Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Eishtmo on January 12, 2006, 07:27:07 pm
-
I've been thinking on this stuff for some time and I finally just started writing it down for no real reason. This is an EXTREAMLY ROUGH draft, and it'll have nasty little starts and stops, lots of random rambling and even ends abruptly. Please feel free to comment as one day I might actually, you know, polish it up or something.
Rise of the Destroyer
An Examination of the Original Purpose and Use of the Destroyer Class Ship in the Freespace Universe That's a big title
Size may not be everything, but it sure means a whole lot. In Freespace, size is represented by the destroyer, a massive warship at least 2 kilometers long, often larger. For a science fiction ship, it's not the biggest, even within the Freespace universe it's dwarfed by the Juggernaut classes. What makes the destroyer interesting is the massive difference in size between the only other warship class to be seen in the original game: the cruiser, a ship less than half a kilometer long, if that.
Why such a massive difference in sizes? Why the lack of any other classes of ships besides those two? Beyond that, when did the first destroyer appear? What was its intended purpose? How has that purpose changed? What is the future of the class? This document hopes to answer these questions and more.
---------
Let us begin with what is a destroyer. Originally, the term destroyer was used to refer to a class of ship designed to screen the navel fleets against small torpedo boats, and later submarines and even aircraft. At some point, the destroyer became a jack of all trades type ship and its original role was taken over by smaller ships.
Though the destroyer has never been the smallest ship in the fleet, it's at least a few grades above that title, it has always been dwarfed by the carriers and battleships that it was tasked with protecting. In the Freespace universe, however, the destroyer is pretty near the top in sheer size only surpassed by the massive juggernaut class warships, of which there are only two known classes.
It should be fairly obvious that the destroyers of Freespace were designed with one thing in mind: To be very big. So important was this that everything in FS is actually designed to enhance how truly, awesomely big these ships are, despite the fact that many of the fighters one flies are massive in their own right. This size and power is enhanced with the introduction of beam cannons and flak guns that now make these ships not only really big, but quite dangerous as well.
Even with these new weapons, it seems the main purpose of the destroyer to carry fighters, lots of fighters. In a sense, the FS destroyer is very much like a real destroyer, a kind of jack of all trades, fulfilling the role of the biggest ships in the modern naval fleet at the same time, the carrier and the battleship. What is surprising, however, is how well they actually accomplish both tasks. Often the idea of being a jack of all trades comes with the additional phrase "master of none," yet the destroyers of Freespace often perform both tasks with a great deal of skill, nearly mastering both, at least until the second generation of destroyers enters the scene.
This brings up the question of how such a feat is possible. What the destroyer is seems to be a product of history of the FS universe, but at the same time it seems to have driven that history into moving in that particular direction. The only way to truly understand this deep connection is to examine the one class of destroyer whose service life spanned the whole of FS history, the mighty Orion class destroyer.
---------
Aside from the Shivan destroyers, the Orion is generally assumed to be the first destroyer constructed by either the Terrans or the Vasudans. The main reason for this is the lack of any previous class being mentioned in any of the canon documentation. To supplement this, the second oldest, the Typhon, is mentioned as a reaction to the Orion, and even destroys one in its opening campaign.
Prior to this comment, only one other destroyer class vessel is described, the Galactic Terran Destroyer Goliath. Given that the Orion is the only class known, it can be safely assumed that the Goliath was such a vessel. This does not confirm this fact, as there are only two mentions of the Goliath, and the inclusion of a date for one of them possibly even harms the possibility as it states that the Goliath was destroyed "12 years ago" or in 2323.
If true, then it seems that the Orion destroyer was around for the bulk of the 14 Year War between the Terrans and Vasudans, if not for its entire length, during which time the Vasudans had no viable counter. How, then, did the Vasudans manage to wage an effective military campaign, let alone create a blood draining stalemate with the GTA? After all the Orion, regardless of its armament during this period, would be next to impossible to destroy short of massed kamikaze attacks, which is how the Goliath is said to have been brought down.
There are several possibilities for how it was done. First, the Goliath was not, in fact, an Orion, but some other, proto destroyer class that was far easier to defeat. This would mean, however, that the Orion is a relatively recent development for the GTA, something they do not treat it as. The second possibility is that the Vasudans actually had a comparable destroyer of their own that preceded the Typhon. There is, however, no mention of it, and when the Typhon is described, it is compared to the Aten class cruiser, not to another destroyer.
The third, and most likely possibility, is that during this period of the war there were very few Orion class ships available, and those were considered very, very valuable either by command or the GTA civilian government. After the destruction of the Goliath, Orion's may have been pulled from most frontline service to protect them from another such attack, muzzling their ability to crush the PVN. This is reasonable given the reaction to the destruction of an Orion. During the 14 Year War, such action is classed as a "major defeat," while during the NTF rebellion and the Second Incursion, the destruction of large warships is shockingly common. They are still terrible defeats, but compared to the reaction of the 14 Year War period, the defeats are much less major and even expected, especially when fighting the Shivans. This is perhaps a result of the Great War itself when massive chunks of the GTA and PVN fleets were simply annihilated.
There are likely other reasons, but these seem most reasonable and simple to establish.
If we accept the third possibility, then that says that the Orion entered service either just before or just after the 14 Year War started in 2321. This, incidentally, makes the Orion amongst the longest served ships in history as they were still in active service in 2365, some 44 years after entering service. Very impressive for any ship, but considering the absolute size of the vessel, it probably is unsurprising. It is even likely that the original designers intended the ship to serve somewhere on the order of 100 years or more.
