Proposal: Additional information was found on the Air Force tapes that documented a limited production ship with special sensors and 2 squadrons of single space fighter or 12 fighters and 6 PFs converted from an empire's heavy carrier or space control ship. These ships were generically called special heavy carriers and were used starting around Y195 as RTN hunters. Calling these ships special heavy carriers (SHC) created confusion as the Romulans built a special heavy cruiser also called an SHC. In fact special heavy carrier was a generic term used to describe a class of ships some empires built. Adding to the confusion is each empire called these ships by different names.

Background: In X1R page 30, three epochs for X-ships are explained. The first was the X-raid epoch. X-carriers and X-PF tenders (gunboats) were built. During the second epoch or "defensive x-ship epoch" the X-carriers and X-PF tenders were as fast as any X-ship but arrived with more combat power because of their attrition units (heavy fighters and gunboats). The third epoch is the RTN hunting Epoch. Only ships with special sensors operating solo could successfully find RTN nodes. Some of the RTN hunters did not survive which included some X-ships.

Division Control Ships (DCS) were excellent RTN hunters. Their only limitation was this class of ship gave up its heavy weapons to make space to carry the large number of attrition units. Federation Ship Master Starship book (R2.133) and Romulan Master Starship Book (R4.127).

Only a size class 2 or Dreadnought based ship with two special sensors can carry more attrition units than a sized class 3 X-ship with special sensors. They also retain their heavy weapons unlike the DCS class . I suggest that an empires CVA or SCS be used as the base hull for a RTN Hunter.

Examples: the Klingon C8S has 12 fighters and 6 gunboats. The Klingon version would be built on a C10 hull losing some phaser-1s for two special sensors. The Federation would use the CVA. The drones in the saucer would be moved to a gun house like the Kirov class heavy Battlecruiser. The two special sensors would be installed in the vacant space.

Historical information: In Module R7 is scenario (SH208) set in Y189. The Federation DNH Trusteeship attacks an Andromedan Satellite (Sat) base with a Cobra acting as a defender. Andromedan reinforcements were a Conquistador with a Cobra. The outcome was the Sat base was destroyed and the Trusteeship was crippled.

Module J2 introduced mobile weapons platform (MWP) and for the Sat base a MWP platform hangar (holds six MWPs). In Module R11 the Concretor monitor with 6 MWP and the Immobilator with 12 MWP were introduced. The Concretor was encountered defending bases in both the Alpha and Omega sectors. There were conflicting reports of Immobilator being encountered in the Alpha and Omega sectors. R11 page 31. Module R8 introduced the gun sled and the mobile operations sled (MOS). The MOS can have a MWP platform hangar.

Captain's Log # 49 has a superb article by Gary Carney titled "A Brief History of the Andromedan War". On pages 9 and 10 detail the discovery of the RTN nodes and violent and bloody attempts by the Andromedans to maintain their tyranny. The X-carriers and X-PF tenders were the main ships used. This proposal adds at most a handful of ships.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 01:37 pm: Edit

By 24 factors of attrition units do you mean four squadrons? That sounds like too many to easily fit on a DN hull. The closest equivalent would be the Hydran IC which falls short of that number of attrition units (even with the sacrifice of its heavy weapons).

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 01:57 pm: Edit

I edited that sentence. Is it clear now?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 02:54 pm: Edit

So... just to check.

In the case of the Federation CVA (DN hull) that starts with 1 F-14 squadron of single space fighters, and a second squadron of single space Assault fighters (A-10) would be refitted to carry 2 special sensors.

The Federation SCS (converted from the CVA) would have 1 squadron of F-14 and a assault heavy fighter squadron of A-20, and be refitted to carry 2 special sensors.

In a third option, if the federation third way rule is not in use, (optional rule where 2 space heavy fighters are replaced by conjectural PFs) the modified SCS would still have 1 squadron of single space F-14, and a PF flotilla of conjectural PFs, and also get a 2 special sensor Refit?

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 03:23 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I think the Federation SCS represents the maximum number of fighters that can be carried. You could remove 12 F-18s for 2 special sensors.

