Deepcrush wrote:The richer core worlds could pay out several ISDs per year. A world like Kuat that runs a shipyard so massive that it wraps around the planet could pay out an SSD with simple ease.
Depends what sort of SSD you're talking about. A smaller one, sure, but an Executor would represent a substantial investment even for them, albeit one that could be managed without much difficulty.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Deepcrush wrote:If Kuat put their minds into an SSD rather then ISDs I don't think it would matter what make or model.
Given that the smallest SSDs are only a few times the size of an ISD, I rather think it would matter. Nonetheless, I agree that Executors are well within the means of the Kuati economy - they simply wouldn't be able to spam them out the way the Empire could, or the way the Kuatis could undoubtably spam out ISDs.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
The advantages of a single large ship are fairly obvious:
1) better sensors/jammers - a larger ship doesn't need to mount 10 copies of the same sensor or jammer system, it can mount a better sensor/jammer system, and use that to track/jam enemies
2) better communications - instead of using transmissions or some form of datalink group, the large ship just runs more internal communications (i.e. more fiber optics, or whatever Star Wars uses)
3) better medical facilities - in real life a carrier will have a dentist, while cruisers don't
4) lower surface area per volume ration - means that armor and shields will be proportionally thicker than a smaller ship
5) better repair facilities - instead of mounting multiple sets of the same tool kit and spare parts, it will have more raw material, and a better machine shop.
6) redundancy - smaller ships cannot divert power to another ship if it gets pounded harder, but a larger ship has the internal power network to divert power as needed
Of course, the obvious disadvantage of the larger ship is that it can only be in one location, vs the smaller ships being able to spread out and cover more locations. Other disadvantages include more structural bracing needed per ton (cube square), heat dissipation limits, construction time vs assembly line, training capacities (if all your fleet is one design, it is easy to develop tactics, vs needing to keep multiple designs memorized).
For the Iowa, the design was along the following lines:
1) Panamax - it was to be able to go through the Panama Canal. That means a maximum beam of 108 feet (and a very good helmsman since the Panama Canal was only 110 feet wide).
2) high speed - given the width, you calculate the length needed for high speed
3) fire really heavy shells (and withstand similar salvos from enemy ships).
The basic armor scheme was 'all or nothing', basically you heavily armor the critical parts needed for the ship to function (and making sure to include enough volume so the ship doesn't sink), and the rest of it isn't armored (enemy AP shells will just pass through without being triggered).
You can apply similar principles to a starship, where heavier ships can carry weapons heavy enough to punch through an enemy's shields (shields would have a total strength measured in Joules, with a peak strength and recharge rate measured in Watts) and damaging the hull directly, while the smaller ships are trying to do enough damage to the larger ship's shields to make up for its regeneration. This gets into the fun math of sustained operation, heat effects on the shields, structural support for the generators/emitters, and the various surge suppressors and other goodies that go into a well-designed shield grid.
Monroe - I think one of the "Tales of the Bounty Hunters" had something you would approve of, where a star went nova and an entire civilization died. Boba Fett never heard about them, and the rest of the galaxy barely noticed. Another story tells where the oceans of one planet were taken away by a transport fleet for conversion into fresh water. Efficiency was not the concern there, punishment was.
Or if you wanted to tell of a fleet battle, tell where the commander on one side can observe how the battle is going by the bacground glow of the weapons fire. His fleet uses one color, the enemy fleet another. So if he can see areas where his color is dominant, he knows that his fleet is winning there. If the enemy color is present, he knows he has a problem.
Tell about a droid raid on a planet with 2.4 million battle droids, and the commander not caring about the losses because the one production line seen in AotC will make up the losses in one month anyway.
Sound tactics at all, this was obviouisly meant to be a juggernaught designed to flex the triangular-shaped wang of the emperor... this was the Mclaren of its day, it'd seem. But it's probably my all time favorite sci-fi ship next to the Enterprise refit/E-A. Such a gorgeously badass looking ship.
Don't you hear my call, though you're many years away, don't you hear me calling you?
Not so much the Emperor but Lira Wessex's hard on for big ships. She started most likely on the Acclamator, though thats not for sure. But then worked through then Venator, Victory, Imperial and then the SSDs.
Absolutely sure - the VenStar was one of Wessex's. It makes sense if you think about it - the Vic was a Rendili design, while the VenStar, ImpStar and Executor were all KDY.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Deepcrush wrote:People just taking a design and making it bigger. Total uberfan.
Which are you talking about? The Vic and Imp look vaguely similar (and so they should - OOU they're the same ship) but the Venator, Imperator and Executor are all competely different designs with completely different roles. The only two classes that could be considered enlarged or reduced versions of each other are the Imperator and Allegiance-type, and even between them there are detail differences such as the Allegiance's slimmer design and lack of a hangar.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
There are certainly similarities in the basic hull form, but there are also significant differences - the shape of the bridge structure and those stupid wings being the main ones.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Well the Victory is also the ship the Imperial replaced. They performed the same roles so naturally they'd look very similar. But they have enough differences I don't think one is the exact same as the other but larger.
How many Minbari does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
None. They always surrender right before they finish the job and never tell you why.
A smaller one, sure, but an Executor would represent a substantial investment even for them, albeit one that could be managed without much difficulty.
Which are you talking about? The Vic and Imp look vaguely similar (and so they should - OOU they're the same ship) but the Venator, Imperator and Executor are all competely different designs with completely different roles. The only two classes that could be considered enlarged or reduced versions of each other are the Imperator and Allegiance-type, and even between them there are detail differences such as the Allegiance's slimmer design and lack of a hangar.