---------
What were they really designed for though? Combat is the obvious answer, but let us examine the Orion in a bit more detail. For one thing, it has one fighter bay. Redundancy is the name of the game when it comes to full time combat operations. While one deck is good if it's all you have, it's better to have at least two ways to launch your fighters. Most modern carriers have an angled deck off the main one for just this purpose. In World War II, when such a deck wasn't available, there were often dozens of smaller carriers on the scene that brought their own fighter squadrons to bear when the situation required. Even the Typhon has two launch bays.
Aside from that, the abysmally low number of turrets, a mere 16 cover the hull, only 7 more than the Fenris and Leviathan class cruisers which are a fraction of the size. Of course, this is pretty much standard, as Typhon has a 15 and the Hades has 16, but these are in response to the Orion, not the original. Later models of destroyer, Hecate and Hatchepsut, have 45+ turrets, so they are much more up to date in comparison.
Where things get odd is the incredible number of radar dishes the Orion sports. There are three large ones, two just on top with a third near the front, right next to massive array of antennas. This giant array is as large as a Fenris cruiser and is virtually unprotected in any major way. No other destroyer has such a system that is as obvious as that of the Orion. Could this just be the result of improvements over the original design? Of course, there is no evidence that this is not the case. However, it might indicate that the Orion may not have been designed for full fledged combat from day one.
Even with a lot of advanced technology, it would take years to design the Orion. The Colossus, a ship many times larger than the Orion, took at least 20 years to design and build, the first Orion likely would have needed less time, but if scaled it would still take seven years from concept to completion. If we assume the Goliath was an Orion, then the class had to be on the drawing board a full five years before the 14 Year War began, if not longer, and thus likely before any contact with alien races had been established. This indicates that the Orion was not designed to fight the Vasudans.
Who was it supposed to fight then? The Galactic Terran Alliance seems to have been well established before the Vasudan war began, and since the majority of Terrans still lived in the Sol system even as that war ended, it can be assumed that there are few, if any, independent Terran groups, even at that early stage. A massive warship like the Orion would be unnecessary in that political environment, and the military arm of the GTA would have to find a way to gain support for such an endeavor, one that could justify building even one of these behemoths.
To find this reason, it becomes necessary to study the concept of subspace, the advanced physics that allows for the faster than light travel of the Freespace universe. The intra-system drive, the one that allows for travel within a star system, is probably the fastest, most efficient form of travel for small craft in nearly any science fiction universe. From a military standpoint, it offers a massive amount of flexibility with forces, enabling one centralized location to deploy forces throughout a system on a whim. This, of course, assumes that small craft like fighters were capable of this action during the pre-war years. Even so, one carrier could fight an entire war without engaging the enemy at all, or even being seen.
A carrier can be justified this way, but not one as large as an Orion. The second element of subspace is the inter-system drive, which requires massive coils and can only be performed at jump nodes. This creates a bottleneck that restricts the movement between systems, and gives the defender of a given star system a great advantage over the attacker. The bulk of the 14 Year War was fought over control of these nodes, not the systems, and even the Shivans preferred node control to occupying planets. To have a successful invasion, the attacking force needs to be able to enter and hold position on the far side of the node until further reinforcements can arrive.
A battleship type vessel is ideal for this situation, for long term staying power little matches the heavy armor of such ships. Being able to launch fighters would make the problem of waiting for reinforcements smaller and much more manageable. Thus node invasions are ideal for the destroyer. There is only one problem with this: The Orion was built before such combat was necessary. There is no enemy to fight, no nodes to invade and hold. I do not doubt someone, perhaps a great many people, would predict that such combat would come at some point, but selling it to a civilian government is likely impossible, especially with no viable threat.
How do you sell the future of combat when there isn't an enemy to fight? You change the mission. Remember those giant radar dishes and antenna arrays on the Orion? The purpose and mission of the Orion was changed to sell it to the civilians. Instead of being an invasion ship, they put it out as an exploration ship. The missions are similar, but in a peacetime environment, the exploration element takes precedence. To make an Orion more ideal for this, they slapped on more and bigger sensor arrays.
When the war started, these systems became handy for the great ship to engage in combat, but it didn't really need them. Later designs, like the Hecate, lacked them completely.
Still, even a handful of Orion's couldn't overcome the Vasudans when the war with them began. Being such a massive investment of resources, it is likely they were held back from direct combat, reserved for only the most important missions, ones that could and often did change the fortunes of war. This is obvious in the reactions people are said to have when an Orion did arrive: initial relief, then panic as it stuck around for far, far too long.
The war was fought off the decks of the destroyer, but not with the destroyer as a direct action weapon. Even when the Typhon appeared, the nature of the combat didn't change. If anything, the GTA and the PVN began pushing for stronger bombs and bombers. Had things continued as they were, aside from the eventual economic collapse, it is possible that the destroyers would slowly have been phased out as effective ships, replaced by more specialized carriers and lots of defensive warships.
The Great War changed the game. There is little point in trying to understand the motives and nature of the Shivans, especially why the bulk of their ships and weapons were similar, if stronger, to what the Terrans and the Vasudans fielded. Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that the most effective weapons against the Shivans, along with excellent intelligent, was not the destroyer, but the bomber and the ultra high lead bombs. The same weapons the two sides were designing to defeat each other.
