950 replies to this topic

[Melcyna]

KalebFenoir, on 25 February 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Actually, I think you nailed right on the head for the plane I was thinking of. It WAS a Stuka that I saw in the video... Good show and 'Holy Crap Are You Psychic??' moment.

Personally I loved listening to my friend describe the firing sound of the BT autocannons. Standard ACs sounded and looked like oversized pistols unless they were the aforementioned multi-shell types, in which case they still were like semi-auto pistols in speed. LB-X were clearly shotguns. Ultras were a double-tap variety of AC, or in the case of the multiple-shell type, if you took the sound of the standard model and multiplied the speed by 2. And the RAC... oh the RAC. Once it spun up to full velocity, just picture the A-10 Warthog's main gun. And then have it jam so horribly within the first shell firing that the entire feed is destroyed, the mechanism jams, the gun effectively dismantles itself from the inside, and you can't use it again. XD Ever.

Which is ironic because rotary multi barrel guns were used PRECISELY because of the system's reliability, which it achieved at the sacrifice of weight and volume (they were significantly more bulky and heavy compared to single barrel autocannon, which incidentally can actually fire VERY rapidly assuming one can accept the heat and jamming chance to it)

So BT turned it upside down, but hey... lostech is the magic word

the funny thing of course is that BT's AC never actually achieved rate of fire that warrants multi barrel assembly at all, but most ppl are not aware of just how fast single barrel autocannons can actually fire, that and well... in games at least, gatling cannons have an extra oompph in style (even if it doesn't make any sense in the game)


And Stuka? not difficult, anyone half knowledgeable with WW2 hardwares can answer that in split second since there are only 2 planes the german used for ground attack extensively (read: different from bombers) either it's the Stuka, or it's the Ju-88, and the Stuka is the only one with the underwing autocannon pod (BK-37), in Ju-88 they mount the autocannon in ventral pod instead, very easy to recognize and distinguish.

Skylarr, on 26 February 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

Every Combat Unit has a Targetting computer and an Electrinic Counter Measure Unit. This is why Combat Units need to get close to each other. After the Helm Memory Core, and recovered Tech from the Clans, is discovered the more advance system start to come online.

This would be true if they were heavily reliant on guided weaponry... or if their weapon needed those sensor feeds information to actually aim properly at long range (real ECM for example will reduce effectiveness of radar in accurately ranging the target, which makes the aircraft protected by it more difficult to shoot at properly given all anti aircraft battery needs proper range data)

But given that BT's weaponry have a heavy emphasis on direct fire weapon, and they don't move at any appreciable speed, this doesn't make much sense, especially so since in ground warfare the only variable you really need if your target doesn't move like a rocket is distance

and we got a WHOLE slew of ways to measure or estimate distance for ground combat (where you can be less precise and still hit unlike in aerial combat), most of which is impossible to jam short of being outright invisible.

This incidentally is another typical mistake of sci fi authors, many thinks that Radar is the one thing that military weapons relied on, incorrect, radar is to a degree very vital for AERIAL combat indeed, but as far as ground warfare is concerned, radar is far less vital, and this is one of the reason why jamming in ground warfare (mostly to jam radio communication) involves different things than aerial jamming (where they jam guidance and detection radar primarily)

Edited by Melcyna, 26 February 2013 - 01:12 PM.

[Skylarr]

Melcyna, on 26 February 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

This would be true if they were heavily reliant on guided weaponry... or if their weapon needed those sensor feeds information to actually aim properly at long range (real ECM for example will reduce effectiveness of radar in accurately ranging the target, which makes the aircraft protected by it more difficult to shoot at properly given all anti aircraft battery needs proper range data)

But given that BT's weaponry have a heavy emphasis on direct fire weapon, and they don't move at any appreciable speed, this doesn't make much sense, especially so since in ground warfare the only variable you really need if your target doesn't move
and we got a WHOLE slew of ways to measure or estimate distance for ground combat (where you can be less precise and still hit unlike in aerial combat), most of which is impossible to jam short of being outright invisible.

