 April 14, 2009 - 8:57pm | Space Navy science fiction that has everybody flying around in fighter planes has always annoyed me. Star Wars space battles are like the Pacific Ocean Theater of World War II. It's like re-fighting the battle of Midway over and over again. I would like to try something different. Lets do away with fighter planes in space. Instead lets use Battle Riders. These are heavily armored and armed system ships of moderate size. They do not have jump drives and are carried into battle by other ships. They do not land on planets. In Knight Hawks they would be Hull size 3-5. If you removed the fighters from the Assault Carrier it could carry from 1 to 3 Battle Riders. 1. What would the Knight Hawks stats be for a Battle Rider? 2. What would a Battle Rider look like? How would its decks be laid out? 3. Would Battle Riders be carried through jump inside the hull of their Assault Carrier or attached to the outside of the hull like limpets? |
 April 15, 2009 - 4:49am | This is a neat idea, but at this point its not really do-able. Its too "simple" to make a craft jump capable. KH just doesnt build ships like Traveller. You dont get any extra available space by not having jump drives since in SF jump drives are not a seperate system, its just a capability of ion and atomic drives. Accelerate to 10% the speed of light, that is the necessary speed to enter VoidSpace I asked a similar question years ago on the old listserv and got a like answer. I thought somebody on this site had a carrier that had 3-4 Assault scouts on external mounts. The carrier can make several jumps, drop off the scouts, which can then meet the carrier another jump away. Time flies when your having rum. Im a government employee, I dont goof-off. I constructively abuse my time. |
 April 15, 2009 - 7:00am | As Rum Rogue said, since jump capability is easy, you don't really need carriers for the larger ships. However, the one place it would be useful he also mentioned. The smaller (HS <5) ships can only make one jump before needing to overhaul their engines (assuming they have Atomic drives, which most military vessels would for performance reasons). If these ships were piggy backed on a larger ship, they could make many jumps on the big ship's engines requiring less work to keep them operational and possibly less fuel. I don't know if it is a big enough benefit to outweigh the cost of the bigger ship but it is a possibility. Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |
April 15, 2009 - 8:10am | Thanks for your replies. I need to become more familiar with the KH rules.  I just don't like the "idea" of fighter planes in space. I would rather model space combat on classic (no flying machines) World War One naval combat. Perhaps a house rule or three is in order. Time to do more reading and thinking. |
 April 15, 2009 - 9:21am | Are you referring to the wings that most fighters have? Do you envision fighters as rocket/torp looking hulls or boxes? Just a few thoughts on wings;
|
April 15, 2009 - 11:49am | Are you referring to the wings that most fighters have?
Do you envision fighters as rocket/torp looking hulls or boxes? I don't envision fighter plane style craft at all. In my opinion hull size 1 and 2 should be too small to carry major military weapons. These are "ship's boats" not war ships. In my opinion hull size 3 is the smallest real naval vessel. A "gun boat" if you will. It would not land on a planet. It could be streamlined, to aid it in skimming or bouncing off a planetary atmosphere, but it would not be capable of landing or taking off from a planet. It would be constructed in orbit. As a gun boat it would have a jump drive as a Battle Rider it would not. As was pointed out earlier, the point is kind of moot under the standard KH rules, as having or not having a jump drive does not effect hull space for weapons and armor. To make this work (if it would work at all) it would have to be house ruled and setting specific. I need to do more reading of the KH rules. Just a few thoughts on wings;
Good points. In KH ships look somewhat streamlined, but their decks are laid out perpendicular to the direction of travel, as there is no artificial gravity in the game. Interface shuttles seem to be laid out as airplanes, but most star ships, even if streamlined, are not, at least inside. |
 April 15, 2009 - 2:58pm | This is a neat idea, but at this point its not really do-able. Its too "simple" to make a craft jump capable. KH just doesnt build ships like Traveller. You dont get any extra available space by not having jump drives since in SF jump drives are not a seperate system, its just a capability of ion and atomic drives. Accelerate to 10% the speed of light, that is the necessary speed to enter VoidSpace I asked a similar question years ago on the old listserv and got a like answer. I thought somebody on this site had a carrier that had 3-4 Assault scouts on external mounts. The carrier can make several jumps, drop off the scouts, which can then meet the carrier another jump away. Art has one on his site. One other as well, I believe. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
