS.................1867

Other Assault Ships
Number of Other Assault Ships.........1867

Gunstars
Number of Cruisers.........2053
Number of Destroyers.....5600
Number of Frigates.........2520
Number of Submarines.....6626
Total Gunstars..............16799

Total Combatant Warships........20532


I actually have no issue with those numbers. If one considers that in our world we would possibly talking about the combined navies of the world? Wow. If you are using Regan era numbers then you would also have to include the Navies of the USSR, and everyone else at that time.

That of course doesn't count any warship types places like Virgon, Leonin and others would keep on their own.

Taking stock from the story I'm honestly surprised so few ships seem to have survived. Perhaps there are more stragglers out there than we are aware of yet. I don't think the Colonial Fleet is aware that BSG-122 (or is it BSG 121/122) survived intact. At least not yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:27 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
How did I get the numbers? In 2012, I used the current pennant list (as posted on Wikipedia to keep things consistent), the reported number of active and reserve Naval personnel, and the US population. First, I determined what percentage of the population was currently on active duty in the Navy, and then what percentage was in the Reserves. Then, counting the capital assets as listed above, I divided the number of active, and the number of reserve, by the number of each asset, which then gave me the number of active and reserve personnel per unit. From there, it was a matter of using the population percentage to determine how many were in the active Fleet and the reserve Fleet. Using those numbers, I could then divide them by the numbers I had for how many personnel per each unit of each type of capital asset. Excel was my friend. :-)

If I wanted to be a little more "realistic", I probably would double or triple the Fleet's reserve component.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:27 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
When Picon Naval Armaments Group successfully lobbied on behalf of their Diana class battlestar, it caused the cancellation of the ten Mercury Block II battlestars that were scheduled for FY 1998-2000 in preference of the new design. On paper, and in reality for the Fleet, this was a good move, but it put the Orbital Dynamics shipyards of Caprica in a difficult position; it had already contracted for many of the components and materials necessary for the ten Mercury class ships. Some creative design work and a strong lobbying effort released funds so that Orbital Dynamics could produce the first Cove class mobile anchorage. OD's president used the famous "Ghost Fleet" from the end of the Cylon Uprising to push the concept, something that the Fleet saw the general utility that such a unit would bring to operations, but still unsure just how it would improve the Fleet's field posture under realistic conditions.

When the first Cove class ship was delivered it was viewed by many ship spotters as one might view a particularly ugly person; worth looking at for the spectacle but not something you'd want to take home to meet the parents...let alone wake up next to. The Perkinson Herald even went so far as to call it "Coyote Ugly", something that caused numerous comments and sketches to be submitted on its comments page.

It was clear that the initial inspiration was the excellent Leviathan class replenishmentstar, but from there things get a bit murky. The head is a standard Block II Mercury as are the engines, with the rest of the center hull constructed using the Mercury's modular hull components. As a result, the ship has one of the most efficient heat management systems in the Fleet. Three wing and dome sections were incorporated into the long, almost pencil-like hull. It was always planned to have underslung pods, but the first tests showed that due to the very long center hull that the ship had a tendency to flex up and down; it's side to side strength was more than adequate, but if the ship would change attitude too quickly, it began to flex and if the change was rapid enough, could result in hull damage. This resulted in perhaps the most distinctive feature of the ship; a second hull made by combining two pods and then permanently attaching it to the pod supports. This change gave the ship the necessary rigidity that was needed, but also increased its cargo and small craft handling volume to an almost insane level.

The only change during the class' production history was the addition of a long range communications and sensor array above the rear engine cluster.

When Admiral Madreau was asked to comment on the ship, he slowly shook his head and said, "At least it works."

And it did work. After the Cylon War of Return, the Cove class ships that escaped to Thule system provided needed service and during the campaigns that followed, proved their legitimacy by servicing ships of all nations taking part.

Image

Image

Image

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
This ship is incredible. Wow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 4:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2014 7:20 pm
Posts: 275
Wow, all I can say is wow. Great Job.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 9:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:19 pm
Posts: 46
Quote:
I was recently asked to repost the size and org charts that I've done for Lady H. To make this viable, I uploaded all the publicly mentioned group org charts and size charts that I've (or CanisD) put together. Other than a few, those with a Z- prefix, none of them have something on them to give a sense of size other than the scale. To help give a sense of scale, simply copy one of the files marked "Z-Trav..." onto the image you want a comparison.


Thank you for that.

I have a couple of questions. In Chapter 40: Venandi Incipit we are introduced to the Earth Union Assaultstar Antiope.

On page 2452 there are three unnamed "Antiope class Assaultstars along with the Lamia class assaultstar Lampedo. We had already been introduced to the Lamia class.

So is the Antiope class Assaultstar the one on the size/org chart Artemesia Family Tree just below the Artemesia?

The second question is am I correct when that I believe both the Antiope and Deo Vindice and her two escorts (I assumed they were of the same class as the Vox Populi?) are missing?

Just curious.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 7:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 5366
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
EMSpier wrote:

I have a couple of questions. In Chapter 40: Venandi Incipit we are introduced to the Earth Union Assaultstar Antiope.

On page 2452 there are three unnamed "Antiope class Assaultstars along with the Lamia class assaultstar Lampedo. We had already been introduced to the Lamia class.

So is the Antiope class Assaultstar the one on the size/org chart Artemesia Family Tree just below the Artemesia?


No. Antiope is a separate class and was the last ship that Canis was working on before he passed in 2015. The ship wasn't completed until last year when Mia took the basic design and notes and completed it for me. The reason it was probably not on the chart is because I did the chart about the time I wrote chapter 40 and since it wasn't completed I didn't put it on.

Image

EMSpier wrote:
The second question is am I correct when that I believe both the Antiope and Deo Vindice and her two escorts (I assumed they were of the same class as the Vox Populi?) are missing?

Just curious.


Yes; Antiope, Deo Vindice, and Deo's escorts are missing, as are two of the mobile docks. I really need to go back and revise that chart!

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battlestar Hecate
PostPosted: Thu Jul 04, 2019 8:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:39 am
Posts: 683
Location: The Planet Terra
Kurt, the sanctuary cove is superb, bravo - I am also planning some vessels utilising the domes in various guises - by the way EMSpier welcome and thanks for contributing to a great thread


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2384 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155 ... 159  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group