Insanity: Screening elements in the HV

Ok. Shannon’s intent was to get more than the one shot that was the current limitation of fire, and to deploy 10,000 of these things for use.

Even if the platforms have several SD spec reactors, there is no way in H E double hockey-sticks even seven SD sized reactors … fission or fusion, large or small, are going to be able to power 70,000 rapid-fire graser shots. High density instant discharge capacitors will have to do that job. I’m guessing the beamed power keeps the capacitors charged; and might be able to provide power in the midst of battle to keep the capacitors from discharging too quickly to a level below what is required to fire. Getting perhaps another 2 shots. So, probably just 5 shots without beamed power.

penny wrote:Ok. Shannon’s intent was to get more than the one shot that was the current limitation of fire, and to deploy 10,000 of these things for use.

Even if the platforms have several SD spec reactors, there is no way in H E double hockey-sticks even seven SD sized reactors … fission or fusion, large or small, are going to be able to power 70,000 rapid-fire graser shots. High density instant discharge capacitors will have to do that job. I’m guessing the beamed power keeps the capacitors charged; and might be able to provide power in the midst of battle to keep the capacitors from discharging too quickly to a level below what is required to fire. Getting perhaps another 2 shots. So, probably just 5 shots without beamed power.

Ship mounted Grasers usually have a ring capacitor on mount with 3-4 shots worth of power on each mount in the event they are disconnected from Ship's power.

I would assume they are either talking about augmenting that to 7 shots, the Solarians use larger capacitors then usual and normally have 6-7 shots available, or replacing the Solarian capacitors with Manticorian capacitors will allow of a 7 shot storage, in the same volume as the Solarian 3 shot ring. If they had a shipborne type reactor on each platform, they would be able to get infinite shots per platform.

penny wrote:Ok. Shannon’s intent was to get more than the one shot that was the current limitation of fire, and to deploy 10,000 of these things for use.

Even if the platforms have several SD spec reactors, there is no way in H E double hockey-sticks even seven SD sized reactors … fission or fusion, large or small, are going to be able to power 70,000 rapid-fire graser shots. High density instant discharge capacitors will have to do that job. I’m guessing the beamed power keeps the capacitors charged; and might be able to provide power in the midst of battle to keep the capacitors from discharging too quickly to a level below what is required to fire. Getting perhaps another 2 shots. So, probably just 5 shots without beamed power.

Theemile wrote:Ship mounted Grasers usually have a ring capacitor on mount with 3-4 shots worth of power on each mount in the event they are disconnected from Ship's power.

I would assume they are either talking about augmenting that to 7 shots, the Solarians use larger capacitors then usual and normally have 6-7 shots available, or replacing the Solarian capacitors with Manticorian capacitors will allow of a 7 shot storage, in the same volume as the Solarian 3 shot ring. If they had a shipborne type reactor on each platform, they would be able to get infinite shots per platform.

Before we get carried away, there is only ONE graser per platform and so 9 to 10 thousand platforms.

There is no way to have a shipborne reactor and keep these platforms to a reasonable size and cost. The platform is going to be some fraction of a LAC in size (mainly because of the graser) and a LAC is too small for a full size fusion reactor. So power would have to come from the micro fusion reactor or a fission reactor, if it is decided to support 7 or more shots per engagement.

Although I have objected to the shot limit, from the text it appears that is what they will do initially.

tlb wrote:I can accept that beamed power might take a long time to recharge the capacitors, but I find it difficult to accept that the platform has to shut down until the "maintenance crews could recharge the capacitor reservoirs". Particularly when we are talking 9 to 10 thousand platforms in the midst of an engagement. Why not a mini fusion reactor on each and the beam power keeps the startup capacitor topped off until an engagement starts, then the reactor fires up and recharges the capacitors until the action is over? Only afterwards is a maintenance crew required.

Yeah - I can accept that the IEWPs need maintenance after 7 shots. But recharging the capacitor reservoirs sounds like something beamed power could do -- or are capacitor reservoirs different from capacitor power level?

It would probably have been better if RFC had been vaguer and simply said that after 7 shots they required maintenance; but omit the details. (Maybe in such a limited platform the alignment starts going, or you hit some thermal limit and need to recalibrate, or to use it outside all the support infrastructure of a ship you're utilizing some per-shot consumable.) But, if left unspecified, we just take it as read that that limit exists, and for some reason that isn't worth working around.

