No canonical Confed battleSHIPS...what would one look like?

[gavinfoxx]

So! There seems to be no canonical battleships anywhere in confed lore, for some reason.

There's a Dreadnaught, there's a few Super Carriers, there's some Heavy Cruisers, there's those BattleCruisers... but no actual Battleships. You know, Big, Heavy, Slow, heavy armor, huge guns, maybe a bunch of missiles, very thick with lots of structure, no fighters, and, this being the Wing Commander universe, heavy shields -- nothing like that.

So muse for me for a little bit... what would one *look like*, based on what you about flying in the WC games, and what features would it have?

I'd say, if it's not going to be directing flight operations, does it really need a very exposed bridge? Does it need an external bridge at all?

Further, could it's design be such that vital systems can only be targeted from specific angles, so a torpedo coming from an 'off' angle would impact a nonessential part of the ship, and a bomber or torpedo or capship missile coming at an 'on' angle would be subject to a very large amount of turret fire?

Would it need to be 'long' like most confed ships? Presumably their shipyards work best making long, flat ships, but how much could that be varied?

Does anyone have any ideas of what a dedicated confed battleship might actually look like?

 

[Wedge009]

Given that Wing Commander is a fighter-dominated series of games, it doesn't surprise me that there isn't anything specifically classified as a battleship, though personally I think there's a pretty fuzzy border dividing some of those ship classifications. I don't know if there were any battleships described in times before WC1.

As for what it might look like, I would guess a big chunk of metal bristling with guns. That's at least consistent with the appearance of the Indomitable battlecruiser and Behemoth dreadnought.

 

[Madman]

As I recall, Action Stations is pretty clear on the dominance of battleships right up until the attack on McAuliffe - at least in terms of fleet policy, both on Confed and Kilrathi sides.

 

[Oggy]

I have just a quick sketch out over lunch. As I read Action Stations this is something like what I had in mind. Apologies for the rather “sketchy” nature, not much time to do it haha.

I would imagine big slabs of armour and massive power generators. I have made it so all the main cannons can deliver a massive broadside at the same target.

The book mentions orbital bombardment so I have included a section for bombardment weapons to be mounted on the underside.

I have included “Victory” Style engines projecting at angles so they don’t foul the cannons. I have included 4 just as a guess.

Like I say just an idle sketch

 

[Wedge009]

As I recall, Action Stations is pretty clear on the dominance of battleships right up until the attack on McAuliffe...

I thought that may have been the case, but not having read Action Stations, I couldn't be sure.

 

[-danr-]

I think by definition, Battleship is a broad kind of term. Similarly, all military vessels are referred to as 'warships.' I'm not sure if WC canon makes specific reference to a class of capship bristling with weaponary, and specifically designed to dole out punishment to other large bogeys.

Instead, we see real-world classifications used to describe the types of capship in the series. This might sound like a stupid question, but what is a 'Destroyer' if its not a Battleship? In WC3 we see the Victory's destroyer escorts in close-range combat with Kilrathi equivalents, then as a real treat, get to witness the TCS Ajax tearing apart a Fralthi II cruiser. Sound like battleships to me

 

[Bandit LOAF]

As others have mentioned, battleships play a huge role in the Wing Commander "prequel" novel, Action Stations. It's about the first days of the war and the idea is that (as in the period before World War II) battleships ruled space until the Kilrathi prove the effectiveness of carrier-based torpedo planes in their first major strike against the Confederation (the McAuliffe Ambush).

They aren't described in incredible detail, but we learn a few things about them--they're similar to 'real' battleships with heavy armor and massive centerline plasma turrets (the Yorkshire had at least three). A character refers to them as 50,000 tonne ships at one point and a Kilrathi version is said to have secondary turrets running underneath (which actually sounds like the Concordia supercruiser--see below).

We hear about at least three types of Kilrathi battleships (Zulu, Yar and Gamorgin) and Star*Soldier later names the Confederation ships seen Texas-class (many are named in the book).

Beyond that, "battleship" has a scattered history in Wing Commander lore:

- Wing Commander I seems opposed to the idea of dedicated battleships. Characters use the word to describe any warship in dialogue--there's a conversation early on where Bossman refers to destroyers as battleships. There's also a sentence in Claw Marks that infers they don't specifically exist: "Terran and Kilrathi destroyers, cruisers, dreadnaughts, carriers, and bases are equipped with heavy, turreted lasers..." (That's interesting to me because there was no dreadnaught on either side in the original game--the author was leaving room to expand).

- In Fleet Action, Hunter describes a new class of Kilrathi warship (which is NEVER! SEEN! AGAIN! ARGH!) as a 'battleship'. Unfortunately, his internal monologue is problematic: "...battleships he could only guess would be the word for them, drawing the term out of ancient nautical history."

