Destroyer question

[La Beret Rouge]

So in several fan fiction, wiki articles and assorted literature mention that Exeter and Gilgamesh class destroyers were modified to carry a small complement of fighters.

Now having read about several carrier upgrades such as the Indian Navy's conversion of Gorhskov. What would be removed or added to either destroyer? Would the Exeter class destroyer have her triple turret removed for instance?

 

[Wojo]

Uh oh, I'm sensing another hideous Paradigm thread on the horizon...

From the Exeter Database entry:
The destroyers carry a single squadron of eighteen light and medium fighters
I always assume that most capital ships have some sort of hangar bay for transferring supplies & crew, like a helipad on a battleship. Or at least a docking point of some sort. So I'm guessing packing a few fighters in there would be the go. Physically on the ships, it's hard to tell from the original game images. I remember in Standoff the creators had chosen to sling a couple of fighter bays below the engines of the Lionheart, a Gilgamesh.

My point is, I don't believe there is anything official (I await correction), so it's up to you! What you said makes sense, remove some major armament if the ship is being re-purposed for a carrier-like role. Or tape a couple of cats together, whatev's.

 

[Wojo]

This is what I thought of too... some ships had catapults mounted perpendicular to the hull, and they would launch sideways.

 

[La Beret Rouge]

Uh oh, I'm sensing another hideous Paradigm thread on the horizon...

From the Exeter Database entry:
The destroyers carry a single squadron of eighteen light and medium fighters
I always assume that most capital ships have some sort of hangar bay for transferring supplies & crew, like a helipad on a battleship. Or at least a docking point of some sort. So I'm guessing packing a few fighters in there would be the go. Physically on the ships, it's hard to tell from the original game images. I remember in Standoff the creators had chosen to sling a couple of fighter bays below the engines of the Lionheart, a Gilgamesh.

My point is, I don't believe there is anything official (I await correction), so it's up to you! What you said makes sense, remove some major armament if the ship is being re-purposed for a carrier-like role. Or tape a couple of cats together, whatev's.

I guess I was looking at the Exeter... one of my favourite love affairs for an unknown reasons and my thoughts were to remove the triple mount Laser Battery and single mount laser battery. Replace with a 64 missile cell... perhaps more haven't thought of that yet. Leave the dual mount / point defence lasers as is. So something similar to the changes made to INS Vikramaditya from her original Kiev clas build.

My thought is the Exeter is closer in line to the former RN Invincible class of warships and the modifications I make should reflect same. Personally with the amount of modifications that have occured I also think the class name should change.. thoughts?

Perhaps an airwing of Hellcats with an AEW shuttle.

 

[Ijuin]

Presumably any ship of sufficient size would carry a pair (or more) of shuttles, so a minimal landing bay would be likely ("minimal" as in "have to move each craft out of the way before the next one can land") Some interior space would have to be freed up for the storage bays for the fighters and quarters for their service crews, so crew accommodations for sub-NCO ranks may be more cramped (e.g. "double bunking" where people of different shifts use the same bed instead of having their own). Accommodations on ships carrying above their design load of fighters and crew seem to be pretty cramped even for low-ranking officers--note how even Maniac, who is a Major and third-most-senior pilot on the Victory, has to sleep in a barracks room instead of having private quarters (or quarters shared with a single room mate)

 

[Dundradal]

The Ralarrad light destroyer has a small hangar bay amidships. I actually didn't notice it my first through playthroughs because of its location.

Finding space for a half-squadron might not be that hard. In End Run, they introduce the concept of actually housing fighters on the outer hull and pilots going EVA to launch. Obviously, not the best solution, but one Confed used.

We might imagine that for such a small number of fighters things like full support crews might not have been necessary. Maybe only one or two flight crews for the ships along with the pilots and a few other support staff.

 

[Wojo]

I imagine if you end up changing the superstructure you would invent a new class name, but if you're just reconfiguring the internal space to add hangar facilities (as Ijuin mentions above) it could just be a modified Exeter variant. That's where I would draw the line. Although removing armament would change its role as a ship of the line, I reckon you could get away with still calling it an Exeter. But if you're building new hangar bays etc. I'd be calling it a Plymouth. Or Bristol. Or some other town near Exeter. (you will see Southampton near there too - har.)

 

[Wojo]

In End Run, they introduce the concept of actually housing fighters on the outer hull and pilots going EVA to launch. Obviously, not the best solution, but one Confed used.

I might not be remembering correctly, but weren't there a couple of WC2 SM missions where you flew off the Bonnie Heather? That would be as you described...

 

[Dundradal]

Bonnie Heather stored fighters internally. You launched and landed from the cargo bay.