This incidentally is another typical mistake of sci fi authors, many thinks that Radar is the one thing that military weapons relied on, incorrect, radar is to a degree very vital for AERIAL combat indeed, but as far as ground warfare is concerned, radar is far less vital, and this is one of the reason why jamming in ground warfare (mostly to jam radio communication) involves different things than aerial jamming (where they jam guidance and detection radar primarily)

Most missile in BT are Fire and Forget. If not then they use a Semi-automatic command to line of sight (SACLOS) as a method of missile guidance. In SACLOS, the operator has to continually point a sighting device at the target while the missile is in flight. Electronics in the sighting device and/or the missile then guide it to the target. SACLOS devices commonly work using one of two methods: either wire and radio-guided, or beam-riding.

Mechs do not use the Wire Guided Missiles. If they did, while it has a better chance of hitting, the Mech would only carry one volley.

Radio-Guided missiles uses electronics in the warhead. This can be jammed.

Beam-Ridding missiles. While it may be "the whole system is impervious to most jamming devices". It is not invulnerable.

I do not think Mechs will use the Manual command to line of sight (MCLOS). This would force the Mech to stand still every time it wanted to fire missiles.

All other weapons use sensors and a Computer to acquire their target. These can be jammed. Even is they use a Laser Range Finder it still can be Jammed.

Quote

A laser rangefinder is a device which uses a laser beam to determine the distance to an object. The most common form of laser rangefinder operates on the time of flight principle by sending a laser pulse in a narrow beam towards the object and measuring the time taken by the pulse to be reflected off the target and returned to the sender. Due to the high speed of light, this technique is not appropriate for high precision sub-millimeter measurements, where triangulation and other techniques are often used.
Pulse

The pulse may be coded to reduce the chance that the rangefinder can be jammed. It is possible to use Doppler effect techniques to judge whether the object is moving towards or away from the rangefinder, and if so how fast.
Precision

The precision of the instrument is determined by the rise or fall time of the laser pulse and the speed of the receiver. One that uses very sharp laser pulses and has a very fast detector can range an object to within a few millimeters.
Range

Despite the beam being narrow, it will eventually spread over long distances due to the divergence of the laser beam, as well as due to scintillation and beam wander effects, caused by the presence of air bubbles in the air acting as lenses ranging in size from microscopic to roughly half the height of the laser beam's path above the earth.
These atmospheric distortions coupled with the divergence of the laser itself and with transverse winds that serve to push the atmospheric heat bubbles laterally may combine to make it difficult to get an accurate reading of the distance of an object, say, beneath some trees or behind bushes, or even over long distances of more than 1 km in open and unobscured desert terrain.
Some of the laser light might reflect off leaves or branches which are closer than the object, giving an early return and a reading which is too low. Alternatively, over distances longer than 1200 ft (365 m), the target, if in proximity to the earth, may simply vanish into a mirage, caused by temperature gradients in the air in proximity to the heated surface bending the laser light. All these effects have to be taken into account.

Military

Rangefinders provide an exact distance to targets located beyond the distance of point-blank shooting to snipers and artillery. They can also be used for military reconciliation and engineering.

Handheld military rangefinders operate at ranges of 2 km up to 25 km and are combined with binoculars or monoculars. When the rangefinder is equipped with a digital magnetic compass (DMC) and inclinometer it is capable of providing magnetic azimuth, inclination, and height (length) of targets. Some rangefinders can also measure a target's speed in relation to the observer. Some rangefinders have cable or wireless interfaces to enable them to transfer their measurement(s) data to other equipment like fire control computers. Some models also offer the possibility to use add-on night vision modules. Most handheld rangefinders use standard or rechargeable batteries.

The more powerful models of rangefinders measure distance up to 25 km and are normally installed either on a tripod or directly on a vehicle or gun platform. In the latter case the rangefinder module is integrated with on-board thermal, night vision and daytime observation equipment. The most advanced military rangefinders can be integrated with computers.
To make laser rangefinders and laser-guided weapons less useful against military targets, various military arms may have developed laser-absorbing paint for their vehicles. Regardless, some objects don't reflect laser light very well and using a laser rangefinder on them is difficult.

BT never said that Radar was the only Sensors Mechs had.

Quote

BattleMech targeting and tracking systems consist more than just the BC - the system is a network of sophisticated sensors, sub-computers, and programming. Thermal imaging, light amplification, radar, laser tracking, uv tracking, and magnetic anomaly sensors are generally used as primary sensors, supplemented by seismic sensors, motion detectors, chemical analyzers, microwave, tracking, and many others, depending on what equipment a 'Mech mounts. However, MechWarriors are not overwhelmed with raw data... The BC compresses, interprets, and prioritizes the information. When the MechWarrior gets the info, it is displayed on the cockpit displays or on the neurohelmet heads-up display (HUD) in with all the various selected sensor information synthesized into a single viewing mode, with important things tagged by the computer with graphic icons onscreen.

