Andy: Your theory assumes the static model, i.e., that the enemy does nothing until you are ready. The enemy, knowing what that base means and how vulnerable it is during construction, WILL destroy it before it is ready, and consequently, you won't build it in the first place.

Bombers are (99% of the time) elements of PDUs and PDU-bombers have virtually no offensive function, role, or mission. The Federation had some special bomber units it tried to use just for this purpose, and found them horrendously ineffective because by the time a base was built (assuming it could be built and that the enemy didn't just destroy it) the enemy had gone away. Andy's theory posits that a huge starship battle was held over some crappy planet just to prevent/create a bomber base there. Nobody is going to fight a major fleet battle just so he can control a rock long enough to build a bomber base. You might as well fight the battle at this target that bombers are supposed to attack.

WILL YOU GUYS JUST GET THE HECK OVER TRYING TO USE BOMBERS OFFENSIVELY?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 05:46 pm: Edit

SVC:

Aw heck, Bombers are such neat & spiffy toys, people just want to use them!

Sorta like that old song from the 80's.... "Gamers just want to have fun!" (please pardon the paraphrase!

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 06:13 pm: Edit

'WILL YOU GUYS JUST GET THE HECK OVER TRYING TO USE BOMBERS OFFENSIVELY? '

Just wait until they start talking about putting the type-H drone on heavy and/or superheavy (aka 'bombers') fighters.

You KNOW its going to happen.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 06:59 pm: Edit

After all, a type-H drone is just a three-space drone.

Hey! It's "three spaces". Maybe it could fit in the bay of a F-111 ...

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:07 pm: Edit

"Hey! Its 'three spaces'. Maybe it could fit in the bay of a F-111 ..."

Coincidence?

I think not!

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:12 pm: Edit

"Hey! Its 'three spaces'. Maybe it could fit in the bay of a F-111 ..."

Coincidence?

I think not!



(now, if you could fit each F-111 with a drogue(or two!), each holding a type H drone, then you would have something!

Bombers? who needs bombers with F-111's hauling 3 type H drones each!



Its a joke, I tell you! A JOKE!

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:16 pm: Edit

I just want to see the Klingons make a little cockpit to attach to an H-Drone just big enough to fit a Vergaian in.

Of course you'd have to make a remote abort switch and hold their children hostage to make sure they didn't turn back on the launcher. Once within the target hex the drones computer takes over and boom!


NOw back to our regualarly scheduled Heavy Fighter debate and design bee.

By Richard Sherman (Rich) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:24 pm: Edit

SVC:

Bombers.

Type H drones.

If you create them, they will come.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:28 pm: Edit

I could see an FB-111 4-space bay being fit with a Type-H drone.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:40 pm: Edit

I don't think that makes much sense. Currently, ships can only use Type-H drones from a drogue. And that requires them to be at speed-12 or less. If you can build a fighter or bomber that can launch Type-H drones, why couldn't you build a ships that could launch them while moving at high speed?

There has been occasional discussion of a "Silo Ship" that could carry and launch Type-Hs internally from a "silo". If that concept ever receives official approval and Silo Ships are published, then I could believe that a heavy fighter or bomber might be able to use Type-Hs. But with the current restrictions on ships using those drones, it doesn't seem to me that a fighter ot bomber-carried Type-H passes the "common sense test".

Just my .02 quatloos worth.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 09:21 pm: Edit

Who said a bomber moving faster than speed 12 can launch a Type-H?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Who said "a" bomber?!?

If those things could launch Type-H drones, it would be in squadron strength... and with Fed third way rules, that could mean up to 4 squadrons.

Other than against the Andromedan or the Xorkians I would almost hate to see it in use.

By Michael Powers (Mtpowers) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 09:40 pm: Edit

Odd, I thought I posted.

Anyway, see my 'KB-22' proposal.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 10:06 pm: Edit

Tos,

But in your 08:28 pm post you said nothing whatsoever about a speed restriction on the FB-111.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 10:15 pm: Edit

I find it more likely that the Type-H-Drone would launch a fighter.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 10:26 pm: Edit

What about a type -H drone Swordfish variant (possibly with a onboard power plant able to continually power a phaser 3 (atleast until the drone is destroyed or exceeds its endurance?)

a kind of "mizia-Drone" as it were

By Mike Strain (Evilmike) on Friday, April 20, 2007 - 08:52 am: Edit

I thought those were called remote-controlled fighters..

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Friday, April 20, 2007 - 09:25 am: Edit

They would be, if we built a ship that could recover the type H swordfish drones for re use!

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Friday, April 20, 2007 - 10:35 am: Edit

NOTE TO MYSELF, WHEN WE DO J3, INCLUDE THE F6V.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, April 20, 2007 - 10:55 am: Edit

Now you see guys, we've made progress.

J3 has just progressed from "Someday maybe, don't really see a need" to "When we do J3".




I know, I might be reading too much into something.

But OK, IF J3 get done it will likely be done AFTER X1R which is perfect because we can address the X1 Era fighters in J3 and move them out of X1R. X1R can develope the history and after that it can be decided exactly how fighters will fit into that era and present the result in J3.

By Charles Gray (Cgray45) on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 09:05 pm: Edit

Bombers with Type H drones-- I don't know.

I think there is a stragetic problem here-- bombers have been in some of the fluff used as an explination as to why so many offensives in the GW "petered out".
But equally, the more powrful you make them, the harder it is to explain the much more limited fleets making ANY headway, and Fast Type H drones in any numgers on a mobile platform-- well I think that would be going a bit far.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 10:25 pm: Edit

I think H-Drones are more likely to strap on a fighter than the other way around. At best I could see a Fi-Con sort of thing but then if ships can't do it then a PF certainly can't. If a PF can't then how could a shuttle (which is what a Bomber is) manage it?

Now, you could perhaps mount the Warhead section of a Type-H drone into a heavy fighter bay and then fly the fighter at the target Kamakazi style. But then I think that will fly right after Pigs, Sheep and Cows start getting airborne.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 11:01 pm: Edit

A drogue can fire two of the things and takes up half the space of a heavy fighter. You do the math.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 11:05 pm: Edit

Tos,

But the drogue is tethered, by a special tractor-tether, to a starship which is many times the size of the heavy fighter.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 11:26 pm: Edit

Tos,
do you really think that straight math makes anything in SFB work? Well, OK math will provide the answer but there are a LOT more variables than just Drogue = size one fighter carries two H-Drone so H-drone = 1/2 fighter.

If so then half a fighter is equal to three drone spaces (a type-H drone is three spaces). An F-14D can carry 9 spaces of drones. So an F-14D carries 150% of its mass in drones. A B1 (carries 12 spaces) should then be able to carry two F-18's.

Clearly math isn't the answer since all of the variables aren't in the rule book.