April 15, 2009 - 3:03pm | Are you referring to the wings that most fighters have? Do you envision fighters as rocket/torp looking hulls or boxes? I don't envision fighter plane style craft at all. In my opinion hull size 1 and 2 should be too small to carry major military weapons. These are "ship's boats" not war ships. In my opinion hull size 3 is the smallest real naval vessel. A "gun boat" if you will. It would not land on a planet. It could be streamlined, to aid it in skimming or bouncing off a planetary atmosphere, but it would not be capable of landing or taking off from a planet. It would be constructed in orbit. As a gun boat it would have a jump drive as a Battle Rider it would not. As was pointed out earlier, the point is kind of moot under the standard KH rules, as having or not having a jump drive does not effect hull space for weapons and armor. To make this work (if it would work at all) it would have to be house ruled and setting specific. I need to do more reading of the KH rules. Just one little thing...you would probably have ground ports and orbital facilities, as it would be cheaper to building starship landing facilities on the ground, than it would be to build similar facilities in orbit. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
April 15, 2009 - 6:50pm | I looked at this a little more after I posted earlier. It would be possible to make a ship that served this purpose that might even make sense in the KH rules. If you took a HS 8 hull and mounted 6 Class C Ion drives you could (in similar manner to the Jump Tug in the Star Frontiersman) make a ferry vessel capable of transporting 3 Assault Scouts. All told the ship would cost about 2 million credits. Since the ship only has an ADF of 1, it couldn't make higher acceleration jumps (risk jumps in the Second Sathar War game) but if this was called for, the Assault Scouts could use their own engines and not get ferried. Now bases on the rules, it costs 10,000 cr per jump per atomic engine and a minimum of 3600cr per jump for Ion engines. 3,600 cr is the minimum if you just accelerate straight to jump speed, make the jump and slow down. I'll call it 4,000 cr to account for a bit of maneuvering along the way. So, our three assault scouts have a total of 6 Atomic engines between them and the cost of them making a jump is 60,000 cr. Our ferry vessel has 6 Ion engines so the cost to make the same jump is 24,000 cr. A saving of 36,000 cr per jump. With our ship costing 2 million, it takes about 56 jumps for the ship to pay for itself. Even if it only made one jump every 20 days, it pays for itself in less than 3 years. Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |
 April 16, 2009 - 5:20pm | Keep in mind the idea of "fighter planes in space" works for the general nature of the craft --- they can be based on a carrier, station, or on the surface of a world. Clip the wings and you only get two of those possibilities (and there's really nothing wrong with that either). You dont get any extra available space by not having jump drives since in SF jump drives are not a seperate system, its just a capability of ion and atomic drives. Accelerate to 10% the speed of light, that is the necessary speed to enter VoidSpace. Actually that's 1% of C, but yeah, the principle is there for jump capable craft. And technically, even a chemical driven system ship can enter the void if given enough fuel (ADF for chem drives is the same as ion drives in canon rules: ADF1). As for a "battle rider" I wouldn't see anything beyond HS:3 as doable if it is to be based on another ship like a carrier. You'd need a huge bay to contain a 100m long HS:5 ship... On that note I have incorporated Traveler-esque "system defense boats" in my game...system ships armed to the teeth with laser batteries and where applicable, a rocket battery. But like RR stated, it doesn't take much more (beyond funding that is) to make them jump capable craft. |
 April 16, 2009 - 7:00pm | My idea was more of using assault scouts and adding a dispossable nuclear or ion drive to get to the system and use their own drives to jump out of the system. Much like extra fuel tanks of some fighters. Maybe some people would not like the idea of leaving nuclear or ion drives just floating around after a single use, but these aliens thought nothing of it. In every age, in every place, the deeds of men remain the same. |
April 17, 2009 - 8:00am | My idea was more of using assault scouts and adding a dispossable nuclear or ion drive to get to the system and use their own drives to jump out of the system. Much like extra fuel tanks of some fighters. Maybe some people would not like the idea of leaving nuclear or ion drives just floating around after a single use, but these aliens thought nothing of it. Similar to the Traveller concept of the close escort, which uses disposable L-Hyd fuel tanks to boost its range and operating time. Hmmmm.... "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