And then we can move on to thinking about what that limit might meet tactically and operationally. (Basically that you hold back some platforms for use against later targets rather than going for the levels of overkill you might use if it only cost you power and charging time -- because, yes, maintenance is a post-battle activity so for all practical purposes a given platform gets just 7 shots in any given battle)

tlb wrote:I can accept that beamed power might take a long time to recharge the capacitors, but I find it difficult to accept that the platform has to shut down until the "maintenance crews could recharge the capacitor reservoirs". Particularly when we are talking 9 to 10 thousand platforms in the midst of an engagement. Why not a mini fusion reactor on each and the beam power keeps the startup capacitor topped off until an engagement starts, then the reactor fires up and recharges the capacitors until the action is over? Only afterwards is a maintenance crew required.

Jonathan_S wrote:Yeah - I can accept that the IEWPs need maintenance after 7 shots. But recharging the capacitor reservoirs sounds like something beamed power could do -- or are capacitor reservoirs different from capacitor power level?

It would probably have been better if RFC had been vaguer and simply said that after 7 shots they required maintenance; but omit the details. (Maybe in such a limited platform the alignment starts going, or you hit some thermal limit and need to recalibrate, or to use it outside all the support infrastructure of a ship you're utilizing some per-shot consumable.) But, if left unspecified, we just take it as read that that limit exists, and for some reason that isn't worth working around.

And then we can move on to thinking about what that limit might meet tactically and operationally. (Basically that you hold back some platforms for use against later targets rather than going for the levels of overkill you might use if it only cost you power and charging time -- because, yes, maintenance is a post-battle activity so for all practical purposes a given platform gets just 7 shots in any given battle)

If these shots are more effective, then take best advantage of them and use the one-shot mines in the rest of the battle. So the IEWP's have to be used in addition to, rather than instead of, regular mines.

Why would the GA need to improve upon that setup? Seventy thousand graser shots against ships without a wedge or sidewall? Isn't that already overkill? If an enemy has more ships than that minefield can destroy to send through that meat grinder, then there is a much bigger problem.

There is the possibility that the MAN might have them shooting at empty space; other than that, I can't see a need to improve upon that minefield.

So, 10,000 LAC sized platforms just to stand guard at the gate? Rather than 10,000 LACs? And nobody wants to give the MAN those kinds of numbers?

Theemile wrote:

penny wrote:Ok. Shannon’s intent was to get more than the one shot that was the current limitation of fire, and to deploy 10,000 of these things for use.

Even if the platforms have several SD spec reactors, there is no way in H E double hockey-sticks even seven SD sized reactors … fission or fusion, large or small, are going to be able to power 70,000 rapid-fire graser shots. High density instant discharge capacitors will have to do that job. I’m guessing the beamed power keeps the capacitors charged; and might be able to provide power in the midst of battle to keep the capacitors from discharging too quickly to a level below what is required to fire. Getting perhaps another 2 shots. So, probably just 5 shots without beamed power.

Ship mounted Grasers usually have a ring capacitor on mount with 3-4 shots worth of power on each mount in the event they are disconnected from Ship's power.

I would assume they are either talking about augmenting that to 7 shots, the Solarians use larger capacitors then usual and normally have 6-7 shots available, or replacing the Solarian capacitors with Manticorian capacitors will allow of a 7 shot storage, in the same volume as the Solarian 3 shot ring. If they had a shipborne type reactor on each platform, they would be able to get infinite shots per platform.

Of course, a reactor on each platform nullifies the need for beamed power. Anyway, I'm just trying to wrap my head around beaming power from a single fort to serve 10,000 separate platforms. If power can be transferred that efficiently, then that setup should be able to fuel at least several platforms indefinitely in the heat of battle, if plasma does not need refilling, and if platforms don't overheat, etc.

The downside is in the event of the minefields completion, the RMN might move their castles (forts) further in-system, relying upon the minefield. Guess what would become a priority target for the MAN? The power source.

penny wrote:Why would the GA need to improve upon that setup? Seventy thousand graser shots against ships without a wedge or sidewall? Isn't that already overkill? If an enemy has more ships than that minefield can destroy to send through that meat grinder, then there is a much bigger problem.

There is the possibility that the MAN might have them shooting at empty space; other than that, I can't see a need to improve upon that minefield.

No one of any intelligence attacks a junction by coming through the wormhole, because that is overkill - as you say. Instead they come out of hyperspace and attack with wedges and sidewalls up, or else sneak in using the spider drive and coasting.

tlb wrote:No one of any intelligence attacks a junction by coming through the wormhole, because that is overkill - as you say. Instead they come out of hyperspace and attack with wedges and sidewalls up, or else sneak in using the spider drive and coasting.

That might be what Foraker is thinking of using those for. And don't forget that they have multiple wormholes termini to defend.

But Commander Clayton was thinking of a wormhole transit with "no wedge or sidewall."