What I am trying to do is define a new class and the parameters or limits for that new class. After the parameters are set then specific ships can be be suggested.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 05:00 pm: Edit

Jeff,

Did I answer your question?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 06:42 pm: Edit

Yes and no.

12 f-18 shuttle fighter boxes is still 12 SSD boxes.

I can wait until the time is right to talk about details.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 06:57 pm: Edit

Generally, special sensors replace heavy weapons over phasers, probably due to power requirements.

I think given the proposed time period of operations that if not operating PFs these ships would operate a squadron of heavy fighters in addition to a single squadron of single space fighters.

While I could see the class considered for conversion from existing CVAs or SCSs I don't think new hulls would be built in this time period. Such ships were very expensive compared to an X-cruiser or the slightly less capable BCSs and DN hull production had been generally replaced by advanced technology cruisers in this time period.

In a strategic sense, X-ships had capabilities that were much better than non x-ships, they have a longer range and count as two SEQs in an F&E sense. This would generally make it preferable to build CXs in your DN production slots and use existing non-advanced tech hulls for attrition unit ships (or advanced tech ships carrying PF flotillas or fighter squadrons).

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 07:43 pm: Edit

Firstly, thank you kindly for your comment regarding the Andromedan War article in Captain's Log #49.

The concept of Size lass 2 RTN-hunters most recently popped up over in the Stellar Shadows #3 discussion.

Also, I once proposed converting the Federation DNL Star Lion into an RTN hunter.

-----

On the one hand, it is relatively easier to deploy such variants on hulls which are themselves modular in nature, or which have a tug-and-pod capacity that allows for a similar degree of mission flexibility.

In the Alpha Octant, one could think of the "REDHawk" configuration for the DemonHawk Modular Dreadnought - which equips a pair of SparrowHawk-E modules and a SkyHawk-C module, all while retaining the full firepower of the base hull. It's one of many reasons why I wish that hull type had been the historical Hawk-series DN instead of the Condor. But alas...

(Actually, has anyone ever proposed a DemonHawk-esque modular battleship for the Romulans?)

Also, one could in theory assign a suitable set of pods to the "lost empire" Paravian Raid Mothership and Battleship Raid Mothership from SFB Module C6, though I wonder if it would be best for those Paravians to keep any such variants aside for use in Operation Unity.

In the Iridani Cluster, the locals can consider certain anti-RTN module configurations for those Brigantine dreadnoughts and Man-O-War battleships which survived the Grand Quest, or for any new ones they might have considered building once their home fleet yards were made fully operational again in Y208. Although of these Size Class 2 hull types, only a Brigantine may equip the PF tender module from Module Omega #5.

In the Omega Octant proper, the Zosmans are noted as deploying a "Godfather" Dreadnought; no SSD has yet been drawn up for it, though Bruce Graw suggested it have six modules back in his Omega's Lost Futures article in Captain's Log #36.

While the Bolosco Mercenary Dreadnought could use a suitable combination of light pods to carry out this mission. However, it's not yet known if any of those hulls survived the fall of Bolosco home space to the Souldra in Y191.

-----

On the other hand, fielding historical non-modular Size Class 2 RTN hunters is a more complicated task.

The best example of this in the Alpha Octant is the Kzinti Super Space Control Ship Goliath. Yet the Hegemony was in no hurry to convert any of their other surviving dreadnoughts to this configuration.

Also, while not a Size Class 2 unit, it's noted that the proposed Ranger-class Battlecruiser in Captain's Log #48 - which would have placed a pair of special sensors in the "gun house" of the Federation BC - was not historically carried out, as none of the hulls of that type in service could be removed from their duties to be so converted in the time when it would have made a difference either way.

-----

But by and large, it would appear that the historical onus in the Alpha Octant would have been on "X-raiders" like the Federation GVX and the Romulan FireHawk-EX, and on those advanced technology heavy war destroyers assigned the appropriate configurations*, to stand at the vanguard of this critical RTN-hunting mission.