The story of the destroyer must now take a detour to explore the two ships that helped redefine the role and power of the destroyer: The Lucifer and the Hades super destroyers. They are significantly bigger than their cousins, and most certainly more powerful. The Lucifer remains the only capital ship to have any form of shielding, while the Hades was an attempt to replicate many of the Lucifer's abilities, but was never fully activated. Though both were defeated through the use of Harbinger bombs, the allies never forgot their power and potential. After the Hades was destroyed, development of the destroyer took on a new direction along with a pair of new weapons: the flak gun and the beam cannon, both the result of experimentation and study of the fallen Lucifer and Hades.
Flak guns are about the most mysterious of the new weapons that appeared. The fact that they didn't exist prior to this hard to understand as the Vasudans were fond of using mass swarming fighters, especially in kamikaze raids, and in that kind of environment, such weapons would rule the roost. The Shivans, of course, attacked with even greater numbers than even the Vasudans could ever muster, so perhaps the sudden increase in attackers necessitated the production of flak to protect even the weakest of ships. It's simply unclear, but what is clear is that they made such a massive difference in the way ships protected themselves from bombs and bombers that a new kind of anti-capital ship weapon was needed.
The beam cannon, and its many varieties, from slasher beams to anti-fighter beams, have a very obvious and direct ancestry: The Lucifer's flux cannons. These were replicated, but never fully tested or activated, on the Hades, and it's likely that the beam cannons of today were constructed based on that initial design. Beam cannons, however, were probably not intended to be mounted on a destroyer, and the decision to do so came about only after the initial development proved they could work.
The Colossus would get the bulk of the beams, but they would be moved to the other classes, and the destroyers would once again be tasked with the bulk of the work, and the failure of their designs. The Typhon suffered the most, as they weren't combatable with the new beam weapons for the most part. Many of the class were destroyed as the upgrades were attempted. Even before then, however, the first corvette, the Sobek, rolled off the lines, and they took to the new weapons much more easily.
See, told you it just ends. I ran out of things to write, for now.
-
:jaw: :jaw: :jaw: wow :yes: :yes: :yes: good job! :)
-
Interesting.
Alltough I see one point in making a destroyer (or any large ship for that matter)
Travel from one system from another was possible only by large ships. Smaller vessels(read - fighters) didn't have jumpd drives capabel of that, and even in FS2 era, such drives are expensive and rare.
What we do see fomr some FS1 & 2 missions is fighters coming tough nodes with bigger warships. Not carried in them, but fyling beside them.
From this one can conclude that you can technicly ride into subspace in the wake of a large ship (or in other words in the vicinity of a ship who can create a large enough "subspace field")
So naturally bigger size gives double advantage - not only can you carry more fighters inside, but you can allso take more of them trough the node if they'r close to you.
-
What we do see from some FS1 & 2 missions is fighters coming through nodes with bigger warships. Not carried in them, but flying beside them.
We do?
-
We do?
Well, I can think of only one instance, and that's the end of FS1 when the fighters use the Lucifer's half formed vortex to exit the node.
I've actually thought it was possible to piggy back a jump like that, but I can't recall a single time that it was used. If it were possible, it has to be fairly dangerous to the pilots or we would see it used often. Of course, how many times do the GTA or GTVA launch assualts into heavily occupied enemy territory in which Alpha One is involved? None, so the point is moot.
I won't dispute that might have been a reason, as I really can't, but could you honestly sell that design to a bunch of senators? Probably not. It would be easier to make the Orion out to be a long range, long term, exploration ship than a potential warship, especially when you don't have any real opponent to deal with at the time of the purposal.
-
Well, I can think of only one instance, and that's the end of FS1 when the fighters use the Lucifer's half formed vortex to exit the node.
I've actually thought it was possible to piggy back a jump like that, but I can't recall a single time that it was used.
I've thought about this too, but I didn't realize until this thread that it actually happened in-game. (Not explicitly, but it could be interpreted as such.) For example, in the mission after the Galatea is destroyed, allied fighters arrive alongside a few of the transports and freighters that are travelling from node to node.
Doesn't Babylon 5 use that technique?
-
Sort of. B5 jump points have to be generated but then any craft in their vicinity can use them once they are opened. I never thought that applied for FS subspace entry, since it requires the ship making the jump to resonate n-dimensionally rather than doing something to the space around it. I've always viewed that particular mission with a lot of skepticism because it defies canon in more than one way (fighter intersystem jump drives as well as the spatial proximity of jump nodes).
-
I thought the whole point of the Altair discovery was that the "piggy back a jump" was then possible. The fact that they figured out the intersystem jumping on fighters near the end was also probably influenced by the findings (though not necessarily IIRC), but the "tracking through subspace" was finally possible for fighters with the Ancients' knowledge of subspace.
It's one thing to plot a jump at a single point and then have everyone take different wormholes to the designated location - totally another to actually follow/calculate the exact same node alongside a cap (which was what the Ancients gave us).
-
In FS2 it's easily explained: intersystem drives are very expensive so not all fighters are fitted with them, but it makes sense most destroyers would have some fighters fitted with such drives to provide escort when jumping into a possibly hostile system.
In FS1, the fighters that make such jumps are either Vasudan or Shivan. We know that Terran fightercraft couldn't make intersystem jumps at that time. The ability of Vasudan ships to do so is unknown, but presumably the Shivans have been able to do so since first contact.
-
how about launching fighters while in subspace ?