Edited by Skylarr, 26 February 2013 - 10:02 PM.

[Melcyna]

Skylarr, on 26 February 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

Most missile in BT are Fire and Forget. If not then they use a Semi-automatic command to line of sight (SACLOS) as a method of missile guidance. In SACLOS, the operator has to continually point a sighting device at the target while the missile is in flight. Electronics in the sighting device and/or the missile then guide it to the target. SACLOS devices commonly work using one of two methods: either wire and radio-guided, or beam-riding.

Mechs do not use the Wire Guided Missiles. If they did, while it has a better chance of hitting, the Mech would only carry one volley.

Spoiler

Actually, that doesn't mean the Mech would carry only one volley

it just means the Mech can't fire a volley WHILE a missile from that tube is still airborne since the wire spooled from the in flight missile would be in the way.

For normal world, this is not a problem since missiles are VERY fast and can reach multi kilometer distance in mere seconds (not to mention lethal enough to blast the target usually in one hit), BT missiles though don't quite follow that and fly at exceptionally slow speed to cover even 1km range.

Once the in flight missile impacted or otherwise detonated, the wire is disconnected anyway and you can reload the missile per normal which is what we do with ground mounted wire guided missiles or weapon like torpedo, same deal with torpedo ie: they can't load and fire another torpedo from the tube in which a torpedo still under wire guidance is connected to but once they disconnect the wire they can load another one and fire it, which in this case they can do as soon as the old torpedo goes ACTIVE since by then the torpedo really doesn't need to be wire guided anymore and is now autonomous.

Skylarr, on 26 February 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

Radio-Guided missiles uses electronics in the warhead. This can be jammed.

[spoiler]
Correction, you can't JAM electronics in the warhead short of blasting them with EM pulse which really wouldn't do any good if it was designed to withstand it (pretty easy too since the missile body can function as a faraday cage, only problem is discharging it and protecting the terminal phase active guidance sensor)


You can however jam the guidance signal and hence why modern guided missiles have secondary guidance in general, since jamming effectiveness is proportional to the strength of the signal they use and emit, the firing platform radar signal will guide the missile close enough to the target from which the secondary guidance then guide the weapon for the terminal phase of the weapon flight path (and often since the terminal phase is really short, the guid

Edited by Melcyna, 27 February 2013 - 05:06 PM.

[Skylarr]

Wire guided Missiles are not Magazine loaded. Someone has to manually load the Missile and manually connect the wires. If you have it automated then there will be a large delay in when you can fire them again. Please, tell me who uses a Wired-Guided system in Missiles that are Mgazine fed?

Quote

Correction, you can't JAM electronics in the warhead short of blasting them with EM pulse

You mean to tell me that all of the militaries in the world cannot jam warheads. Then why are we wasting so much money on Electrinic COunter Measures?

Quote

You can however jam the guidance signal and hence why modern guided missiles have secondary guidance in general,

Wait, you just said we cannot Jam them?

[Skylarr]

My point is that all mechs carry a Basic Electrinic Counter Measure unit. That is why they fight within a Kilometer of each other. At this close of range their Sensors can penetrate the Jamming. The ECMs we see in MWO is a system that improves what is already there. Just like when the Targeting computer come out. That are improvements on existing systems.

Edited by Skylarr, 27 February 2013 - 06:48 PM.

[Melcyna]

For some reason more than half of my last post is missing... oh well... too long to retype all of them, maybe later...

Skylarr, on 27 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Wire guided Missiles are not Magazine loaded. Someone has to manually load the Missile and manually connect the wires. If you have it automated then there will be a large delay in when you can fire them again. Please, tell me who uses a Wired-Guided system in Missiles that are Mgazine fed?