Or to put it another way, if other (non-modular) Size Class 2 RTN-hunters are to be made to exist historically, well and good - but if the Goliath is to remain one of a kind in that regard, fair enough.

At least in the "standard" timeline. Perhaps in the "dark future" timeline, things went somewhat differently... if only as a sign of desperation at how badly things were going by the time the RTN was uncovered in that alternate course of events.


*For the Federation HDWX, this would be a pair of special sensors in the RA OPT mounts, a set of four cargo boxes swapped in for the AWR* boxes, and fighter mech-links in the NWO boxes so as to deploy a "short squadron" of four F-111s; this is proposed as the "-Z" configuration in Federation and Empire terms. For other empires' HDWXs - and for the Fed HDWX from alt-Y198 onwards over in the "dark future" timeline - this would be the PF tender configuration outlined in (G33.46).

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 09:44 pm: Edit

In the Federation Master Ship book (R2.32)George Washington was complete Y186, the Napoleon Y190, and Julius Caesar was converted during the Andromedan war."The intention was to create a space control ship-class vessel with resorting to the construction of fast patrol ship (K0.0)".

In G3 The earliest date fro a SCS is year 179 (Klingon and Lyran). Dates for the SCS range from Y179 to Y186.

Problems with my proposal: The first issue is the year in service is to late; second issue you need an SC2 hull available; third issue is in Y 186 no one new of the RTN; fouth issue is once the RTN is discovered X-ship are used to hunt for RTN nodes.

So I alter my proposal to be a heavy division control ship-class (HDCS). The Federation was pleased with the performance of the DCS class ships. The Federation used the damaged Zhukov and converted it into the HDCS with a new NCC number and name. Only modification were to move the saucer drone racks to a gun house and replace the racks with special sensors. YIS is 184. The Federation recognized the HDCS was inferior to the the other empires SCSs. So they designed the superior SCS class.

This being a ship class proposal the very important historical aspects of the Andromedan war as told through scenarios would be fun to discuss. Anyone is welcome to e-mail me (address is in my profile).

By Jeff Anderson (Jga) on Wednesday, April 29, 2020 - 10:01 pm: Edit

Some time ago, I proposed an idea of "Supercarriers and Theater Control Ships" that, at least to me, sounds similar in some respects to these ships.

An example of the basic type would be a Lyran ship. Imagine doing a trimaran conversion of their Interdiction Carrier (R11.68). Basically, the same middle hull that's used to convert their standard CA to a DN, except that, in this case, the weapon mounts on the center warp engine hold Special Sensors instead of Disruptors.

This ship sacrafices all its heavy weapons in order to field two standard squadrons of fighters (or a double sized squadron?) AND a full flotilla of Gunboats.

Is this the sort of thing you've proposed, or am I totally off base?

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 12:15 am: Edit

No not off base. I opened the topic with a proposal to discuss. That is the fun of the BBS.

Your idea is different in that the Lyran ship has no disrupters (heavy weapons).

The Gorns have the space patrol ship with 2 flotillas of PFs (module R12).

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 10:38 am: Edit

I don't think you get to add two special sensors without removing anything (Feds did not adopt deckhouse weapons). If you do replace something, it will probably have to be photon torpedoes, or if you run out of photon torpedoes to replace, phasers.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 11:15 am: Edit

Richard,

The "Ranger" class^* that Gary Carney mentions in his 7:43 PM post from 29 April has the two special sensors in the "option mounts" (yes, I know they're not really option mounts in the Orion sense) that are drone racks in the BCG, Type-F plasma in the in the BCF, or photon torpedoes (with shock) in the BCJ. The Ranger was an "Unbuilt Variant" but I don't believe there was any technological impediment to building it.


^*Personally, I always thought it should be made a "real" ship (either Unique or LP2) rather than an Unbuilt Variant. Even better, it should have been based on the BCV or BCS rather than the straight-up battlecruiser. Such a ship would have been a formidable RTN Hunter and, since it had the same CR10 as a standard BCG, BCV, or BCS, would have been just as capable of commanding a full battle fleet if that's what the strategic situation called for.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 11:41 am: Edit

I like this idea, in general. I think there should be more SC2 RTN Hunters besides the Kzinti SSCS. The advantages of a ship that could find RTN nodes and take them out by themselves (with their attrition units), or which could survive Andromedan attempts to hunt down the RTN hunters, would have been very valuable, I think.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 12:32 pm: Edit

This could be the core ships of a future R module concerning the Andromedan invasion/RTN hunt campaign.