- The Wing Commander movie (and friends) features battleships-by-any-other-name, the Concordia-class supercruisers. They're clearly both visually (large turrets, angular naval hulls) and role-wise (they're the victim in the Pearl Harbor scene at the start, then the Admiral's flagship later) World War II-style battleships turned into space warships.

- We see "battlecruisers" in Wing Commander Arena that are said to be a development of the Nephilim War, patterned after the pre-2634 battleships. They actually seem to work more like 18th century frigates, with rows of side-mounted cannons rather than large centerline turrets.

Would it need to be 'long' like most confed ships? Presumably their shipyards work best making long, flat ships, but how much could that be varied?

It depends on the era--up until the very end of the Kilrathi War there was a phys limit for ships that meant they had to fit into a particular radius in order to enter a jump point.

Does anyone have any ideas of what a dedicated confed battleship might actually look like?

It's possible (even likely?) that the warships on the cover of Action Stations are supposed to be battleships.

I have included “Victory” Style engines projecting at angles so they don’t foul the cannons. I have included 4 just as a guess.

Four is a good guess--there's a point in Action Stations where we hear that a Kilrathi battleship has had its third and fourth engines disabled.

This might sound like a stupid question, but what is a 'Destroyer' if its not a Battleship? In WC3 we see the Victory's destroyer escorts in close-range combat with Kilrathi equivalents, then as a real treat, get to witness the TCS Ajax tearing apart a Fralthi II cruiser. Sound like battleships to me

Good question. The were basically opposite ends of the warship spectrum--destroyers were smaller, lighter warships that were built quickly and in large numbers while battleships were massive heavily armed and armored floating fortresses (twenty or more times the tonnage of a destroyer).

 

[Oggy]

I ve attached a better sketch from my earlier post.

 

[Farbourne]

As others have mentioned, battleships play a huge role in the Wing Commander "prequel" novel, Action Stations. It's about the first days of the war and the idea is that (as in the period before World War II) battleships ruled space until the Kilrathi prove the effectiveness of carrier-based torpedo planes in their first major strike against the Confederation (the McAuliffe Ambush).

I had always thought that Confed lost the McAuliffe Ambush because they mis-decoded a Kilrathi message and ended up being outnumbered 2-1. They also had the misfortune of sending battleships up against strike craft with no fighter support? They're lucky that they managed to break the Kilrathi spearhead!

- Wing Commander I seems opposed to the idea of dedicated battleships. Characters use the word to describe any warship in dialogue--there's a conversation early on where Bossman refers to destroyers as battleships. There's also a sentence in Claw Marks that infers they don't specifically exist: "Terran and Kilrathi destroyers, cruisers, dreadnaughts, carriers, and bases are equipped with heavy, turreted lasers..." (That's interesting to me because there was no dreadnaught on either side in the original game--the author was leaving room to expand).

Isn't a dreadnought functionally a battleship by another name? I know that the dreadnoughts we see in the game carry fighters, but, once the efficacy of fighters in the WC universe became evident, would either side every build a large warship and NOT put at least a small hangar deck in it? It's not like a naval vessel where you need a long flat spot to land on, and you have to choose to use the top of your ship to either have gun turrets or a deck. As we see in the Exeter destroyers, it's possible to squeeze a small hanger and launch area into even a small warship.


The only time in the WC universe I can imagine a pure battleship being seriously looked at by military planners would be in the years between WC1 and WC2. At some point in that span, phase shields were invented, rendering fighter-born weaponry ineffective, and at some presumably later point, phase-penetrating torpedoes were invented, making fighters effective again. But for that brief window between the two developments, big, antimatter-equipped ships with lots of armor and not a lot of need for fighters other than for scouting purposes and convoy interdiction, would have been of prime value.

Unfortunately, I think we know very little about military hardware evolution during this time period... LOAF?

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I had always thought that Confed lost the McAuliffe Ambush because they mis-decoded a Kilrathi message and ended up being outnumbered 2-1. They also had the misfortune of sending battleships up against strike craft with no fighter support? They're lucky that they managed to break the Kilrathi spearhead!

Action Stations does include the story from Claw Marks but expands on it quite a bit.

The Confederation does intercept a Kilrathi message and translate it incorrectly and they do send a smaller-than-necessary force that fights to the death at the end of the battle... but it also begins the battle with a Pearl Harbor analog where the Kilrathi open the battle by devastating the Confederation fleet moored off McAuliffe in a surprise attack (McAuliffe didn't learn of the attack in advance and was still on a peacetime footing).

The 'technical' aspect is that in 2634 the only thing that kills warships is other warships--shields are too strong to be penetrated by fighter weaponry... so as in real life the goal is to build a heavily armored ship with guns that are as powerful as possible. Carriers and fighters exist, but they have a lesser role--they're largely for reconaissance, interception and space-to-ground bombing missions. The Kilrathi develop fighter-mounted torpedoes capable of taking down warships and open the attack with them... (which is a great point to tell a Wing Commander story from, with characters who fly human interceptors suddenly finding themselves the only thing capable of stopping the Kilrathi.)

