That might work then.

Also, might the Kzinti fighter designs be big enough for Gorns to fit? Kzintis are pretty big, too.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, April 06, 2021 - 10:36 pm: Edit

Just to be clear, i had thought of using Kzinti fighters instead of Fed fighters. What I had NOT thought of is the idea that Fed fighters could not be repurposed into Gorn fighters. So, that makes my above prospective Fed/Gorn fighters as irrelevant and unworkable. Bummer.

Maybe one of the alternatives will be appealing enough ...

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Tuesday, April 06, 2021 - 10:57 pm: Edit

Fighters, can the space for CDS be repurposed for seeking weapon control space?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, April 06, 2021 - 11:12 pm: Edit

I thought Petrick already addressed that in his 6:26 PM post.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Tuesday, April 06, 2021 - 11:40 pm: Edit

Jeff:

ADM raises a legitimate point. The CDS is basically internal. All of the Plasma-D the ship is to launch is external. While some of the internal space is going to be lost making room for the launch rails, there might still be enough space left over for the control systems. Honestly, that could be true of the photon tube, too, though that isn't necessary if the CDS rack provides enough room for the new control systems. This would then be true for the 2-space fighters, too, as both have CDS racks that will be replaced.

They might not get single-space Pl-F fighters out of the this, but that isn't a deal-breaker. If this works, then the G-1/2/3 all work just fine. The G-6 is outta luck, though, as it doesn't have the rack. But, for it, we can probably just handwave it and call it even. Perhaps it had additional space inside because they tried to put in a CDS rack, but failed and never properly reused the space. The G-30/32/40/42 all work fine, too.

Or, again, maybe using Kzinti fighters or going straight to heavy fighters is just cooler. Starting with a cut-rate two-space fighter, then moving on to the G-30/32/40/42 would be cool and different.

By Richard Eitzen (Rbeitzen) on Tuesday, April 06, 2021 - 11:55 pm: Edit

This seems to not be Feds without seeking weapons if you are speaking of foreign built fighters given to the Feds so that they can have seeking weapon fighters.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 12:08 am: Edit

It might also be worth considering how the Cygnan "National Guard" ships in Captain's Log #24 might be affected by the "no drone" setup. Historically, these ships played a key role in the defence of Cygnus during the Second Federation-Kzinti War, albeit at a high cost.

On the one hand, as "obsolete" ships, built by a species with a long (albeit rather one-sided) history with the Kzintis, it might not be a deal-breaker for the Cygnans to go with what they know, at least until they more formally integrate "modern" Federation technology. But on the other hand, if even they are to be under the same "no drone" limitations as more modern hull types in Federation service, how might this best be handled?

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 01:26 am: Edit

No foreign fighters for the Feds. Dead Horse.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 02:44 am: Edit

There is a problem with the Gorns using Kzinti fighters, actually more than one.

Distance, trust, availability, history.

The Kzintis were losing to the Coalition badly and were unlikely to share secrets (fighter drone guidance) much less have fighters they would provide the the Gorns.

The Kzintis signed the treaty with the Federation, but were worried about Federation betrayal. Despite the situation being desperate, they kept a powerful squadron immobilized on the Federation border.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 03:22 am: Edit

SPP posted at 6:26 PM on 6 April

---

Quote:

This brings up a rules question (when moving to the Gorn versions). Star Fleet Battles History establishes that shuttles, generally, cannot provide guidance to seeking weapons. (See Kzinti AS fighter). So there would be no reason to provide such to Federation fighters not armed with any such weapons. So when you hand them off to the Gorns, they would not be any room to install such (they are not designed for seeking weapons and no one would waste the space for a system they do not use).

---

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 03:33 am: Edit

The Feds did not build a non-seeker-fighter with room left over to add guidance. You just don't do that. I think you guys need to take a step back and start over. If the Gorns don't have SW-fighters, what do they have? Plasma bolts?

By Thomas Mathews (Turtle) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 06:27 am: Edit

Could a system needed by Fed fighters but not by Gorn fighters, be replaced by a system needed by Gorn fighters, but not by Fed fighters?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 07:59 am: Edit

Just to play devils advocate, ships without seeking weapons can utilize suicide assault shuttles.

If I recall correctly, such ships have half the number of seeking weapons control channels (which is to say) three SWCC’s.

This came up as an issue during one of the captains log battle force tactical scenarios.

In theory, the first step to developing a Gorn plasma torpedo fighter capability would be a variant on the Kzinti Assault Shuttle, the AS type. No onboard seeking weapons control systems, but did have two drone rails.

Perhaps the first Gorn fighters had no onboard guidance systems. Just the plasma F tube, and such assault fighter shuttles had a single phaser 3, and were deployed on Gorn ships in place of some admin shuttles with a limit of no more than two on any Gorn ship.

