Re: [GZG] UNSC Workings

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l200
8/12/12 Ladue, Grant <ladue@buffalo.edu>

>     For what it's worth, I like that the OUDF is the "modular ships"
> faction, and I wouldn't want the UNSC to duplicate that.
>
> I like that the UN uses "module" designs for construction purposes,
but
> once mated the modules are permanent.  In theory,
>
My thought was that you don't have plug and play weapon mounts like the
OUDF
but modular hull sections that can be mated together. For instance a BC
command hull, a carrier module, a "wing" module and then an engine
module.
The ship name would follow the forward hull section and the rest would
be
swapped out for mission specific tasks / maint upgrades.

> it would simplify design changes as well.  I like to consider the
battle
> corvette, deep space explorer, and BC as the first
>
> UNSC designs, followed by the cruisers, and then the new battleships
and
> DN's.  The old BC fore hull design is most in
>
> need of an upgrade and a new one (possibly with a cruciform more like
the
> battleships) would see production as soon as
>
> the Kravak threat lessens.  The Lake class destroyers were upgraded by
> minor changes to the production fore hull as new
>
> weapons designs came into play (largely to reduce their dependence on
the
> supply chain for reloads).  The "fleet" upgrades
>
> to grazers (first implemented on the brand new Heavy Cruiser design)
were
> implemented after the Strike, Escort, and Light
>
> cruiser designs were in production for some time, and the decision was
made
> to retain the current designs until completely
>
> new fore hulls were warranted (after the BC).
>
>
>
>    Most likely, the battle carrier designs developed during the war
will be
> retired or mothballed shortly after the war ends due
>
> to the very high material and personnel costs to operate them in a
> peacetime environment.  The Super Heavy Carrier may be
>
> retained as fleet flagship and propaganda tool though.
>
My vision has the new BC class to take over the mission specs of
BC/BB/strike carriers/light carriers. They'd be the new work horse of
the
fleet. I should say I call them BC because in their base configuration
that's their size, but since they'd have several modules available
they'd
upclass quickly to BB size and bigger.

With a major threat of the KV capital ships would be needed in case of
attack. You'd have to use them as major world pickets or propoganda
shows of
force in peacetime.  Fleet carriers would also be usefull to support
large
ground opperations if your PSB includes atmospheric capable fighters.

>
> It takes only one drink to get me drunk. The trouble is, I can't
remember
> if it's the thirteenth or the fourteenth.
>    George Burns
>
>
>