Isn't a dreadnought functionally a battleship by another name? I know that the dreadnoughts we see in the game carry fighters, but, once the efficacy of fighters in the WC universe became evident, would either side every build a large warship and NOT put at least a small hangar deck in it? It's not like a naval vessel where you need a long flat spot to land on, and you have to choose to use the top of your ship to either have gun turrets or a deck. As we see in the Exeter destroyers, it's possible to squeeze a small hanger and launch area into even a small warship.

In real life a dreadnought is a type of battleship (what we would think of as a 'modern' battleship--which means the sort you see in the 20th century). Dreadnaughts in Wing Commander seem to be a little different; they're armored carriers which have both heavy weaponry in the direction of a dedicated battleship *and* full complements of fighters (the Concordia, any of Thrakhath's flagships, etc.--the Sivar was said to have a complement of fighters *or* a superweapon...)

The only time in the WC universe I can imagine a pure battleship being seriously looked at by military planners would be in the years between WC1 and WC2. At some point in that span, phase shields were invented, rendering fighter-born weaponry ineffective, and at some presumably later point, phase-penetrating torpedoes were invented, making fighters effective again. But for that brief window between the two developments, big, antimatter-equipped ships with lots of armor and not a lot of need for fighters other than for scouting purposes and convoy interdiction, would have been of prime value.

Unfortunately, I think we know very little about military hardware evolution during this time period... LOAF?

You are correct, we know very little about the era. The only ship we know is 'new' from that period is the Confederation-class, which is certainly a heavily armed-and-armored affair.

That said, I think most everything glosses over the 'phase shields change everything!' aspect of Wing Commander II. The conceit has always been, even in WC1, that ordinary fighter pilots aren't supposed to be able to take out cruisers in the first place. All the other Tiger's Claw pilots talk about how terrifying Fralthi and Snakeir are... the game just makes it fairly easy for Blair to knock them down.

(It's a cylical thing, too--I mentioned above that phase shields prevented damage from fighters before the war... and then they do again in WC2... and then again at the end of WC4 with the Vesuvius and through WCP. More of a constant and expected struggle between defensive and offensive technologies than a particular odd point in history.)

 

[Bob McDob]

The only time in the WC universe I can imagine a pure battleship being seriously looked at by military planners would be in the years between WC1 and WC2. At some point in that span, phase shields were invented, rendering fighter-born weaponry ineffective, and at some presumably later point, phase-penetrating torpedoes were invented, making fighters effective again. But for that brief window between the two developments, big, antimatter-equipped ships with lots of armor and not a lot of need for fighters other than for scouting purposes and convoy interdiction, would have been of prime value.

Phase shields exist in Action Stations. They're part of the reason the strike is launched from fighters, rather than frigates or light capital ships, as Admiral Nargth would have preferred. Something about the way phase shields operate prevents the shield-penetrating mechanisms on the torpedoes from working, which means that a phase-shielded ship launching torpedoes would have to shut them off before firing (much like how we see in the movie.)

 

[gavinfoxx]

I ve attached a better sketch from my earlier post.

Iiinteresting. Definitely more 'confed-y' than what I had picturing in my head.

How would you change it to make a more, well, 'optimal' design, with the restrictions of

1.) You need a certain shape to go through jump points

2.) Confed shipyards are generally set up to do that rough shape

3.) You *really* want to make it such that targeting certain parts of the ship is difficult, and requires very very specifically angled attack runs that open a bomber / capship missile to lots of ackack

I'm thinking it would look kind of like a star fort or something, with the places that enemies would *want* to target (ie, engines, shield generators, bridge, fire control, etc.) being very much obscured by the 'arms' which have lots of guns on them, maybe? Though I'm not quite sure how to do that with the 'make it fit through a jump point' thing... any ideas?

 

[Dundradal]

Iiinteresting. Definitely more 'confed-y' than what I had picturing in my head.

How would you change it to make a more, well, 'optimal' design, with the restrictions of

1.) You need a certain shape to go through jump points

It's not so much shape as it is size. Fleet Action mentions that the Hakaga have overcome this restriction in 2668.

Here, for the last five years, a new class of carriers has been tested and developed, overcoming the difficulties of translight jumping of ships above a certain size and mass.

I'm thinking it would look kind of like a star fort or something, with the places that enemies would *want* to target (ie, engines, shield generators, bridge, fire control, etc.) being very much obscured by the 'arms' which have lots of guns on them, maybe? Though I'm not quite sure how to do that with the 'make it fit through a jump point' thing... any ideas?

I've imagined it looking something like a WW2 Battleship with heavy weapon batteries on the dorsal and ventral sides. There would also be a significant secondary battery for AAS and fleet actions.