Also found the relevant text from ER:

"We're also to serve on convoy duty, which is the mission we're hooking up to now, covering nine
marine transport ships as they move up to the Uruk Sector for a planet assault training exercise. We've
been losing too many ships to the occasional Kilrathi raider, pirates and such. There's no sense in tying up
one of our precious fleet carriers for such an operation, and the one or two exterior mounted fighters that
we were strapping on to the transports took forever to launch and recover."

Jason found that he had to agree with that point. There was a constant and annoying wastage of
transports to such raids. They had tried the idea of simply strapping a fighter to the outside of a ship and
launching when needed. It was a nightmare and a suicide job. A pilot had to suit up, go EVA along with
his launch crew. If they were in the middle of a fight and the transport did any maneuver while they were
outside, they were dumped off and lost.

Bondarevsky later docks on a marine transport to see Svetlana:

"Bear, you are cleared for external dock."

"Thank you Bangor , initiating clamp-down now." Hovering above the top side docking bay, Jason gave
a nudge to his down thruster and felt his Ferret scrape up on the deck of the transport ship. There was a
quick groaning snap as the Bangor 's external docking locks clamped around the landing skids of his ship.
Shutting down his ship, he bled off the cabin air until it was vacuum, and then popped the canopy hatch.
Slowly standing up he looked out across the open vista of space. A glorious binary was off to port, a red
giant with a tiny white dwarf above it, a trail of incandescent fire spiraling up from the red giant's surface
into the glowing white dwarf. The Milky Way spanned the heavens with a hundred million jewels of light
and he paused for a moment to admire the view. It was hard to imagine that there was really a war on.
The silence of space was all encompassing, an eternity to be explored, and he again felt that wonder of it
all, and the sense of irony about the fact that even out here, humankind could not escape the bitterness of
war.

He realized as well that he was stalling. Cautiously taking hold of the side of the canopy he pulled himself
out of his cockpit, turning a somersault while still holding on to his ship. If he didn't lock to the deck of
the Bangor , and should let go now, it'd be most embarrassing to call for a rescue party to come out and
reel him back in. He always hated external dockings for that reason. Bangor , as did all marine landing
transports, had a launch bay, but they were just large enough to hold the assault landing craft, without an
inch to spare for anything else.

His feet hit the hull of the Bangor and he felt the magnetic lock snap his shoes down. Moving slowly he
walked across the deck and reached the airlock door, punching it open and then stepping inside. The
door shut, and he felt the ship's gravity take hold, slapping him from weightlessness to one standard
gravity as a flood of air washed around him. Seconds later the interior door opened, and a marine
corporal in dress blues was before him, standing at rigid attention.

 

[La Beret Rouge]

I imagine if you end up changing the superstructure you would invent a new class name, but if you're just reconfiguring the internal space to add hangar facilities (as Ijuin mentions above) it could just be a modified Exeter variant. That's where I would draw the line. Although removing armament would change its role as a ship of the line, I reckon you could get away with still calling it an Exeter. But if you're building new hangar bays etc. I'd be calling it a Plymouth. Or Bristol. Or some other town near Exeter. (you will see Southampton near there too - har.)

Definitely reconfiguring internal space, my thoughts would be removing the capship missile cannisters and replacing with greater storage space for the air wing's armament, spare parts and other parts required to run an airwing. I am uncertain about if I want to remove the triple mount or replace with an anti matter gun. Although they mention 18 light to medium fighters I have always remained unconvinced about the possibility of running two classes of spacecraft from a small platform. Considering Hellcats and possibly Ferrets or even go old school with a Rapier II. Opposition would be standard Kilrathi frontline spacecraft from WC 3.

BTW look the name change to Plymouth or Bristol.

 

[La Beret Rouge]

After further thought I have decided that if my plan is a carrier conversion then I would remove the triple mount to replace with a missile cell or an anti matter gun. This would reflect its change from a greyhound of the fleet to a space equivalent of a sea control ship. Something that I am using to focus my thoughts is the proposed carrier conversion of the Spruance class destroyer from our TL.

 

[Ijuin]

We must also ask ourselves what role the ship will be fulfilling--is it still acting as a destroyer (i.e. directly attacking other light capships with its own weapons) or are we stripping it down to make it into a pocket carrier? If the former, then the fighter squadron will also be more defensively-oriented (CAP, interception, scouting) with minimal anti-capship striking potential (probably limited to something like the Epee's infamous single torpedo loadout).

