Comments/Questions on 2.0 by Jonathan Cresswell with Answers by MBC:

Jonathan’s remarks are prefaced with —; my answers are prefaced with **.

— GSN CL 'Nathan': 50 cm graser X2 ...is that 150cm? Otherwise the graser armament is only 1/27th that of the CA design.

** 50cm is the “standard” that I picked up for CL broadside grasers, based in part on the fact that @150cm is the average for RMN BCs -- and that the Alvarez class CA is specifically stated to have BC-grade energy weapons. You will also notice that the RMN-standard CA-grade graser is “set” at 90cm.

— Max accel for both CA and CL designs is 586G. One should be higher, no

**Yes... And No. Given the “original” mass/accel table in MTH, both fall into the mass range that would have been increased to 586G. By my “latest” efforts, the CA will be revised (in v3.0) to 603 and the CL to 615 -- assuming 5th Generation I/Cs. The v2.0 accel assumed 4th Gen.

— GSN SDs: Harrington has 1,000 less core crew from automation. Should there be a 'non-assault' version with few or no Marines? That's potentially another 1,000 bodies to eliminate (depending on how much of their training time is given up to ground/boarding combat).

**I refer you back to the running argument/commentary with Scott at Baden Baen (under the “Harrington Class Ships” thread). Basically, it comes down to this: GSN ships are built to carry a certain number of Grayson Marines, but they are only actually aboard when the ship’s current assignment sends it somewhere that Command Central thinks Marines would be useful. Exception: ships operating as squadron flags. At least, that’s my interpretation.

— Graysons don't seem to like energy torps here. But the two times HH destroyed ships much more powerful than her own (OBS, HOTQ) it was with energy torp or graser fire at unprotected ships. If HH is providing a lot of the tactical though of Grayson, would she not have recommended having a few ETs on board? And who would argue with her? :)

**I got the impression from OBS that HH did not like E/Ts on principle – that medium graser range was her idea of closer than you should allow an enemy to get. I think that is the lesson she would be imparting, and thus the Grayson trend toward heavier/longer-ranged missiles and energy weapons even at the expense of numbers.

— Do you want to include PD autocannon as a listing for Grayson/Masadan ships, or is that already factored into their PDLC rating?

**I am not even counting them, as I consider them useless against stand-off weapons. Besides, I wouldn’t know how to rate them anyway.

— Grayson/Masadan DDs have no listing for separate CM launchers, as practice for higher tech navies. But Grayson CMs are reaction-drive, a different technology from their impeller SK missiles. Would they still be able to use their SK launchers to fire CMs?

**You will notice that none of the DD designs have separate CM launchers. For this design point I am relying on DW’s statements about CM launchers and CM cannisters in his posting about HMS Nike on the alt.books.david-weber newsgroup. Whether pre-Alliance Grayson or Masadan DDs have separate CMLs or not is a totally open question, thus a totally open entry.

— Danville's squadron of three Bancroft-class LACs fired 39 missiles in their first salvo, so those LACs should have 13 missiles in each broadside, not 15.

**That will be corrected in v3.0.

— Those LACs [the MSN Bancroft-class (mbc)] also have "crude, relatively low-powered" lasers, so is the 50cm rating equivalent to a lesser calibre of modern weapon, or should it be revised to 25cm or so to represent its actual strength?

**I will add an entry to the “Notes” to the effect that the laser is equivalent to something lighter — somewhere between 15cm and 25cm, probably.

— From Courageous to Apollo class, the displacement goes from 88,000 to 135,000, but the missile broadside is actually weaker (the laser broadside is twice the strength) and the accel is still 586 G (and same crew strength).

**The missile broadsides are as given in OBS, THotQ and HAE. I realize that this makes the Apollo’s per-salvo throw weight lower (blame DW), but I also figure that the Apollo can carry twice the missile load (or more).

**Regarding crew strength, I figured that ships of the smaller types (FGs, DDs, CLs and LACs) would generally carry the same crew size from one class to another, with the size increases being reflected in greater personnel comfort and (most importantly) better defenses and larger magazine loads. It seems to me as if that (the defenses and magazine loading, not the crew comfort) would be the only logical reason for any navy to accept the lower maximum accel that automatically accompanies increased size.

— The RMN DDs have 2 chase missiles & a bigger laser for 4 missiles and 3 lasers broadside; that's about 2-to-1 broadside/chase. Light units were described as having "as much as one-third of the strength" of their broadsides as chasers...one-half is a bit much. Question is, how to pare it? Maybe asymetrical, lighter stern chasers (DD is fastest hyper combat unit)? (Or was it one-third TOTAL strength? Can't quite recall...)

**I went for the “one-third TOTAL strength” option because the concept of broadside strength was somewhat flexible in the Sail Navy days — a ship’s rating was determined by the total number of broadside weapons, even though only half of them could be put into action at any time. Thus the term “broadside” was used to describe either the total broadside — the number of guns which would be in action when fighting both sides at once — or the number of guns normally fired as a “broadside” — the guns on one side only, or half the total.

— The Manticore SD is around 1.7 times bigger in linear dimension than the Minotaur, which should make it almost 5 times bigger in mass, but it's only 33% more mass. What's up?

**Guesstimates from what little SD description we have -- more hollow space and “foam core” construction material? The only SD about which we have any dimensional information is the PN DuQuesne class — and that is minimal.

— Glad to see the pirate jalopies included--Chalice units etc.

**You’re welcome. I have added the “mobile dockyard” Warnecke owned and the “corvette” mentioned as being stationed in one system as well.

— Seydlitz matches her description -- half-again more missiles, lots less energy weapons — but she begs the question of what happened to all those operational hangups that limit SDs to only 45-missile broadsides...I'm starting to think DW slipped up big-time with the capital ship capabilities.

**I can’t help but agree that he slipped up somewhat — but a lot depends on the actual dimensions (which we don’t know).

— RMS James Kirk DDL??? :) I love it!

**Registered Manticoran Ship? If the RMN incorporated this class, it would be Her(His) Majesty’s Ship. RMS is the designator for a civilian, non-merchant ship. And if you like James Kirk so much, what about Quentin McHale? (I never said they had good archives — just comprehensive.)

— The only snag with fitting DDLs with grasers is that with only 2 of them, one hit takes out half the energy broadside.

**The DDL is basically a Light Cruiser with specific duties as a DesFlot Command Ship, thus the CL armament. It is listed as a DD (Destroyer) primarily because it has no separate CM launchers. And the broadside armament layout is G-M-L-M-L-M-L-M-G, if you’re interested.

— Paul's Raptor DD is interesting. I assume that by reducing fuel bunkerage with the fission plant for routine needs, he freed up enough cube to allow much heavier sidewall generators (CA-grade). I wonder what the doctrine would be to exploit that extra protection?

**Ask Paul. Other than the volume required for the heavier sidewall generators he specified, I suspect that probably half the “remaining extra bunkerage” would go to additional missile stowage, and the other half left as fuel bunkerage both to increase the energy combat duration (which is the primary purpose of the fusion reactors) and for maneuvering thrusters. Paul’s designs seem to work out well for a repeat of the Trafalgar Gambit.

Out of time for now. I still have to scroll the light craft. That's a big chunk of work you've done there, Michael! I hope the new-ship designers are giving you a commission on any sales they make to aspiring admirals...:)

**Fat Chance!