Poor Garibaldi huh? Yeah, he's going to have problems in the future, but how he deals with them is a big part of the early story arcs. Tensions are on the rise, and we are just days away from a full scale Dilgar invasion...
Women will make an appearence, but so far we've only seen a sample of the EA, a single platoon of a single regiment, which has been engineered to be mostly guys. I was reading somewhere that a study had shown women could actually handle high G forces better than men and so could be better pilots, which makes me think most women end up in the fleet and fighter units than in the army, but we will see some around. generally speaking the pre-Minbari war Earthforce is a lot more like todays armies than the troops we see in Gropos. Deraini could be Turhans father, he was a direct heir unlike Cartagia so that makes sense. you may also remember that Deraini was the surname of the little kid Londo tells his Minbari war story to far in the future...
Actually the Centauri used only 1 of 4 turrets facing the target, and even then in short bursts rather then continous fire. Plus they were slugging it out at almost point blank range, instead of the Centauri using the speed/mobility advantage. The battle was a screw-up un the Centauri part. We don't know what those big things are, but the concept of max coverage at expense of fire concentration is simply flawed. What you need is to point as many of your guns as you can in the same direction, those that can't be pointed there are just wasted mass and volume of the vessel. Hard to say, too few examples of Nova@Work.EA.gov
My take on those big objects on the Nova bow is that they are indeed guns, they are identicle to the plasma cannons B5 uses against enemy ships, so why don't we see them in action. One of two reasons I believe, either the ship doesn't have enough power to fire them and its other more versatile weapons (something a station the size of B5 wouldn't worry about) Or the weapons are just too hard to bring into battle, needing the whole ship to turn towards its target which could quite easily evade. Personally I think they are planetery bombardment weapons, big and powerful enough to cause major damage but when used against fixed emplacements they don't need to track the enemy. Only B5 had the power to mount them in limited turrets and use them in an anti ship role.
Tryg, you forget obiously something. Nova is not attack craft like WS or Vorchan, but a dreadnaught. Dreadnaught - by deffinition - should be able to handle multiple ships at once. Or one of other-side dreadnaughts. Concentration of all firepower at one target is nice and cool - for something as small and agile as Whitestar. And even with chees design you would have to be extremely lucky to target all guns at one target. In most cases it would be max half of them. Not to talking about BIG blind-spot behind the ship. And those big things are guns - one of Novas in ItB has fired them.
So why bother mounting them in the first place ? They didn't use them in Gropos, if that's what they are for. My guess is that they are some cool-looking-thingies-that-the-designers-envisioned.
Probably the most likely answer, because they look cool though I still think planetary bombardment the most logical in universe answer, they look like they do a lot more damage than regular EA guns based on the gaping holes left in the Roanoke when B5 hit it during their break away. I guess its just EA doctrine... "Say boss, we have these huge guns but can't fit them on our ships." "Rubbish, stick em on! two of them, just here!" "But boss, we've already got an utterly ridiculous number of guns already!" "this is a human ship, I can see part of the hull that doesn't have a cannon! add MORE GUNS!"
But at least the Warlock benefitted... "Sir we've got these planetery defence weapons, we just..." "Put them on a ship." "But sir, they are planetary grade..." "On a ship." "The satellites needed to carry them are..." "On.A.Ship." "The power needed is just too..." "What part of 'on a ship' are you not getting?" *sigh* "yes sir." "In fact put two on. and a bunch of missiles, oh and rail guns, we haven't had a good rail gun ship in a while. And more really big guns, just to embarrass the Centauri." I love Warlocks
Actually, a dreadnaught should never travel alone, but with a screen of destroyers and cruisers to deal with lesser threats. Plus, it's guns would out-range anything short of another dreadnaught. And with it's armour it wouldn't have to fear anything short of another dreadnaught - hence the name. The Whitestar is basically a monitor. Look at the Primus - all main guns pointed forward, half the guns cover the port/starboard. The Sharlin - 4 of 6 main guns pointed forward. The G'Quan - 2 of 2 main guns pointed forward. The Battlecrab - 1 of 1 main guns pointed forward. The Vorlon Dreadnaught - 1 of 1 main guns pointed forward. The Nova - Sorry Old Looser. Nope, just make sure you have the proper thrust-to-mass ratio, to keep the guns poining where you need them. The dreadnaughts had not only the advantage of heaviest guns and best armour, but also of speed. As I stated before, it doesn't have to be a perfect wedge - the ISDs do have aft-facing heavy guns. The rest is about turning the ship and making the escorting ships and fightersbombers earn their pay. Hmmm. I'll have to see that movie again.
The EA way of building ships reminds me of early days of tank warfare - the "mobile landfortress" concept, with guns pointing in every direction. Didn't exactly work out...
Yep. Pity we never really got to see them fight, though--that would have been brilliant... Okay, what would the next evolution of an EA ship be like? You know, after the Warlock? Thats a good idea...
Hard to say not knowing what kind of technology level it would represent. But wait. Hmmm. Get shield technology. Buy LucasArts. Remove the tower section. Field the redesigned Stardestroyer. There ! But to salvage the Nova design - remove the fighter bay from the bow and place it in the middle section, like on the Hyperion. Make the hammer-shaped bow solid, no openings in the armour. Put reactors in there. Put armour in the front. Put a turrent mount (just one) on every side of the bow, for a total of 4. Put more armour in the front. Put 2 or 3 guns per mount. Add even more armour to the front, and sides too, while at it. Make each turret-placed battery capable of making a full 360 degrees turn in its own horizontal plane, and if 360 is too difficult then at least 180 degrees in its vertical plane. That way you have all of your heavy guns facing forward, and at least half of them facing everything in the forward arc of the ship. Bank the ship to port- or starboard to bring 3/4 of guns to bear. Turn the ship to use them all. If there is nothing to obstruct then you can fire the guns straight in the aft direction as well. Almost perfect 360 degrees coverage. Put smaller anti-fighter guns along the hull in the proportionally narrower middle section, so that they won't obstruct the main guns.