Like the AS, these early development Gorn plasma fighters were never deployed in squadrons. No point really, as they require some base, ship, PDU to provide seeking weapon control channels.

Basically the same as if they were using admin shuttles as suicide assault shuttles.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 08:47 am: Edit

If there was to be more than one "no drone Fed" timeline, and if a least one of those were to also be a "Mapsheet P" timeline in which the Gorns are allied with the Inter-Stellar Concordium against the "lost empire" Paravians from Module C6, perhaps the Gorns in such circumstances could import their fighter designs from the ISC instead of from the Federation?

They could still have Skolean pilots flying them, if one assumes that the Fed-Gorn alliance develops when it historically did. Although they might have to take notes from ISC exchange officers when first learning how to operate them.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 11:16 am: Edit

Plasma has an edge in that IIRC it's all potentially self guided. Do the Gorn fighters necessarily need onboard guidance?

Couldn't they just cue the plasma's guidance at launch, and let it home in on its own?

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 12:17 pm: Edit

Ok, the idea of Kzinti fighters is right out. (As a side point, I never suggested the Feds use Kzinti fighters. I suggested the Feds serve as a middleman so that the Gorns buy Kzinti fighters. The Feds always use their own fighters no matter what. I know the idea is dead, but I just wanted to make sure it was clear on exactly what I was suggesting.)

Making the Fed fighters deal with seeking weapons is right out.

I am assuming the idea of focusing on heavy fighters is out.

So ... we need direct-fire fighters for the Gorns. How about this:
They use split fighter arrangements and buy more than just fighters from the Feds: they also buy the CDS. Like with Lyrans or Seltorians with Klingon fighters, they don't use any of the purchased systems on their ships (so the ships are unchanged), but they do use the CDS on their fighters. Their superiority fighters are pretty much unchanged F-series fighters, including the F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, and F-6. (To the point that they probably don't even change their names.) Since the Feds don't even have enough F-11 for themselves, they don't sell any of them.

For assault fighters, how about ... carronades? Their assault fighters are still built around a Pl-F tube, but the fighter tube can't launch a seeking weapon. It can only do one of two things: fire a Pl-F bolt or fire a carronade. Here is the cool thing: At any point an incompletely armed Pl-F warhead can still be loaded into a fighter's tube. It can only be fired as a carronade, but it will use the power level of the warhead to determine the effect.

These assault fighters aren't great, as bolts aren't that great, and the carronade is very short ranged. But, the carronade ability is *great* against cloaked Romulans. So, there's that!

The assault fighters are based on the A-1 through A-4, but they have a Pl-F tube in place of the photon tube. The phasers probably drop to just one Ph-3 because the tube has to be reinforced. These fighters get renamed with the "G-" descriptor.

The heavy fighter based on the F-21 is unchanged; the heavy fighter based on the A-21 replaces the photon tubes with Pl-F tubes, but doesn't lose any phasers.

Would this work? It is working a little outside the box, gives something fun, and only breaks the rule saying that Pl-Fs can't be bolted by fighters. That is gotten around because these fighters are designed to bolt and can't use seeking. The firing tube is fundamentally different and specialized for this function. In theory, the Romulans or ISC could do this, too, but they won't because they don't want to restrict their fighters to only bolting.

And, since these are still fundamentally Federation fighters, the Skoleans are still in play as foreign pilots.

Oh, one more point:

---

Quote:

Plasma has an edge in that IIRC it's all potentially self guided. Do the Gorn fighters necessarily need onboard guidance?

Couldn't they just cue the plasma's guidance at launch, and let it home in on its own?

---

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 02:01 pm: Edit

Existing Rules on fighters using bolts prohibit them doing so:

(FP2.42) FIGHTERS: Fighters carrying plasma-F torpedoes are unable to arm these weapons themselves. See (J4.86) for reload instructions.

(FP8.23) FIGHTERS: The type-F and type-D plasma torpedoes carried by fighters (J4.86) cannot be fired as bolts. The small frame of the fighter could not stand the shock. Note that this rule includes plasma-armed MRS shuttles.

(FP9.37) NO BOLT ON FIGHTERS: Type-D torpedoes mounted on fighters and MRS shuttles cannot be bolted (FP8.23).

(J4.864) No fighter can fire a plasma bolt (FP8.23).

Carronades are not allowed to be fired by plasma-F armed fighters by existing rule:

(FP14.15) SIZE CLASS RESTRICTIONS: Fighters and other size-6 units armed with plasma-Fs cannot use the Carronade firing option. PFs and Interceptors can use the Carronade option but this counts as a "launch" for the firing rate limit, i.e., a Gorn PF could use this option as its two allowed plasma shots in a turn (K1.543).