 

[Deathsnake]

After further thought I have decided that if my plan is a carrier conversion then I would remove the triple mount to replace with a missile cell or an anti matter gun. This would reflect its change from a greyhound of the fleet to a space equivalent of a sea control ship. Something that I am using to focus my thoughts is the proposed carrier conversion of the Spruance class destroyer from our TL.

Why remove the tripple for AMG? Its enough to replace the internal gunsystem - rdy is the tripple AMG. A missile cell would be usefull on the downside of the ship. The 18 Rapiers on the Exeter is not really realistic. The place on the ship is to short. But in 1990 nobody ask how the fighters have room on the Exeter. Today I would say: 18 fighters? Ferrets and Epee only - bigger fighter - less complement. Maybe 6-8 Rapier/Hellcat. No Sabre, Thunderbolt, Raptor or bombers. Epee with a single torpedo if is required. But capship are the work for the Exeter itself. And for enemy bombers are Epee/Arrow - even the Ferret the best answer.

 

[La Beret Rouge]

We must also ask ourselves what role the ship will be fulfilling--is it still acting as a destroyer (i.e. directly attacking other light capships with its own weapons) or are we stripping it down to make it into a pocket carrier? If the former, then the fighter squadron will also be more defensively-oriented (CAP, interception, scouting) with minimal anti-capship striking potential (probably limited to something like the Epee's infamous single torpedo loadout).

Thanks for the responses across the board as this is helping me rewrite my story.

I would say this vessel is primarily used to maintain the space lines of communications escorting convoys to and from worlds. However, post Kilrathi attack on Earth convoys are regularly encountering increasing numbers of Kilrathi raiders . Hence, there is a requirement to go toe to toe with other light capital ships.

That means the fighter squadron would be defensive in nature to protect the convoy and the ship... Originally I used a squadron of Ferrets, but I am unsure if I want to convert that to Hellcats or Rapiers. Although I confess to a love affair with the Epee, which is patently ridiculous.

My story revolves around a militia Exeter class ship being 'nationalised' for want of a better term by a TCN Carrier squadron to replace a destroyer lost to enemy action. The Carrier squadron is conducting an interdiction mission in order to distract the Kilrathi from the Temblor bomb mission. So 1 Wake class carrier, 1 Coventry class destroyer, 1 EW Corvette and my Exeter.

 

[Wojo]

I'm confused... is your Exeter being modified by the Carrier fleet? If so, I'd imagine they wouldn't want to strip off any armament whatsoever, given they already have an operational carrier. They would likely want it it replace the lost destroyer. If not, why do you need to modify it at all? The canon states they already operate with a squadron of fighters, so the design already has room for this. You'd only want to start removing stuff if you wanted MORE fighters/bombers.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

 

[Dundradal]

I would say this vessel is primarily used to maintain the space lines of communications escorting convoys to and from worlds. However, post Kilrathi attack on Earth convoys are regularly encountering increasing numbers of Kilrathi raiders . Hence, there is a requirement to go toe to toe with other light capital ships.

That means the fighter squadron would be defensive in nature to protect the convoy and the ship... Originally I used a squadron of Ferrets, but I am unsure if I want to convert that to Hellcats or Rapiers. Although I confess to a love affair with the Epee, which is patently ridiculous.

Have you read "End Run" in particular the first part of it entitled "Milk Run"? A Venture stays on duty for quite a while defending against raiders and other light capital ships. If you haven't read it, I'd consider doing it.

 

[La Beret Rouge]

I'm confused... is your Exeter being modified by the Carrier fleet? If so, I'd imagine they wouldn't want to strip off any armament whatsoever, given they already have an operational carrier. They would likely want it it replace the lost destroyer. If not, why do you need to modify it at all? The canon states they already operate with a squadron of fighters, so the design already has room for this. You'd only want to start removing stuff if you wanted MORE fighters/bombers.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

I can see how this would be confusing.

The Militia when then they purchased the Exeter have modified the vessel to be able to adequately respond to the greater threat posed by Kilrathi raiders etc.

So the Carrier squadron is using the Exeter as a one for one replacement of the destroyer lost to enemy action.

 

[RogueBanshee]

Based on the DB entry the space and support for 18 fighters comes standard on Exeters so there would be no need to remove anything for them. Though as mentioned they are light and medium fighters so hey have little or no anti-capship strike capability.

 

[Wojo]

Based on the DB entry the space and support for 18 fighters comes standard on Exeters so there would be no need to remove anything for them. Though as mentioned they are light and medium fighters so hey have little or no anti-capship strike capability.

I guess that's what I was getting at. Why would you make modifications that are already built into the original design?

 

[Silent Hunter]

You wouldn't - you might make mid-life upgrades, but you wouldn't change fundamental design if you're keeping it in the same role.