-
how about launching fighters while in subspace ?
hi,
mhh, good question.
but i think if you jump in and out of the supspace tunnel you need a lot of energy to open that window.
a jump in a system dont need so much energy, so i think do dont can jump with a normal hyperspace generator out of a supspace tunnel, because he didnt can generate enough energie to open a window to normal space.
Mehrpack
-
how about launching fighters while in subspace ?
What I was thinking.
-
I thought the whole point of the Altair discovery was that the "piggy back a jump" was then possible. The fact that they figured out the intersystem jumping on fighters near the end was also probably influenced by the findings (though not necessarily IIRC), but the "tracking through subspace" was finally possible for fighters with the Ancients' knowledge of subspace.
It's one thing to plot a jump at a single point and then have everyone take different wormholes to the designated location - totally another to actually follow/calculate the exact same node alongside a cap (which was what the Ancients gave us).
AFAIK the tech descriptions of subspace don't preclude ships sharing a node 'tunnel'; it's not even clear whether there is ever more than one tunnel open/available anyways; I always thought the rush was to get into that tunnel before the Lucifer exited the other side in Sol (bearing in mind the non-relativistic nature of subspace physics), and the main use of subspace tracking (in particular intra-system jumps) was to allow the ships to be close enough to do so. I've never seen anything I can remember to indicate a non-subspace capable vessel can 'piggyback' onto another ships wash, particularly given that the FS1 end scene is somewhat unique.
The tech stuff indicates a ship needs to oscillate in multiple dimensions (the role of the drive) in order to access an aperture into subspace; the ref bible mentions that it requires vast amounts of energy to sustain a subspace node/tunnel, but it doesn't say exactly how large that tunnel is and whether or not other ships can survive within. If it is some sort of modulating harmonics type thing, then I'd imagine it can't be done passively (i.e. no piggybacking); but it's never made entirely clear how you travel in or exit subspace.
-
The Lucifer launched fighters in the last mission in subspace.
-
I never really thought of subspace travel as being actually in subspace, but rather as being in a (comparatively) short tunnel of normal space the goes through subspace. Hence all the glowy blue stuff swirling around outside the tunnel, and not in your face nebula style.
So per my thinking, a ship may not be able to piggyback into or out of a subspace tunnel, but it should be able to launch safely inside one and be able to operate normally until the ship that created the tunnel leaves... by which time they better be safely docked again, or they're screwed.
-
What we do see from some FS1 & 2 missions is fighters coming through nodes with bigger warships. Not carried in them, but flying beside them.
We do?
Sure we do. For instance - that mission where you blockade the node destroying NTF warships that come TROUGH THE NODE. Ever noticed that fighter come with the ships trough the node too?
Allso, if you think about it fighter have a drive that enables them to resonate in multiple dimension, they just don't have the power to open a hole for a system-system jump.
Thus a ships WITH a normal subspace drive can piggy-back into subspace if close to a big ship.
-
werent the fighters that were sent after the lucy specifically said to be modified to be able to do inter-system jumps?
if i'm not mistaken, the bastion didnt get to the node in time to launch fighters, so the fighters had to jump by their own power IIRC.
otherwise the bastion would be in the tunnel with the lucy...
-
That's correct. That's another area where canon is grey about things. By FS2 (and King's Gambit) it's possible that fighters traversing a node, such as in that particular mission, do have inter-system drives installed though, so there's really no precident one way or the other for how that works.
-
Exactly. The NTF knew they would be facing a blockade at the other end of the node so they would have launched a fighter screen of ships fitted with intersystem drives so that they had fighters available from the second they arrived rather than having to launch them as soon as they got out of the node.
Also if you check the arrival cues you'll notice that the fighters arrive after the capship and using their own warp too. :v: could very easily have ticked the box for the ships to arrive as if from the capships jump point but actually choose not to.
Kings Gambit shows nothing more than NTF fighters with intersystem jump engines arriving via a node. Something we've known fighters could do since FS1.
-
The FS2 tech entry specifies that, whilst expensive, jump drives are fitted onto fighters who need to travel between systems; that alone is enough to make any sort of arrival non-provative. I would have expected, though, if piggybacking is possible it would be mentioned or at least hinted at. The one thing that seems odd to me is that entering subspace is described as vibrating in n-dimensions, in order to expand an aperture to a traversable size; I'm not sure how this modulation could either be 'transferred' to an accompanying vessel, or how the aperture could be enlarged beyond the phyiscal dimensions of the vessel opening the aperture.
-
To me, destroyers in FS1 are basically modern day carriers. The only reason they are so big is to field as many as fighters as possible. Smaller, more agile cruisers were far more effective in ship v.s. ship battles. However, since fighters can't travel through subspace nodes easily, they needed a launch and supply platform to spearhead any inter-system operations (military or exploratory), destroyers are the perfect answer. That being said, they are not almighty. They need an entire battle group to protect them. Also, they are only necessary as offensive tools. The defenders don't need them since bases can pretty much serve the same purpose.
-
I actualyl allways found destroyer to carry too little fighters compared to theri size.
A modern carrier can carry 80fighters and is 300m long.
A Fs2 destroyer is over 2000 meters long, which is a MASSIVe increase in volume, and yet they carry only 120-150 fighters. Not even double :confused:
You might say beam cannons and armor take up a lot of space. Granted, they do that, but this is still redicolous.
and as far as piggy-backing goes, we do know inter-system jump drives are VERY expensive. The onlyl time you use them is when you're part of SOC special ops group. Sems to me that only some elite squadrons get them installed and only for specific missions.