Self-Guided Seeking Weapons (plasma torpedoes are included in that category) can be launched at targets that are at least five hexes away (D19.221), but the Launching unit MUST be on Passive Fire Control (D19.224).

Converting Fed Fighters to be Gorn Fighters. Essentially, there is a problem with "hard points." Fighters (whether in the modern world or in the fictional Star Fleet Universe) have a limited number of these. You cannot simply keep adding drone rails or other external ordinance (yes, the "C" refit or other upgrades essentially did this, but it can only be done within the limits of the air/space frame). Converting a Federation F-8 to a Gorn G-8 is accomplished because a Federation Drone and a Gorn plasma-D are both about the same size and weight and there is little difference beyond the capabilities of the two weapons. Converting a proposed Federation F-6 to a Gorn G-6, REQUIRES that you install seeking weapon control on the fighter, And the two CDSS are the only hardpoints to add plasmas so it pretty much cannot be done. Further, the existing Federation Fighters converted to Gorn Technology LOSE their ADD racks So I do not see a route to replacing the CDS racks with plasma torpedoes or any type (that is just me) without a major redesign/rebuild which means the Gorns may as well start from scratch to build fighters.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 02:32 pm: Edit

I know there are rules that prevent bolting and carronade in fighters. It is acknowledged that this would have to allow for a change, and without that change it can't happen. The two questions when considering that are:
1) Is there a way that can make it work?
2) Is there a way to prevent anyone else from doing it?

What I am trying to do is say that the state a Gorn fighter's Pl-F is stored in is fundamentally different that for a seeking plasma. Rather than doing whatever is required to make a seeking warhead into a bolt, the idea is to say that the warhead is already been made into a bolt and "frozen" until fired. This would get around both issues because it would be defining that the "shocking" part is the conversion of a seeker into a bolt. By making the "shocking" part happen prior to loading on the fighter means we completely avoid the limiting issue. The huge bonus is that this means any fighter with seeking plasma *still* can't bolt. And for them to have bolting fighters would require them to sacrifice their seeking plasma fighters. Which they won't do. So, it solves both issues with one piece of technobabble.

The question is if that piece of technobabble fits the understood question of fighter plasma technology, and I can't answer that. I can only bring it up, and Steve or Steve has to answer whether it could work in their universe.

As a worse alternative, we can just define a brand new plasma-based weapon that *just* so happens to work *exactly* like a bolted Pl-F, but it isn't a bolted Pl-F. That's a super-cheesy solution, but it is always possible. I do like the idea of a Gorn fighter able to fire a carronade, though.

I do want to call out a point of order, however: The conversion of the F-6 is perfectly fine. I did not do that in a vacuum. If you take a look at the F-20, it has two type-VI drone racks. If you look at the G-20, it has two plasma-D torpedoes. The rest of the fighter is unchanged. That means, if you really, really, really want to, you can stick a "full" seeker on a "light" rail in some cases, and specifically in this case. Since this happened for the F-20/G-20, having it happen on the F-6/G-6 is completely fair game since the F-6 is just an F-20 with RALAD and the G-20 and G-6 are the same fighter. (Only focusing on the mounts. Obviously, the whole "no control for seeking weapons" is still an issue.)

Yes, your overall point is completely valid. And, with the exception of the F-6/G-6 I didn't violate that stricture. The only time I violated it was with the F-6/A-6, and I did so because the F-20/G-20 had already violated it in the published game.

By Mike West (Mjwest) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 02:44 pm: Edit

Posted separately to keep them from flowing together.

Assuming that the "no seeking weapons" is a very hard limit (which means my first set of Pl-D/Pl-F based fighters are off the board) and assuming that bolt/carronade for fighters is a hard no (irrespective of technobabble), then we are reduced to the following:

The Gorns simply use unaltered Federation superiority fighters. They use the F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, F-6, and F-21 straight up with Skolean pilots/crews. (Including on the F-21, as it is just the unmodified Federation fighter.) They do not have any assault fighters and any carriers that would have carried assault fighters in the main history would instead simply carry all superiority fighters. While the fighters make use of CDS, the carriers and escorts do not. They continue to use Pl-D and never convert to use ship CDS racks.

I want to note that the *bombers* (used in this alternative) are home-grown anyway, and can remain unchanged and actually use seeking weapons. They bought and/or converted absolutely no Federation bombers.

This, while fairly boring, works pretty well. Honestly, Pl-D fighters really aren't that great, and the 4-shot CDS can actually do some damage to other fighters. It means they are nearly worthless as a threat to ships, but they also become slightly better at their primary job of fighting other fighters (and can help break up enemy plasma waves).