Spoiler

Most of our normal missiles aren't magazine loaded either, but nothing stops them from being magazine loaded as long as there's enough space to mount the loader system, that's the only real limitation to them

and in cases where we have magazine loaded missiles, the range of the missiles required practically made wire guided non feasible (since they are anti ship missiles or ship borne air defense missiles which have range measured in dozens or hundreds of km in some cases)

the closest thing to magazine loaded wire guided weapon we have is the submarine which have enough space within the torpedo or the tube to actually spool wires for multi dozen kilometers

BT never accounts for how exactly they reload their weapons so this was never considered (or rather it's PHYSICALLY impossible in most cases for BT to actually reload their weapon), but if they can reload their missiles (and thus LOGICALLY they ought to have a loading mechanism that can SOMEHOW fit into the missile bay and the ammo storage, which is physically impossible in general but let's forget about that for now) nothing stops them from using wire guided missiles

the only reason we don't do the same with our standard wire guided missile launchers used in ground warfare is simply because we can't really fit the loading mechanism to them, most of these platforms barely have enough room for the weapon, ammo and the rest of the equipment, much less an autoloading mechanism for the missiles, and aside of that, the ATGM launchers we have virtually work on the basis of initial advantage... that is to say if they miss or failed to make the kill, there's no time for them to actually stay around and load a second missile anyhow because they have to get the hell out of there fast and relocate to a new firing position before the return fire zero in on them

Skylarr, on 27 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

You mean to tell me that all of the militaries in the world cannot jam warheads. Then why are we wasting so much money on Electrinic COunter Measures?

Spoiler

because that's not the purpose of ECM

the PURPOSE of ECM in particular is to reduce the accuracy of the sensor, or to reduce the accuracy of their weapon precision and effectiveness (since they often need accurate ranging data to actually hit properly).

These especially apply to aerial warfare and defense where ECM is mostly used, these DO NOT APPLY to ground warfare in general or takes an ENTIRELY different approach and method where unlike aerial warfare, achieving a firing solution is much simpler.

Skylarr, on 27 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Wait, you just said we cannot Jam them?

Spoiler

You CANNOT jam the electronics inside the missile as your statement "Radio-Guided missiles uses electronics in the warhead. This can be jammed." suggest, short of achieving direct datalink to it or blasting it with a direct EM pulse

what you can jam is the radio guidance signal, the two are completely different since jamming the guidance signal means cutting off the missile from it's parent command but does nothing to stop the missile onboard guidance from continuing on it's course towards it's target, while actually being able to jam the missile electronic itself would more or less render it dead

guided weapons in general have secondary guidance it switch to or automatically switch to especially for terminal phase of the weapon's path (and it switch to terminal guidance typically if it for whatever reason cannot acquire proper guidance signal from the parent anymore)

Skylarr, on 27 February 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

My point is that all mechs carry a Basic Electrinic Counter Measure unit. That is why they fight within a Kilometer of each other. At this close of range their Sensors can penetrate the Jamming. The ECMs we see in MWO is a system that improves what is already there. Just like when the Targeting computer come out. That are improvements on existing systems.

And i am saying, it has no BASIS whatsoever with our world

any standard sensor used in warfare can detect an object of such size and mass particularly considering their profile from distances far beyond the incredible short range in BT

a SINGLE kilometer is a distance so short to any standard vehicle sensor, it's essentially equivalent to point blank

Spoiler

and as i said before ECM doesn't work the way BT, or MWO, or you, or what a lot of ppl it seems think the way it works.

To give an idea of some of the most obvious mistakes they've done:

radar ECM itself IS an emitter, it is PHYSICALLY impossible for radar ECM to mask itself invisible to radar because radar by virtue of it being both emitter and receiver will pick up the ECM signal and STILL recognize the signal's direction

the only thing the radar ECM makes it much harder to do is to measure the exact distance, but the radar itself KNOWS VERY WELL that the ECM is in that direction since it's emitting a signal.

similarly, any ECM equipped vehicle that broadcast EM signals is AUTOMATICALLY broadcasting it's own presence to anyone with EM receiver.

Spoiler

Ah something i remember from the previous post that got erased away

In the case of say laser beam ridding missiles? There are 2 things more or less you can do to it

A. shoot the laser emitter on the firing platform to stop it from transmitting signal to the missile (and how you are going to recognize where exactly the emitter is up to anyone's guess since the laser is invisible except possibly when enough scattering has occured when the missile is almost directly onto you by which point you are pretty dead)

B. somehow physically block the line of sight between the missile and the launching platform, don't ask me how exactly you are going to do that.

There's not much else you can do to it, much less jam it

Spoiler

Another part that also got erased from the last post:

And given that BT mechs engage each other with direct fire weapon a hell a lot, there's practically nothing they can do to stop most of the weapons in the first place.

What are they gonna do against laser? PPC? gauss rifle?
Jam their targeting computer?