Given the number of fighter seen pouring trough the nodes in FS1 and 2, the probablilty that all of them had such drives (and thus that all of them were elite) is very slim.
With that said, nothing in FS2 sez that piggy-backing ISN'T possibe....
-
I actualyl allways found destroyer to carry too little fighters compared to theri size.
A modern carrier can carry 80fighters and is 300m long.
A Fs2 destroyer is over 2000 meters long, which is a MASSIVe increase in volume, and yet they carry only 120-150 fighters. Not even double :confused:
You might say beam cannons and armor take up a lot of space. Granted, they do that, but this is still redicolous.
Why?
You have life support, food/drink for several months (possibly even a biodeck?), 10,000-ish crew (a 80-150m long submarine has about 120, having similar life support requirements to a spaceship - albeit operating 'tours' for probably a shorter term period, especially with regards to oxygen) requiring recreation and sleeping space, possibly several inner hulls (for protection), a fusion reactor, possibly more self-contained repair equipment (i.e. more dependence on being able to make battlefield repairs, with the attendent difficulties of doing so in space), possibly a large number of escape pods (which would take up substantial space), more repair equipment for fighters/bombers (again, issues regarding operating in space and at very long distances from support and logistic chains), an inability to store fighters/bombers in prep areas 'on deck' as for carriers (i.e. need internal volume for all preperations and repairs), and possibly most importantly a need to store vast quantities of very large warheads (for both the fighters/bombers and the ships own flak/missile turrets).
I wouldn't say it was particularly ridiculous, given the operating constraints upon a space vessel.
and as far as piggy-backing goes, we do know inter-system jump drives are VERY expensive. The onlyl time you use them is when you're part of SOC special ops group. Sems to me that only some elite squadrons get them installed and only for specific missions.
Given the number of fighter seen pouring trough the nodes in FS1 and 2, the probablilty that all of them had such drives (and thus that all of them were elite) is very slim.
Why? Firstly, take the Shivans out the equation, because they evidently have a lot of resources & skill with subspace / drives. And in terms of GTVA / NTF ships - how often do they actually jump out at the node, or in via it?(rather than making an intersystem jump from a base ship to meet an arriving vessel performing an inter-system jump, or to leave after escorting a ship which has departed through that node.
I think the techroom does say that, whilst very expensive, fighter jumpdrives are assigned to fighters/bombers performing operations requiring them (i.e. not restricted to elite/SOC type squadrons). It doesn't mention any other way for a fighter to travel inter-system.
With that said, nothing in FS2 sez that piggy-backing ISN'T possibe....
True, but it's a question of which seems the most likely. IMO it would see more likely that it's not possible, simply due to jumppoint sizes; a jumpoint represents the opening of a subspace-normal space 'connection', and that's what takes that amount of energy to form (not the act of traversal); thus I can't see any way how a ship could open an individual warp point without having its own drive. Again, not provative that it's impossible, but I'd think that the expensive nature of jump-drives would mean you'd expect to see it (piggybacking) quite frequently where possible.
-
I thought the whole point of the Altair discovery was that the "piggy back a jump" was then possible. The fact that they figured out the intersystem jumping on fighters near the end was also probably influenced by the findings (though not necessarily IIRC), but the "tracking through subspace" was finally possible for fighters with the Ancients' knowledge of subspace.
It's one thing to plot a jump at a single point and then have everyone take different wormholes to the designated location - totally another to actually follow/calculate the exact same node alongside a cap (which was what the Ancients gave us).
AFAIK the tech descriptions of subspace don't preclude ships sharing a node 'tunnel'; it's not even clear whether there is ever more than one tunnel open/available anyways; I always thought the rush was to get into that tunnel before the Lucifer exited the other side in Sol (bearing in mind the non-relativistic nature of subspace physics), and the main use of subspace tracking (in particular intra-system jumps) was to allow the ships to be close enough to do so. I've never seen anything I can remember to indicate a non-subspace capable vessel can 'piggyback' onto another ships wash, particularly given that the FS1 end scene is somewhat unique.
The tech stuff indicates a ship needs to oscillate in multiple dimensions (the role of the drive) in order to access an aperture into subspace; the ref bible mentions that it requires vast amounts of energy to sustain a subspace node/tunnel, but it doesn't say exactly how large that tunnel is and whether or not other ships can survive within. If it is some sort of modulating harmonics type thing, then I'd imagine it can't be done passively (i.e. no piggybacking); but it's never made entirely clear how you travel in or exit subspace.
That's great, but that's not what I was saying. When I say "piggyback" I mean in context of the previous poster, sharing a node with other ships (naturally all ships entering would need a drive, I even think they'd need a specific kind of drive too, ie you can't jump inter with intra), which is what the Altair findings allowed us to do. There is no indication that we've been able to do that before, but the final mission of FS1 is an indication that we've been able to do it after.
-
You might say beam cannons and armor take up a lot of space. Granted, they do that, but this is still redicolous.
It's not that ridiculous. Just 25 bombers take up a shedload of space.