Would *this* work for Gorn fighters?

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 02:59 pm: Edit

Mike West:

I am afraid that the "shock" part is the actual firing of the energy. Rule (FP8.0) "The electro-mechanical procedure for firing in this mode is to detonate the torpedo in the launch tube and release the energy in a specific direction." The violent discharge of the energy as opposed to the comparatively 'soft' shock of "launching" of the energy. If you can fire a plasma-F bolt simply because it was "frozen," which by definition ALL PLASMA-F TORPEDOES ON FIGHTERS ARE, then by definition you could fire an overloaded disruptor from a Klingon Z-D or Kzinti DAS. Your whole concept is simply opening up a can of worms that you are going to fix by hand waving that "only plasma torpedoes could be used this way" and the Hydrans are going to say "why can't we use this non-shocking technology to allow our Hellbore fighters to carry and fire fully overloaded hellbores?"

As to your point of order. Note that the F-20 had two type-VI drones AND a DRONE CONTROL Ability, and I am pointing out that in your conversion you Convert the CS(S) to plasma on a fighter THAT HAS NO DRONE CONTROL ABILITY in Federation service and has no design space to ADD such capability. You missed the issue even though you mentioned it. So it IS NOT FAIR GAME. You are taking a fighter which you stripped of drone control (there is no reason to build it in if the fighter is only direct-fire) and claiming it is a fair comparison when the lack of drone control or room to add such capability IS the issue.

I will add that the F-20/G-20 has been in the game since the Mid 1980s. And plasma-Ks were added to the game in the Mid 1990s (if memory serves) and had plasma-Ks been thought of the G-20 might (I will not say would definitely) have been armed with them. Further, the eventual F-20C says that the Gorns simply got there before the Federation.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 05:41 pm: Edit

Gorns historically purchased fighter technology from the Federation “shrink wrapped” and preloaded on pallets.

They effectively paid nothing for Research and Development.

One could argue that they reaped the benefits, and left the Federation taxpayers holding the empty wallet.

Now, as part of Mike West’s “No Drone Feds” proposal, he is arguing that the Gorns adopt the “No Drone” fighters in the same way it was historically done. That means, any Gorn seeking weapon using fighter has to comply with the published rule concerning plasma torpedoes as well as respecting the laws of physics in as far as the ability to with stand the shock of rule(FP8.0) as stated by SPP in the post just above this.

Having had fought this battle before several times in several different proposals, I have to say that this is not advantageous ground to fight this battle.

You are in Petrick’s kill zone.

As SVC stated in his April 7, 2021 03:33 am post “take a step back and start over.”

Build a Gorn Fighter R&D program that makes Gorns emphasize seeking Weapon fighter shuttle based weapons.

Yes, it’s only tangentially related to “No Drone” Feds... but it should keep the Gorns at about the same place technology-wise.

My recommendation is to separate the topic of Gorn fighter technology from the “No Drones Feds” thread, by creating a new topic and copying any relevant posts to it.

Then we can concentrate on Mikes main proposal here with less distraction.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 05:52 pm: Edit

Maybe Jeff is right and this should be a different topic, but I'm just not seeing the fatal disadvantage to the Gorn in a no on board guidance Plasma-F assault shuttle.

Say a squadron has 8 superiority and 4 Plasma-F shuttles. At range 5+ you fire on passive and let your plasma pick its targets. At range 4 or less, you go active so your phaser can add it's little bit, and you launch and hand over to the carrier the same as the original AS did, the carrier probably doesn't mind using AT MOST 4 of its 6 control channels for a short range plasma F.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 06:10 pm: Edit

Jeff Wile:

In creating a no-drones Federation, the Gorn fighters are a relevant part of the history. It is an old conundrum that if you change something (such as the famous Kill Baby Hitler to Prevent World War II), something else happens (such as the Russians occupy Europe as a disarmed Germany cannot resist them and steamroll over everyone else). Not the best example, I admit (because I cannot prove theses without really inventing a time machine and going back and .... well perhaps I will only kidnap the child ... what could happen?). But if Mike is changing history to have no drones Feds, then part of the fall out is Gorn Fighters.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 06:17 pm: Edit

Douglas Lampert:

Really? Are you also fortetting all the plasma-Ds which also cannot be controlled by the fighters? Those 8 superiority fighters in theory have plasma-Ds.

By Douglas Lampert (Dlampert) on Wednesday, April 07, 2021 - 06:20 pm: Edit

Steve Petrick,

I'm assuming the superiority fighters are the unchanged Fed fighters and use the CDS rather than plasma D.

Hence only the assault fighters have seeking weapons.