Which gave ZERO gunnery assist whatsoever, and practically can be replaced by an iron sight synchronized to the barrel direction?

Mind you that we can range ground targets with just 2 things:

1. We need to know the rough height or width of the target (either through intelligence service or past combat information)

2. We take a simple optic and put a gradient on it representing the distance for object of such dimension (either in height or width, one of them will do)

Voila,

You get what essentially amounts to the SIMPLEST ranging optic device that can be operated by more or less anyone with 5 minutes of instruction

And the sad part is that this incredibly simple ranging system allowed gunnery at range of several kilometers already with shells flying at much slower speed than hypervelocity and affected far more by gravity

Edited by Melcyna, 28 February 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Grizley]

There are a couple reasons given for not just blasting every target into submission with a warship.

1. After being blasted by a warship, any sort of factory, supply cache, city, etc has a value approaching zero.
2. Warship fire from orbit is extremely inaccurate. If I remember right the best the inner sphere got at orbital bombardment was using a smaller warships secondary weapons to land shots within a kilometer of the target, with the aid of a ground spotter. So barring the mechs packing in really tight and completely ignoring the spotter a bombardment... not as effective as you might think. Yeah yeah, apparently Warships use iron sights to attempt to shoot through the atmosphere.

Basically compare Warships to aircraft and Battlemechs to infantry in todays terms. Then make aircraft completely inaccurate in the bargain.

[Monsoon]

Grizley, on 05 March 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

There are a couple reasons given for not just blasting every target into submission with a warship.

1. After being blasted by a warship, any sort of factory, supply cache, city, etc has a value approaching zero.
2. Warship fire from orbit is extremely inaccurate. If I remember right the best the inner sphere got at orbital bombardment was using a smaller warships secondary weapons to land shots within a kilometer of the target, with the aid of a ground spotter. So barring the mechs packing in really tight and completely ignoring the spotter a bombardment... not as effective as you might think. Yeah yeah, apparently Warships use iron sights to attempt to shoot through the atmosphere.

Basically compare Warships to aircraft and Battlemechs to infantry in todays terms. Then make aircraft completely inaccurate in the bargain.

Warships are more like WWII bombers according to your description.

[Grizley]

Yeah, that works too. WWII bombers vs WWII infantry. They both have a use. Can't take and hold with bombers, can't blow crap up from relative safety with infantry.

Point 3 for Warships not being the go to weaponry in Battletech. They don't even show up until 3050, and then it's only the Clans that have them. The Clans aren't there for a scorched earth conquest, they're there to take and hold. Yes, even the Crusaders.

IS finally gets warships in the 3060s, but in absolutely tiny numbers. If you have 12 warships and 100+ RCTs... yeah that's a lot of RCTs running around without Warship support. That was what the FedCom military had in 3068.

[Melcyna]

Let's fix a few things shall we?

WW2 strategic bombers can in fact batter a country into submission ASSUMING several things:

1. the defender cannot do defensive action to halt or disrupt the bombers action (even attrition damage is something the bombers have to cope and if you can inflict more than they can sustain cohesive bombardment then eventually the bombers will falter), in fact the primary reason why WW2 bombers resort to carpet bombing from high altitude where they are relatively inaccurate is because the defender weapons and interceptors would mean almost certain death in European theater if they try to bomb at low altitude (where they are much more accurate)

2. the bombers have the RANGE to actually reach the target that needs to be blasted (which is the primary difficulty and why WW2 gave rise to a lot of massive strategic bombers)

3. the bombers can do effective damage to the target (the US had trouble with Japan strategic bombing for example earlier in the war, until they figured out a proper technique to compensate the powerful cross winds in Japan)

With orbital bombardment in BT you effectively have all of them fulfilled (BT's orbital defensive measures are pathetic to say the least) so there isn't an actual compelling reason why they can't batter a planet to submission with a sufficient space faring fleet.

Spoiler

To outline:
The vast majority of planets in BT have practically nonexistent orbital defense whatsoever so no.1 is pretty much straightforward

There's literally nothing out of reach by the fleet's gun once it establish control over the low orbit so no.2 is obvious

And given their "SUPPOSED" energy output of their guns, they most certainly can produce damage output of anything between a warning shot to the defender by say blasting a small crater in the outskirt of the city, or liquidating a factory block so no.3 is checked

Warships existence in BT is another point altogether

See during those era, they are still using lots of ships... anything from transport for carrying materials between planets or even the dropship itself that are used to carry the mechs that they use to wage the very war in BT.