 April 18, 2009 - 12:59am | Its a neat idea, however i for one was raised on star wars, star trek, battlestar, wing commander, etc. and think there is nothing wrong with the concept of space fighters. Now that being said i also acknowledge that there existence is impractical and not realisitc in a hard science fiction sense. However, they are exciting, fast, and fun which is what sci-fi at its best is all about, fun. I agree that maybe the rules on fighters could use a rewrite but i would not remove the class altogether. The Atomic rockets site completely poo poo's the idea of space fighters and explains why in very practical terms. But I do like a touch of fantasy and a dose of fiction in my science fiction. And whats more fun then taking a crazy pilot strapping him into a bath tub cockpit of a ship with only a huge ole engine and a set of guns. Fighters are cool. Just re-imagine them a little bit and you can easily break away from the WWII battle of midway mind set. My vote is to keep em |
April 18, 2009 - 3:53pm | Can't say I've ever thought of SF fighter combat as looking like something out of WWII. The ranges are too far for that seeing as each hex is a 10,000 km area and fighters are firing a rocket at a target 40,000 km away, while thrusting at 5 to 9 G's every 10 minutes. I don't think a pilot moving that fast is going to try and skim over the hull of an enemy ship, it's going to go by so fast if a pilot gets too close they'll never see that anntena structure that they're about to collide with. Have to accept that if star fighter combat was possible, it's not going to be played out how movies and TV show make it to be. Years ago, and I mean a very long time ago. I drew comics as a hobby and I wanted the fighters to work as SF did, this is where the aliens I created used dispossable ion drives for long range assault scouts. Some people didn't like it that I had fighters exchanging fire beyond visual range, it was almost so that some asked if they're firing at such distances maybe I should just work on what happens in the cockpit and bridge of the ships as the long range fights just seemed to drag it out. It kind of comes across a little like Legend of Galactic Heroes some what, only with even the fighters are fighting at least 10,000 km away from each other. When you think about it, a clear canopy on a SF fighter isn't even needed. Except maybe for take offs and landings. In every age, in every place, the deeds of men remain the same. |
April 18, 2009 - 5:37pm | Can't say I've ever thought of SF fighter combat as looking like something out of WWII. The ranges are too far for that seeing as each hex is a 10,000 km area and fighters are firing a rocket at a target 40,000 km away, while thrusting at 5 to 9 G's every 10 minutes. I don't think a pilot moving that fast is going to try and skim over the hull of an enemy ship, it's going to go by so fast if a pilot gets too close they'll never see that anntena structure that they're about to collide with. Those kind of vectors, it's going to be a single, high-speed pass, as the fighters unload their birds, and fire their guns at their assigned targets, as they streak past them. Electronics and guidance will usually help them in hitting, but they will only get one shot at taking out any given target(and that target will only have one shot in taking them out), before thrusting well clear of the combat, decelerating for either another pass(unlikely)or a return to base to be rearmed, refuelled and refitted. Have to accept that if star fighter combat was possible, it's not going to be played out how movies and TV show make it to be. That's given...if anything, it'll be more Babylon 5 and less Star Wars. Years ago, and I mean a very long time ago. I drew comics as a hobby and I wanted the fighters to work as SF did, this is where the aliens I created used dispossable ion drives for long range assault scouts. Some people didn't like it that I had fighters exchanging fire beyond visual range, it was almost so that some asked if they're firing at such distances maybe I should just work on what happens in the cockpit and bridge of the ships as the long range fights just seemed to drag it out. It kind of comes across a little like Legend of Galactic Heroes some what, only with even the fighters are fighting at least 10,000 km away from each other. When you think about it, a clear canopy on a SF fighter isn't even needed. Except maybe for take offs and landings Inertia will ensure fighters will have clear canopies for a long time to come. Love to see copies of your comics, if you still have them lying round. "You're everything that's base in humanity," Cochrane continued. "Drawing up strict, senseless rules for the sole reason of putting you at the top and excluding anyone you say doesn't belong or fit in, for no other reason than just because you say so." —Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stephens, Federation |