(http://homepage.ntlworld.com/karajorma/Misc-Pics/Ursa-Orion%20Comparison.jpg)
-
AFAIK the tech descriptions of subspace don't preclude ships sharing a node 'tunnel'; it's not even clear whether there is ever more than one tunnel open/available anyways; I always thought the rush was to get into that tunnel before the Lucifer exited the other side in Sol (bearing in mind the non-relativistic nature of subspace physics), and the main use of subspace tracking (in particular intra-system jumps) was to allow the ships to be close enough to do so. I've never seen anything I can remember to indicate a non-subspace capable vessel can 'piggyback' onto another ships wash, particularly given that the FS1 end scene is somewhat unique.
The tech stuff indicates a ship needs to oscillate in multiple dimensions (the role of the drive) in order to access an aperture into subspace; the ref bible mentions that it requires vast amounts of energy to sustain a subspace node/tunnel, but it doesn't say exactly how large that tunnel is and whether or not other ships can survive within. If it is some sort of modulating harmonics type thing, then I'd imagine it can't be done passively (i.e. no piggybacking); but it's never made entirely clear how you travel in or exit subspace.
That's great, but that's not what I was saying. When I say "piggyback" I mean in context of the previous poster, sharing a node with other ships (naturally all ships entering would need a drive, I even think they'd need a specific kind of drive too, ie you can't jump inter with intra), which is what the Altair findings allowed us to do. There is no indication that we've been able to do that before, but the final mission of FS1 is an indication that we've been able to do it after.
Well, looking at the tech documents there's nothing to indicate that it is actually unusual to 'share' a node; the only description IIRC calls it a 'tunnel' rather than some sort of parallel wormhole, so my best guess would be that the importance of Altair is that it became possible to actually find out where the Lucifer was (by tracking it all the way through intra-system jumps) and jump in close enough in time to 'catch up' to it before it reaches Sol and exits that tunnel; this is assuming, of course, there is some sort of additional time dilation effect such that a 10 minute (for example) trip through subspace appears to be instantaneous from the POV of exiting and arriving.
EDIT; which I've checked, and is actually wrong; the FS1 failure debriefs mention a 40 hour time period for the Lucifer to arrive at Sol if the player fails, knocking that out (presumably there is some sort of dilation effect that lengthens the wait time in realspace). So, :o for me, then.
Shame; I thought the time dilation thing would have been quite a nice, simple and clean way to put it. Although I would still think it's possible to share a node anyways, it's just a question of entry time; namely because the briefs don't mention this as if it's something new.
-
This is a very interesting discussion for I am just learning the technical and
tactical specs for the FS Universe. I have not commanded or served in
space before, though I have served in command up to Admiral in wet Naval
sims and can think of the evolution of ship type and ordiance and tactical
and stragetic aspects from that experience. In both fleet and single ship
evolutions, missions and plans, the destroyer was indeed a type that
first came into being at the advent of the torpedo as a novel and signficant
tactical weapon. Its predicessor was the small ship type of the sloop, brig type
while the frigate evolved into the cruiser. The two types discussed here in this
thread, the Destroyer -Cararier and the Battleship were originally the
destroyer, which was first called the torpedo boat and evolved into the larger
destroyer and the Dreadnought which became the BattleShip with a
Battlecruiser sub type.
The destroyer was indeed a light unit, designed for fleet screening and
some independent action of its own in convoy escort, and other actions.
It became larger and larger with more and more ordiancne and top side
equipment added to the point of extreme limits. It was always limited
by its cruising range, and the armor and ordinance and speed equations.
The Battleship was for a significant time the major fleet unit, and around
accumulations of battleship units in fleet actions, in squadrons, the fleet
strategy and tactics evolved. Naval strength was meant to both acquire
and hold territory, both by action and by what was known as the
"fleet in being" implications, by just existing, as the German HIgh Seas
Fleet did, the Fleet became a factor. I see that these factors all apply
to the FS universe, and that the major units, the Destroyers of the
classes mentioned, became signficant units in their own right, effecting
the battles and wars by just being in existence.
The exuation of ship size to function is indeed significant, the larger a
vessel and class, the greater the burden of support of the internal
crew and ordinance needed. So the size can increase incrimentally
with sometimes a lack of weapons and individual unit array, some
carriers had a large hull size relative to what they could actually deliver
in terms of figher units ....others did very well with this.
I look forward greatly to learning the specs more thoroughly, the
balance of unit size, function and strategy and tactics in naval war
have evolved over thousands of years, and it appears that this has
continued in the canon of the Space universe of FreeSpace.
-
AFAIK the tech descriptions of subspace don't preclude ships sharing a node 'tunnel'; it's not even clear whether there is ever more than one tunnel open/available anyways; I always thought the rush was to get into that tunnel before the Lucifer exited the other side in Sol (bearing in mind the non-relativistic nature of subspace physics), and the main use of subspace tracking (in particular intra-system jumps) was to allow the ships to be close enough to do so. I've never seen anything I can remember to indicate a non-subspace capable vessel can 'piggyback' onto another ships wash, particularly given that the FS1 end scene is somewhat unique.
The tech stuff indicates a ship needs to oscillate in multiple dimensions (the role of the drive) in order to access an aperture into subspace; the ref bible mentions that it requires vast amounts of energy to sustain a subspace node/tunnel, but it doesn't say exactly how large that tunnel is and whether or not other ships can survive within. If it is some sort of modulating harmonics type thing, then I'd imagine it can't be done passively (i.e. no piggybacking); but it's never made entirely clear how you travel in or exit subspace.