Might even make a good Rule U campaign for the said HDCS (heavy division control ship).

Just an opinion, but instead of making major changes to the SSD of the DCS class ships (deleting 12 fighter shuttle ssd boxes) just use a gun house to mount the special sensors. (That would work for the Federation, possibly for the Klingons as well.) the other empires might have to be a case by case decision process.

I suggest that the flight groups (as in what fighters, heavy fighters Or in the case Of those empires other than the Federation who do use PFs, PFs that are assigned.)

One thing that might make this a little more different from the original DCS published ships might be a combat reform of the flight groups composition.

Given that RTN hunters do not operate with escort ships, that means the HDCS goes into combat solo. Also Given the fact that the Andromedans are somewhat different from the empires in that they do not use fighters, drones, plasma torpedos, shields, heavy fighters or PFs... would it make tactical sense to reduce the number of electronic warfare fighters in the fighter squadrons?

The carrier already has the ability to lend ECM points to the fighters. Fighters have a ceiling on how much EW factors can be lent to them. In the case of the Federation, they have SWACs available. Perhaps in non Federation empires DCS ships could normally have a MRS assigned for RTN hunting duty?

For empires other than the Federation, by the same token, PF flotillas might benefit more if they lose the PF scout and add another “shooter” PF?

This would make the SSDs visually different from the vanilla DCS ships that are already in the game.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 01:06 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I'm dubious that eliminating EW fighters or PF Scouts to increase the number of "shooters" is a good idea. Yes, the carrier or tender could lend EW to the fighter squadron or PF flotilla, but it COSTS POWER, power the ship itself will have need of for other purposes if it is battling Andromedans.

What does "the fact that the Andromedans are somewhat different from the empires in that they do not use fighters, drones, plasma torpedos, shields, heavy fighters or PFs..." have to do with it? The attrition units will still want EW support and the carrier/tender would still need to spend power (maybe A LOT of power - lending maximum EW to both a fighter squadron and a PF flotilla would cost 13 points; six for the fighters, one to power the Special Sensor to lend to the PFs, six for the actual lending to the flotilla) that won't be available for the RTN hunter's own weapons, shields, movement, or EW.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 01:12 pm: Edit

The reason given in the Fed Master Ship Book was the Admiral were unwilling to give up a hull during the RTN hunting phase.

Fot this proposed class to work the ships need to be built for a late general/ISC pacification role. That is why I suggested a HDCS. There has to be a defined mission for this ship during that time frame.

Please note the examples I am using are straw man ideas not a full SSD proposal.

I think these ships fit in a future Module J3. Last night I looked through Annex G3. There around 8 CHV that listed as future. There is the Federation DVA and Klingon C10V. Add the Andromedan invasion/RTN hunt campaign. There likely other items that exist as proposal that might become a real.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 03:00 pm: Edit

Despite how the R-section entry tells it, I have doubts as to how effective a division control ship might be in the RTN-hunting role.

The most effective RTN-hunters are those which are able to use their attrition units to augment the ship's own firepower. While a Federation GSX is effective in this role, the GVX is more so because it makes room for its F-111s wile retaining the full firepower of the "standard" GSX. (Well, the GVX was built before any of the GSXs, but is considered to be a variant of that hull type nonetheless.)

In contrast, those X-raiders in Module X1R which either have no heavy weapons of their own, or which have weapons that are restricted by the size class of the base hull, might struggle to carry out this mission. For example, the ISC PFTX packs ten phaser-1Xs, two forward-mounted plasma-M torps, and two pairs of aft-launching plasma-Ls; whereas the ISC HDDX has only six phaser-1Xs, two forward-mounted plasma-Ls, one L+LR L-torp, and one R+RR torp - and has to use its RA OPT mounts to carry special sensors in order to serve as an RTN-hunter. Despite having the same Move Cost, the PFTX enjoys the benefits of being a Size Class 3 hull, in terms of being able to make use of the plasma-M torpedo.