Common sense would mean that in the absence of a proper warships, the most logical action would be to arm said vessels.

Someone before in this thread then said that they SOMEHOW don't have enough ships for that (ignoring the fact that they ARE STILL MAKING SHIPS during this entire period) and then went on and on about how the displaced captain for the commercial or civilian ships would SOMEHOW be a problem for the nation that had a strike of SANITY and decides to build a space fleet.

In short? yeah, when you start dissecting BT like this, you start seeing LOTS of ugly inconsistency...

which is... well expected, after all few ppl are actually versed in how economy, war, and nations actually runs and for games, no one playing it probably even understand any of it so it's not really a problem.

But unfortunately if you try to actually justify them with common sense, well... they aint making any sense i am sorry.

[Skylarr]

Melcyna, on 06 March 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

Someone before in this thread then said that they SOMEHOW don't have enough ships for that (ignoring the fact that they ARE STILL MAKING SHIPS during this entire period) and then went on and on about how the displaced captain for the commercial or civilian ships would SOMEHOW be a problem for the nation that had a strike of SANITY and decides to build a space fleet.

In short? yeah, when you start dissecting BT like this, you start seeing LOTS of ugly inconsistency...

There are many source in BT books that said they lost their ability to make warship. But, you are saying that they are wrong. Please show me were it is said that the houses are still making them.

I like the way you twist the second part.

[Melcyna]

Oh they r not wrong,

apparently (and no one in BT have basic engineering common sense, blueprints? what's that? backup? what's that?) they can't produce warships anymore during a period
Keyword there?

warship

they were still producing other vessels throughout, case in point Kathil Shipyards which produced a good chunk of the dropship and jumpships used in FedCom and ironically in the case of Kathil, they apparently were making warships in covertly later on.

Even if you were not aware of it

It should be PAINFULLY obvious that given the silly war BT is waging, they lose dropships over time, if no one produces them then common sense dictates that eventually the war itself as the way BT during succession war engaged would've GRINDED to a halt.

I think i recall that someone before also made that BS about dropships not being a target for war etc and they avoid shooting dropships... which is ABSOLUTE NONSENSE since they were shooting it and blasting quite a few dropships regularly in lore and novel, nvm the games where Dropships not only get shot and destroyed but also engages whatever enemy is within it's range while it's making drop or extraction of mech forces. What they don't destroy if possible is Jumpships (since it serves no real purpose given Jumpships have no direct combat capability and by the time a Jumpship appears in your system, it's function is already fulfilled)

Edited by Melcyna, 06 March 2013 - 07:27 PM.

[Skylarr]

I was the one who made the statement about the dropship and I a thought I said I was wrong. But, I do remember someone saying that the houses should seize all the civilian dropship and refit them with allot of weapons. In a video game this is a great idea.

Noone ever said that dropship and jumpship production stopped. Who makes the Transit Drives used on Warships?

[Melcyna]

Which is the point, they STILL have ship production capability throughout (it goes up and down with some facility going offline after an attack relocated, etc)

either way, it's the equivalent essentially of having a war waged across oceans between multiple isles where EVERYONE deliver their forces with barges

and NO ONE, not a single one in this period...

considered arming the barge instead and hunt the other barges (if they got no barge and your barge can kill theirs anytime you meet, then what are they going to do? Throw their forces across the ocean in catapult?)

Armed merchant vessels, etc (goes by various name in our world across the time) are indeed NO SUBSTITUTE for actual properly designed warships but in BT world the thinly disguised line here is that warships had a more efficient compact drive.

So sure, in a direct engagement say between a BT warships and say a retrofitted armed Jumpships or hell Jumpships carrying Dropships retrofitted as gunboats then obviously the warships is likely to come out on top.

Except in this same period... there are almost no warships around used by the states (they certainly didn't have enough to cover their territory that's for sure)

So if there are no warships around... then literally any space faring vessel ARMED is practically sufficient because as long as you outgun your contemporaries (which is about the only thing you'll see until THEY DO THE SAME THING and arm their vessels too) then a dropship retrofitted for gunboat for example is effectively a warship (just not in the same definition as BT's warship).

Edited by Melcyna, 06 March 2013 - 07:49 PM.