That's great, but that's not what I was saying. When I say "piggyback" I mean in context of the previous poster, sharing a node with other ships (naturally all ships entering would need a drive, I even think they'd need a specific kind of drive too, ie you can't jump inter with intra), which is what the Altair findings allowed us to do. There is no indication that we've been able to do that before, but the final mission of FS1 is an indication that we've been able to do it after.
Well, looking at the tech documents there's nothing to indicate that it is actually unusual to 'share' a node; the only description IIRC calls it a 'tunnel' rather than some sort of parallel wormhole, so my best guess would be that the importance of Altair is that it became possible to actually find out where the Lucifer was (by tracking it all the way through intra-system jumps) and jump in close enough in time to 'catch up' to it before it reaches Sol and exits that tunnel; this is assuming, of course, there is some sort of additional time dilation effect such that a 10 minute (for example) trip through subspace appears to be instantaneous from the POV of exiting and arriving.
EDIT; which I've checked, and is actually wrong; the FS1 failure debriefs mention a 40 hour time period for the Lucifer to arrive at Sol if the player fails, knocking that out (presumably there is some sort of dilation effect that lengthens the wait time in realspace). So, :o for me, then.
Shame; I thought the time dilation thing would have been quite a nice, simple and clean way to put it. Although I would still think it's possible to share a node anyways, it's just a question of entry time; namely because the briefs don't mention this as if it's something new.
Don't know, I just think that signficance was put onto actually being in the same wormhole, being able to track others etc. Naturally it's all a matter of timing, since the transport time is short, but if you aren't able to "track" a ship into subspace, how are you going to go "with" it and end up in the same hole? Just doesn't make sense to me that if we were able to follow eachother into subspace, ship after ship in the same wormhole, that the Altair discovery was so important.
Launching fighters in subspace is obviously possible, Lucifer does it, and so does exiting subspace with a cap and fighters, considering we've seen that in the ani where Lucy blows (fighters exit first, followed by Lucy).
Usually however, I'd assume because the technology is expensive most likely - every ship takes their own wormhole and plots the jump coordinates at a mutual location. Say you have four bombers leaving - I'd think they all take their own wormhole to the destination, and exit four wormholes (when you see bombers jumping in). This is in contrast to all getting out of the same wormhole (Lucy exiting subspace then dying), seeing how they'd all exit one wormhole if they were all collectively innit.
Just the way I see it anyway.
-
I just watched the FS1 outro again and quite frankly it proves neither argument. The fighters could all have formed their own jump points and they would have been lost behind the glare of the massive jump point the Lucifer is creating.
-
Don't know, I just think that signficance was put onto actually being in the same wormhole, being able to track others etc. Naturally it's all a matter of timing, since the transport time is short, but if you aren't able to "track" a ship into subspace, how are you going to go "with" it and end up in the same hole? Just doesn't make sense to me that if we were able to follow eachother into subspace, ship after ship in the same wormhole, that the Altair discovery was so important.
Launching fighters in subspace is obviously possible, Lucifer does it, and so does exiting subspace with a cap and fighters, considering we've seen that in the ani where Lucy blows (fighters exit first, followed by Lucy).
Usually however, I'd assume because the technology is expensive most likely - every ship takes their own wormhole and plots the jump coordinates at a mutual location. Say you have four bombers leaving - I'd think they all take their own wormhole to the destination, and exit four wormholes (when you see bombers jumping in). This is in contrast to all getting out of the same wormhole (Lucy exiting subspace then dying), seeing how they'd all exit one wormhole if they were all collectively innit.
Just the way I see it anyway.
Well, I tend to think that the Ancients tracking device was key because - I think - before that it was impossible to know where the Lucifer or any other ship (whether using intra-system jumps, inter-system, or maybe even inter-via-unstable) was, and thus to vector in forces to attack it at the precise moment (too early, and you risk being destroyed by it or Shivan support forces, too later and...er... boom). Unfortunately it's far from clear exactly how nodes are formed; the closest thing to a canonical reference is probably the FS1 box art showing (IIRC) Terran and Vasudan fighters in subspace, and we know how usless the FS boxes are for that sort of thing.
-
I don't think tracking is that big a deal for piggyback on a friendly ship. They would enter the wormhole together and thus can see each other all the way. Chances are little steering is required as the wormhole just pulls everything in it forward along a predetermined path. Of course, skills are required as the window of wormhole opening is very small. You better catch the ride along with the cruiser or you would be crashed by the collapsing wormhole.
Expenses aside, inter-node jumping is not that practical for a fighter. It requires a vastly different, and likely cumbersome, subspace engine. For a craft that depends on its agility, the extra mass could be fatal in a dog fight. It's not going to be very useful aside from special operations anyway since the fighters would need to be resupplied, which is impossible without a capital ship or a base around (assuming inter node communication is not that easy).
That being said, I still think it's the standard procedure to have a destroyer spearheading any inter-node operations. They may send several cruisers and fighter wings to establish a defense perimeter, but destroyers are crucial for sustained offensive air force projection.
-
My whoe rationalization was the following:
Jumps between systems require massive ammounts of power, and maby the way the node is opened is different - but the mechanics of the jump are the same. The ship has to vibrate in harmony with the opening to enter.
Destroyers make a big opening, and that leaves enough room for several fightes to slip in. Of course, they have to use their own subspace drives to vibrate in the same way, which requires coordination between the ships. Thus both the destroyer and the fighters vibrate as one single object and pass trough one opening.
Makes sense to me...
-
My whoe rationalization was the following:
Jumps between systems require massive ammounts of power, and maby the way the node is opened is different - but the mechanics of the jump are the same. The ship has to vibrate in harmony with the opening to enter.