Typically, a DCS would make room for its fighters and/or PFs in part by swapping out the base hull's heavy weapons. This might risk putting to much onus on the attrition units to keep the ship alive, rather than enabling the base hull to contribute to the battle. Contrast this to the aforementioned BCS, which retains much more of the BC's intrinsic firepower, even if it only has a half-squadron of size-1 fighters.

Which, if so, might mean that, if a given empire was to look at following the example of the Kzinti SSCS Goliath, they might express this by using a different term. (If "Super Space Control Ship" were to remain a one-off designation, perhaps "Campaign Control Ship" or some such?)

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 03:05 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

The reason given in the Fed Master Ship Book was the Admiral were unwilling to give up a hull during the RTN hunting phase.

---

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 04:14 pm: Edit

Alan, I was just trying to point to a possible alternative attrition unit deployment without inventing any new fighters or variants of existing units.

I could have suggested that single space fighters on the HDSC be changed to mega fighters, for example. I guess there may be other things might also work.

As far as electronic warfare for fighters or PFs go, the biggest advantage still lies in how drones interact with the Andromedan power absorbers. Once the drones are launched, the existing rules dictate how they interact in the sequence of play, How the drones move, and how they interact with the rules on Electronic Warfare.

I guess what I should have stated is that the attrition units are best used as drone launchers. Yes, they could close to direct weapons fire range but it’s more important to build a big enough drone wall that the Target does not close with the HDSC. (Yes, I know this only applies to drone using empires like the Federation,Klingon,Kzinti,Lyran (well, technically...), Wyn, Orion.). It may be true to a lesser extent for plasma races.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 04:18 pm: Edit

The proposed SC2 heavy division control ship retains its heavy weapons and has a larger number of fighters and PFs than an PFTX. Compare the Klingon C8S to the ISC PFTX. An SC2 RTN hunter is superior to an SC3 X-ship RTN hunter on a one to one basis except for strategic movement.

The DCS class had a hard time surviving once they found a sat base. I agree on the Ranger class.

My view is as the as you approach the each entry point from the LMC in the the Alpha Octant the Andromedan resistance will increase. RTN hunters will start encountering monitors and great numbers of support units.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 04:54 pm: Edit

Since an SC2 RTN hunter needs Special Sensors, it probably can't keep all its heavy weapons. But consider the following as a hypothetical Klingon heavy RTN hunter. Start with the C8S. Replace the two disruptors on the center warp engine with Special Sensors. The ship's own integral firepower is now heavy cruise-level. But it still has dreadnought-level shields and durability. It's a formidable warship in its own right, carries a full Z-YC squadron and a full G-1 flotilla, and can find RTN nodes. This hypothetical ship would not match the Kzinti SSCS. But it would still be in the top tier of RTN hunters. The modifications to the existing C8S are sufficiently minor that it could probably be converted fairly quickly. And it has the command facilities of a C8S so could serve as a fleet flagship, if that's what the situation called for and no other CR10 ship were readily available.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 05:03 pm: Edit

The SSCS Goliath carried 2 flotillas of PF and 12 fighters, 4 special sensors, and all the phasers and disruptors of the SCS. Drone racks were increased by 2 G-racks.

The Gorn space patrol ship carried 2 flotillas of PFs ((YIS 184) (It is in module R12. 1xplasma r, 2xplasm S, 2xplasma F, 10 phaser 1s)). It was destroyed fighting an Andromedan squadron.

These are the only two ships I am aware of that has 12 PFs and the combat power of a DNH.

By Joe Carlson (Jrc) on Thursday, April 30, 2020 - 05:11 pm: Edit

I think a Federation version would be a converted CVA that approaches the fighter load of the SCS. Eliminate 4 F18 shuttle boxes (leaving 8 F18s) and replace with 4 special sensors.