[Theodor Kling]

Well arming ships to shoot down other peoples ships seems all nice.. but by doing so you risk loosing ships of your own. loosing dropships is acceptable, if you can hurt the enemy more then tehy hurt you, fine.
Problem is: loosing jumpships is NOT acceptable, because prduction is bareley enough to keep up with losses due to accidents and lack of maintanance, and as it is, major campaings already need on basicly stoppign all civilian traffic and using trade ships.
Making jump ships take part in battles would ris loosing your only wayof gettign troops around. Sure, if you shoot down all other ships, the enemy becomes helpless. But you will have causalties of your own durign the fightings... losses you can´t risk. Even if lets say the FedCom crippeld all other succesor states fleets to an extend that theycan´t move troops anymore.. well they are safe from atacks, sure.. but they would loose too many ships to effectivley transport garrisons around.. and you can rely on many plantes realising that, rising in rebellion. Probably also due to the lack of food, materials and so on, becuase most of the civilian traders were "upgraded" and shot at durign the war.
meaning: Malcyna, your picture is fine if everyone got only one or a handfull of islands.. but with hundreds of islands, some dependend on regular suply from others, the risk of arming your barges is way to great.

Which doesn´t negate the situation being ridiculous, because as you also said: Backups and storing blueprints and research data in multiple locations seems to be beyond BT logic, so it was all lost

And if they couldn´t reinvent it from already existing, working examples during severylcenturies their reverse engeneering skills must also suck.

Edited by Theodor Kling, 04 April 2013 - 06:14 AM.

[Skylarr]

OW MY GOODNESS.

I thought this thread died.

The problem with this thread is that everyone has their own point of view. We have been debating for over a year and some just do not want to agree on some points. Not sure why. Maybe they think that by agreeing to one point all the reast of what they say is wrong.

It feels like one side is saying that the Glass if half full and the other is arguing that the water is wet.

Also some people who post do so by trying to make the other feel they are inferrior.

Let us bring up new subjects.

[Melcyna]

Theodor Kling, on 04 April 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Spoiler

Well arming ships to shoot down other peoples ships seems all nice.. but by doing so you risk loosing ships of your own. loosing dropships is acceptable, if you can hurt the enemy more then tehy hurt you, fine.
Problem is: loosing jumpships is NOT acceptable, because prduction is bareley enough to keep up with losses due to accidents and lack of maintanance, and as it is, major campaings already need on basicly stoppign all civilian traffic and using trade ships.
Making jump ships take part in battles would ris loosing your only wayof gettign troops around. Sure, if you shoot down all other ships, the enemy becomes helpless. But you will have causalties of your own durign the fightings... losses you can´t risk. Even if lets say the FedCom crippeld all other succesor states fleets to an extend that theycan´t move troops anymore.. well they are safe from atacks, sure.. but they would loose too many ships to effectivley transport garrisons around.. and you can rely on many plantes realising that, rising in rebellion. Probably also due to the lack of food, materials and so on, becuase most of the civilian traders were "upgraded" and shot at durign the war.
meaning: Malcyna, your picture is fine if everyone got only one or a handfull of islands.. but with hundreds of islands, some dependend on regular suply from others, the risk of arming your barges is way to great.

Which doesn´t negate the situation being ridiculous, because as you also said: Backups and storing blueprints and research data in multiple locations seems to be beyond BT logic, so it was all lost

And if they couldn´t reinvent it from already existing, working examples during severylcenturies their reverse engeneering skills must also suck.

No one said to take the jumpship to battle anymore than they do already

those dropships needed jumpship in the first place to bring the dropship to the target planet THEY ALREADY are involved... except they don't directly engage in frontline

however instead of using dropships as essentially a landing craft, there's technically nothing stopping them from using the same dropship as a gunboat for orbital bombardment and blockade by simply replacing it's carrying capacity for arsenal

The ONLY THING that can effectively stop this jumpship/gunboat combination is an actual warship, as they have an actual advantage vs mere gunboats with an unarmed Jumpship (or alternatively another jumpship/gunboat)

except THERE ISN'T ONE...
supposedly there isn't any working fleet around in IS with warships for a good stretch of a period until the arrival of the Clans... so effectively the only fleet there is in IS for that period with the highest firepower in space...

are these jumpships/dropships

but despite this, they continue to use the same method...