I envision future EA ships being built like the Excalibur, they have the ability to create fast moving unspeakably powerful ships now, imagine a Victory class level of technology combined with Earth forces obsession with strapping big guns on everything... I need to do a story set in the B5 universe in 2300 or so when these kind of ships could be in service
Given the EA's penchant for butt-ugly designs it'll probably be a self-propelled brick like the Valen class. (Seen in the Legend of the Rangers).
Well that depends on what you compare them to. During the Dreadnought era ~1907-1920 the DNs had to compete with the BC as well in the heavy category. There were also droves of lighter much faster units available. Not even DN herself could bragg about mastery of all three strenght categories, there were PDNs with better protection and a few with speed to match the DNs. I think the Warlock will be the standard for EF for a long time. It is a solid design with few weak spots, it isn't cursed with rotating sections - something likely to cut short the service life of the Omega class. Most improvements EF are likely to make wouldn't require a major new ship design.
I'm far from claiming that the DNs were the fastest around, but they were substantially faster, better armed and armoured then the untill-then top dogs, the overall armour/weapons/speed ratio was the best around and in terms of speed they weren't too much of a handicap when in formation with cruisers and destroyers. Actually, the Warlock being a big ship is very the problem in itself. What the EA needs is not to repeat what the Romulans did with the D'deridex class. Instead they need to keep the Warlocks as heavy hitters in the Dreadnaught/Fleet Command Vessel role, and field (im sticking with the current terminology) frigates, destroyers and cruisers for all the other tasks. Sending a DN to do the job of a destroyer is a waste of resources. In terms of Starfleet TMP+ era ships - keep the Constitutions/Excelsiors as command ships/DNs, and send Mirandas and Constellations in the destroyer/cruiser roles.
Not really, there isn't a tactical problem with large powerful ships in general other than their lacking numbers. The problem tend to be financial, there isn't enough of them, but EF's talent for mass production and the Minbari war trauma seem to have reduced that issue. Although I tend to agree with the need for some form of lighter cruiser escort, an advanced Hyperion faster than the O & WL to get more speed into the fleet and boost numbers without needing costly jumpengines. The battle-carriers of B5 actually have little need for support vessels in general since their fighter wings can deal with most traditional screening tasks.
Money is pretty much always an issue. For each DN I'd estimate one could build 2-3 cruisers, or about half a dozen frigates. A DN can be only in one place at the time, with several ships you can cover a lot more space, and be far more flexible. You do need a DNs to go toe to toe with enemy heavy ships, but hardly for everyday escort or patrol duties. Playing cat and mouse with the Raiders is also better done with frigates or cruisers at most - using DNs for everything would simply be cost-prohibitive, and fighters based in space stations have too limited flight duration. Look at today's world and the piracy issue around Africa or in the seas of south-eastern Asia. A carrier battlegroup would scare the pirates shitless, yet it would be far too expensive to use carrier groups on daily basis for that. And sending battleships wouldn't help either - the pirates would simply avoid them. Frigates, or even corvettes are needed here, and in the Bab-verse piracy was a serious issue. Same could be told about modern carriers (ok, fit them with better anti-missile defenses and ship-launched anti-ship missiles), yet you don't see them without escorts.
Yeah perhaps, but is that necessary? EF is not SF with billions of cubic LY to patroll so the need for large numbers are not there. When you have only a dozen system to defend there is no reason to build 120 frigates rather than 24 DNs. Fleets with large patroll areas are typicaly cruiser heavy while fleets without those responsibilities normaly only have enough cruisers for screening and some raiding. But the EA is small compared to it's military production potential, it's battlefleet is so large that it can handle the patrolling duties you want smaller ships to deal with. Actually fighters are far better at chasing raiders (B5 pirates) and a battle-carrier's fighter group can cover far far more space than a cruiser. Military raiders are more troublesome and convoys are the only real defence and the more firepower the better in that role. Unless you have the CVBG in the area anyway, which is what the EF generally have. On the fringes of the empires perhaps, vermin tend to live in the cracks. That situation was mainly caused by the hostility of the states and patroll ships would not correct that situation since they would not get permission to patroll further than their own borders. The modern naval CV-battlegroups face a more complex problem in battle than the EF battlegroups. The main reason for escorts in a CVBG is to expand the air defence zone and with submarines on the prowl you need ASW assets and most importantly the CVN are not battleline units so screening them makes far more sense than for a battleship that have to expose itself and is designed to survive firepower that would wreck and escort in an instant.
If you go by history, the Carrier spelled the end of the battleship as the prime navy unit. I'm thinking EF might go for a space going version of the Nimitz class carrier, and build a battle group around it. The strike wing could pound enemy ships before they even come into main gun range of the dreadnauts. You doubt this? Can you say Prince of Wales, Musashi, and Yamato?
Awesome update, LC. Beautifully written. Really made me feel as if I were there. Makes me wanna be part of the 99th. You've got some awesome imagery of Mars and the gathering of forces in orbit. Sweet!
Cool, my big worry is getting the officers right, I want them to be in control but not overbearing with their troops. So sometimes they look the other way for minor infringements to keep unit morale high and I was concerned that a real life officer might not do that. I'll try and keep a balance, but let me know if it gets too unreal
Carriers and dreadnoughts should be workable as a combined force, but I doubt that in the B5-verse a carrier strike could defeat a dreadnought force. Unless, of course, the carrier force are Minbari and they're fighting the Hurr...