 

[Bob McDob]

It's not so much shape as it is size.

Well, shape matters too - the Handbook goes into some detail on jump drives ("All parts of the jump-ship must be subjected to roughly the same amount of antigraviton flux. Because of the short lifespan of these particles, this effectively translates into a maximum ship radius of about 500 meters", 56). It does go on to say that "Since particles have a half-life, this radius is not fixed, and to a certain extent the power of the drive determines the radius of the sphere", but goes on to conclude that "Ships bigger in radius than 500 meters take vastly more power than ones smaller than this threshold."). Keep in mind this was written for 2651, though.

Because it's radius that matters, I guess you could try playing around with certain shapes, but you don't want to devise anything too crazy or else you'd need extra jump generators to cover those parts of the ship (and for practical purposes, too - presumably you want those parts to be armored, and to be able to sustain basic stresses like moving around.)

 

[Zelvik]

One thing that bothers me with the radius explanation is that ship designs realy do not fit with this explanation. If it was a radius limitation you would expect to see much more sphere like designs that try to use every inch of the jump engine capabilities - something along the lines of a borg sphere. Building flattops in space seems like a bad design decission.

 

[ChrisReid]

One thing that bothers me with the radius explanation is that ship designs realy do not fit with this explanation. If it was a radius limitation you would expect to see much more sphere like designs that try to use every inch of the jump engine capabilities - something along the lines of a borg sphere. Building flattops in space seems like a bad design decission.

Not if the radius is less than 500 meters. Which actually fits: about the longest conventional carriers we see for most of the war are just under 1000 meters. We're told that the energy requirement significantly shoots up above that, not that it's a directly linear reduction in energy beneath. Then you have other considerations such as what shape works best in battle: how you can maximize the effectiveness of 'broadside' engagements, how you can minimize the radar cross-section as you move towards a target, etc.

 

[Bob McDob]

It's also worth remembering that the Handbook dates from 1998, and while the description is based closely on one that appears in the Bible, we can only trace that as far back as 1994. It's a case of design driving technobabble, not the other way around.

That said, the problem with a sphere design is volume. Under 1000m, you get a free pass of sorts, but go over the margin of error - say, 1500m - and you need *eight* generators, to make sure you're getting good coverage. By contrast, a 3k-long cucumber or spindle-shaped design will only need three.

It also makes interesting answer to a long-dogged question - why does the Kilrathi Hvar'kann dreadnought look like it has large bits cut out of the hull? Apart from aesthetic reasons: to use less jump generators. Mount them along the pylon-like constructions that spread out from the center; don't build something thick and concentrated where you need lots of generators to provide good coverage.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

It's also worth remembering that the Handbook dates from 1998, and while the description is based closely on one that appears in the Bible, we can only trace that as far back as 1994. It's a case of design driving technobabble, not the other way around.

I would bet that it is in the 1991 version of the bible--because it must be what Forstchen is replying to by noting that the Hakaga can get around the limitation (since the limitation isn't mentioned anywhere else at that point).

 

[Zelvik]

Not if the radius is less than 500 meters. Which actually fits: about the longest conventional carriers we see for most of the war are just under 1000 meters. We're told that the energy requirement significantly shoots up above that, not that it's a directly linear reduction in energy beneath. Then you have other considerations such as what shape works best in battle: how you can maximize the effectiveness of 'broadside' engagements, how you can minimize the radar cross-section as you move towards a target, etc.

Even if you are using traditional naval design thoughts on this (which isnt realy working in a three dimensional space as it is on a mainly two dimensional scenario like seafaring navies). It doesnt even apply to the aforementioned flattop scenario. They dont exchange broadsides, they aint built to do so. And overcoming sizerestrictions that are defined by a radius, you first try to use the space that you have before you start expanding beyond it (wich caused you serious problems for decades). You just dont build long slim ships, you build ships that are high and broad as well as long to fill out those 500 meters radius you have available. Either that or the technobabble just does not fill us in on other problems that are posed. Maybe its not a sphere but for some hypothetical more technobabble reason a prolate spheroid. That would correspond with many ship designs we see in Wing Commander.

 

[Death]

You seem to have missed the part where Chris mentioned there are concerns other than fitting the most ship into the jump engine sphere.

For starters, beach balls are easier to target than baseball bats.

Also, while you can fit more into a sphere than a spindle, that interior volume has drawbacks like controlling heat. WC may ignore that aspect, but pretty much anything you do generates heat, especially when farting around with things like matter/antimatter powerplants. Anything you put at the center of that sphere is going to build heat, and because of the rest of the ship around it, that heat is going to be more difficult to transfer somewhere that it won't endanger the ship. It's not impossible, mind you, but it's also not something you can just casually disregard, if you're looking at the universe as more than entertainment.