Spoiler

UNTIL FASA got time to think about it and realize later on... that ... hmmm yeah, you know what? it doesn't make sense for them to not do so...

so in the subsequent technical readout where more details are fleshed we get the gunboats... and Q ships

The only thing is that this comes about decades LATE if not longer in BT from chronological order

And shortage of manufacturing capability for either jumpship or dropship only serves to REINFORCE the need to have armed gunboats because whoever controls the space with superior navy will effectively win the control for the war.

if there was shortage of production of either, then the one winning the space battle keeps more of his fleet (and can use it for anything else they might need be it bombardment or to then ferry the troops when the time comes) while the one LOSING the space battle (since they insist on not having a navy in this nonsensical world) would just have less... and less ships as the time pass with each encounter until they do the exact same thing and produce their own gunboats to fight on even term in space.. or they run out of ships that they effectively are sealed in their planets.

alternatively of course, have a warship...

Edited by Melcyna, 04 April 2013 - 09:58 AM.

[WassonG]

Brenden, on 31 July 2012 - 08:57 PM, said:

-When a battlemech is cored, it does NOT go nuclear like most clear reactors do when damaged

It's a fusion based power-plant, they're all about the creation and utilization of plasmas, which can exists in a fusion and pre-fusion state. The thing about fusion is that it is the polar opposite of fission, outside of a star's massive gravity well and immense mass, thermonuclear fusion naturally wants to come to a stop. Indeed, the very nature of what it is not a practical source of power right now has largly to do with how difficult it is to reproduce, without the intense gravity at the heart of a star, one typically needs tremendous heat to overcome the coulomb barrier in many modern experiments - or very precise application of energy-

...using fusion as a power source is that theoretically you can achieve it in many different ways, I would assume that in the battletech universe there fusion-based power-plants manage to overcome the fusible nucleus's coulomb barrier with precision and control by pulsing particle-beams into one another in a medium of magnetically confined pre-fusion plasma. It's not in a state of constant "fusion" and the plasma is used to induce current in a series of coils much like a modern generator. The more current that is drawn (i.e. the more load put on the power plant) by movement and firing of weapons, the greater the flux induced in the plasma and it cools, so the reactor has to compensate by "fusing" at a higher rate - which causes it's heat to increase. So when struck by enemy fire...there would likely be an initial violent explosion as the plasma's containment is compromised, but there would be no sustained "meltdown" or massive "atomic blast".

actually in all likelyhood, battlemechs would likely just shutdown after sustaining too much damage to there reactor's sub-systems, pretty much like an engine seizing up from heat, via loss of coolant, oil or fuel lines being hit...

Edited by WassonG, 04 April 2013 - 10:45 AM.

[Melcyna]

Not that there would be a 'nuclear' explosion even if it was fission reactor....

Fission reactors being what they are ie: designed to generate power in controlled process... not uncontrolled one like in warhead does not have the capacity to produce a nuclear detonation in the first place given that fission reactors uses fuel of insufficient enrichment level for weapon grade reaction and it is not designed to overcome the fizzle...

[Theodor Kling]

@Melcyna:
I think we run in circles here Your point of view is perfectley valid. Exepft for one flaw, that popped up earlier in this thread: Ypu assume that winning the space battle would give you control of a system, so you can land your ground forces in peace, and support them from orbit ( ignoring the ares convention.. but then again, thats just a convention )
If you could achieve true (space) naval superiority in a practical way, then building sublight warships out of dropships makes sense.
But with Bt sensor systems, targeting, and accelerations you can´t controll orbital space, let alone a star system, it´s just to damm big.. You might controll the standart jump points, but that's already hard, and sooner or later somone will use a pirate point.
As was also mentioned, using guided weapons, smart mines and unmaned drones you might stand a chance of controling orbital space.. but then again it´s BT, so those are not an option.
Using BT tech you would need alot of Gunships at the ready around a planet, prefereably teamed in groups and even more fighter patrols. Even then there is a problem that you can´t "slow down" the enemy advance in a space battle. Hell, dropships en route to a planet usually don´t budge from their plotted ourse for anything short of another ship directley in their flight path. And even then they go around it because decelarating hard enough to come to a stop earlier then originally planned results in g forces on the crew that are potentially fatal.Even if they wanted they couldn´t stop and fight.
Or you simply garrison some mechs planetside near the few strategic locations worth guarding, at a fraction of the cost.

Edited by Theodor Kling, 04 April 2013 - 02:19 PM.