Destroyers make a big opening, and that leaves enough room for several fightes to slip in. Of course, they have to use their own subspace drives to vibrate in the same way, which requires coordination between the ships. Thus both the destroyer and the fighters vibrate as one single object and pass trough one opening.
Makes sense to me...
The problem is that the vibration is the only mechanic described for opening a node; i.e. as far as the tech states, we don't know of any other role for a jump drive than to cause that oscillation. Which would imply that all that energy requirements is solely for the vibration action. We don't know if ships have to continue that vibration in subspace, AFAIK, but we also don't know if it's required in order to cross the threshold into and out of subspace. And also because we don't have all that much on the mechanics of intra-system jumps, too; what we can derive from the tech difference is that there is some sort of key difference caused by the lack of stellar gravity, but exactly why that matters is left unknown.
It's tricky, of course, because we don't have much to go on. One thing that occurs to me is that if fighters have to 'slip' in besides (and close to) a larger ship, why not go the whole hog and simply mount them to the deck for rapid detachment/deployment afterwards (we know docked ships can be dragged into subspace)? (albiet this isn't a for/against arguement, just something that'd look neat ;) ). My tendency is to think piggybacking isn't possible simply as we haven't seen it in FS1 or FS2 (and because there's no mechanic for it in FRED, i.e. to share a node), but we're really looking at a heads or tails type scenario here. Certainly piggybacking would allow some interesting scenarios (especially for TV War era campaigns), although it also removes some of the restrictions that could also make for other interesting scenarios.
-
It's also worth noting that just because piggybacking isn't possible in FS1 or FS2 that it can't be invented subsequently. It might be a fairly easy discovery that was required.
-
It's tricky, of course, because we don't have much to go on. One thing that occurs to me is that if fighters have to 'slip' in besides (and close to) a larger ship, why not go the whole hog and simply mount them to the deck for rapid detachment/deployment afterwards (we know docked ships can be dragged into subspace)? (albiet this isn't a for/against arguement, just something that'd look neat ;) ). My tendency is to think piggybacking isn't possible simply as we haven't seen it in FS1 or FS2 (and because there's no mechanic for it in FRED, i.e. to share a node), but we're really looking at a heads or tails type scenario here. Certainly piggybacking would allow some interesting scenarios (especially for TV War era campaigns), although it also removes some of the restrictions that could also make for other interesting scenarios.
Mount them to the deck?
Doesn' the Orion have a flight deck (from which you take off when haunting the Lucifer)?
And didn't the Aquaitaine have fighters "docked" with it when it first explored the nebula?
Granted, that doesn't prove anything. As far as FRED goes, how would you invision a mechanic like that?
You allready can set up wings to arrive at the same time anotehr ships comes (and VERY close to it too) so that really isn't needed. Unless you mean that a fighter HAS to be docked to the destroyer for piggybacking.
-
It's tricky, of course, because we don't have much to go on. One thing that occurs to me is that if fighters have to 'slip' in besides (and close to) a larger ship, why not go the whole hog and simply mount them to the deck for rapid detachment/deployment afterwards (we know docked ships can be dragged into subspace)? (albiet this isn't a for/against arguement, just something that'd look neat ;) ). My tendency is to think piggybacking isn't possible simply as we haven't seen it in FS1 or FS2 (and because there's no mechanic for it in FRED, i.e. to share a node), but we're really looking at a heads or tails type scenario here. Certainly piggybacking would allow some interesting scenarios (especially for TV War era campaigns), although it also removes some of the restrictions that could also make for other interesting scenarios.
Mount them to the deck?
Doesn' the Orion have a flight deck (from which you take off when haunting the Lucifer)?
And didn't the Aquaitaine have fighters "docked" with it when it first explored the nebula?
Yeah, the whole dock thing is an independent issue as there would possibly still be good reasons to dock a ship before jumping (NB: I'm thinking of simply bolting the things onto the sides, etc, of the ship - so like where you start on the Aquitane, etc - so you'd have them able to deploy over a wide are rapidly rather than risk being caught when coming out the fighterbay). The Aquitane thing is interesting, as you're just sitting stationary there, so you can't tell if the ships are 'meant' to be attached to the hull, or just waiting for deployment orders.
Granted, that doesn't prove anything. As far as FRED goes, how would you invision a mechanic like that?
You allready can set up wings to arrive at the same time anotehr ships comes (and VERY close to it too) so that really isn't needed. Unless you mean that a fighter HAS to be docked to the destroyer for piggybacking.
For FRED? Simple; fighters arrive or depart sharing the same jumpnode (warp ani) as the larger ship, rather than independent entry points. The whole seeing separate warppoints is, to me, the reason I don't think we've seen that sort of piggybacking. Not being possible in FRED isn't any indicator of the possibility within Freespace, of course, just that Volition never intended or planned to use it.
NB: the reason I'm assuming you'd need a shared warppoint is because, visually, there'd be no way tell the difference between inter-system and piggybacked jumps - I'd think a visible difference would be key in a game just so the player has an idea what's going on. Also, I don't think it's any easier to exit a jump tunnel than enter it, in terms of energy requirements, because (presumably, IMO) you have to expand that infinitessimal entry/exit point to a traversible size in realspace.
Albiet I'd say this is really something that should be flexible in terms of campaign storylines, anyways. I wouldn't use it, myself, though.