Register Register

Author Topic: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.  (Read 12289 times)

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« on: 25 December 2015, 04:48:40 »
The Farragut class Battleship, the big stick of the Terran Hegemony.

Mass – 1,680,000 tonnes
Length – 1405 meters
Crew Compliment – 730

Background

In the mid 2430’s the Terran Hegemony fleet was faced with the growing obsolescence of its front line battleship the Monsoon class and the fact that the older Dreadnought class was now obsolete.  A replacement for both classes was needed to keep the Hegemony’s fleet ahead of the House Lords whose fleets were viewed as a threat to the Hegemony. 

The new battleship design was to be able to replace both older classes in front line combat and carry the most advanced weapons available.  The new design was commissioned by the then First Lord, Richard Cameron and initial design work started in 2430.  Unfortunately, the First Lord did not live to see the ship he had a hand in designing leave the slips in 2448.  What emerged was a monster and a ship that quickly redressed any thought of an imbalance between the fleet of the Hegemony and the House Lords.

The Farragut class battleship, named after Admiral Isaac Farragut, not the ancient Terran Admiral David Farragut the new battleship was a mobile fortress massing a huge 1,680,000 tonnes making her the largest ship built in the Inner Sphere until the McKenna class appeared two hundred and four years later.

The Farragut was also over a kilometre long, 1,405 meters to be exact but despite her great mass and size the Farragut was able to generate more thrust than the older ships she replaced and at full burn could generate 2.5g of thrust, making her capable of matching a pace set by the common Riga class frigate and the planned Avatar class cruiser.

The Farragut also served to highlight the high technology of the Hegemony and she was designed from the onset to feature the brand new Heavy Naval Gauss Rifle, able to inflict tremendous damage out to extreme range whilst generating little heat.  That each weapon alone weighed 7000 tonnes and fired a shot weighing 12 tonnes didn’t bother the Farragut and she was fitted with eighteen of the new weapons with them covering all arcs.  Backing these weapons up was a fearsome array of weapons that would enable the Farragut to engage at all ranges.  Fourteen NAC-40’s, fifteen Heavy Naval PPC’s and twenty two launch tubes for Killer Whale missiles gave the ship its main and most formidable punch whilst for point defence forty large lasers were spread around the hull to target fighters that managed to get close.

The Farragut also boasted a thick hide with 1,603.5 tonnes of the new Ferro-Carbide armour shielding her from hostile fire and she boasted a massively reinforced hull structure that was matched by the McKenna class and exceeded by the far larger Leviathan class produced centuries later.  An expansive 183,414.5 tonne cargo bay also allowed the Farragut to supply other vessels and carry enough fuel and ammunition on-board for long deployments.

Finally coming to her aerospace compliment the Farragut boasts a full wing of Fighters (36) as well as 10 small craft and shuttles.  The only area the Farragut falls short is that she is only capable of carrying a pair of dropships verses the Monsoon’s six.

If there was one problem with these massive ships it was their construction costs and the expense of keeping them in service.  It seems that the Heavy Naval Gauss rifles were possibly maintenance intensive (as with many new weapons) and this made the Farragut seemingly be quite the hangar queen (although this is my own interpretation and not official).  This meant that production of the Farragut’s ceased in 2500 after a mere 52 years of production, a very short time by Hegemony standards.

Despite this they served in the Reunification War as fleet flagships and in line squadrons where their firepower would tip the balance in many battles and the ships proved capable of taking huge amounts of damage and still getting home.

After the Reunification War the Farragut’s remained in service for centuries, their only presumed rival the Marik Atreus Class and the Lyran’s Tharkad (although other ships of this size may exist we have yet to see any data about them).  Still as time moved on and doctrines changed the Farragut’s started to show their age, and their high maintenance requirements gradually saw the class start to be retired into first secondary fleets and finally mothballs.  Even this didn’t save the class and it was ordered that the ships start being decommissioned and scrapped but it does seem that this may well have been for public consumption outside of the Hegemony.

It seems that instead of being scrapped some Farragut’s were put into storage in mothballs whilst they were official scrapped.  Indeed during the Amaris War the Farragut class served alongside General Kerensky’s forces and survivors of the class accompanied him on Operation Exodus.

A single Farragut would later show up in the hands of the Word of Blake, it’s not known where she was found but it can be assumed that the Farragut the WoBS Righteous Justice was either a mothballed ship discovered at the Ruins of Gabriel or a repaired hulk that had survived the Amaris Civil War.  It’s not known if any of the class survived the Pentagon War or are still in some hidden naval cache awaiting the call to arms once more. Or, if the Righteous Justice, who fell in battle over Terra was the last of her kind, finally making the class extinct.

Design

The Farragut is a monster, she’s really an early McKenna and yet she still has vulnerabilities and is an avatar of the Hegemony/SLDF’s warship design where each ship was supposed to be part of a greater and mutually supporting whole. 

As is fitting her class the Farragut packs a fearsome amount of firepower, but she was designed before bracket firing became a thing, and even afterwards where we can assume the classes computers were updated and upgraded to take the new firing protocols into effect she can only bracket fire to a rather modest degree with her largest group of weapons being turrets with three H-NPPC’s in them, everything else is either mounted in single mounts or in pairs.

This means a Farragut like other ships of her time must get a bit closer to bring her firepower to accurately engage a target, but she’s got the hide to do so and more importantly the thrust.  With a 3/5 thrust curve the Farragut is capable of generating more thrust than many ships of her era and is as ‘fast’ as the later Texas and McKenna classes and the big cruisers of the time in the form of the Avatar and Luxor classes and is capable of keeping up with the Black Lion’s and turning with them.  This means the ship can handily roll and bring new faces to bare if one side takes damage.

The Farragut is, like many battleships built for broadside fighting but don’t think you can engage her head on and escape her firepower, the guns are well spread out whilst her massed Killer Whale launchers also cover all angles.

For example, if a Farragut can broadside you you’ll have this pointed at you.

6 x NAC-40’s in 6 x single mounts.
6 x Heavy Naval Gauss  in 3 x dual mounts.
6 x Heavy Naval PPCs in 2 x triple mounts.
9 x Killer whale launchers in 3 x triple launchers.
15 x large lasers in 3 x quintuple turrets.

That’s a LOT of firepower and save the NAC’s (and of course the large lasers) it’s all darn long ranged whilst the NAC’s provide a ship killing punch at short to medium ranges.

Like other Hegemony/SLDF ships the Farragut is vulnerable to fighters yet her missile batteries can engage them at long range and no fighter wants to be hit by a Killer Whale missile.  The Farragut’s complete lack of any form of Naval Laser means she can’t engage them with any other weapon other than her missiles whilst the large laser battery is in my eyes a final terminal defence. 

Remember a Farragut would not be on the front line, or if she was, there would be escorts sailing with her to add their guns to hers against an incoming threat.  Any fighter strike would have to work its way past any escorting fighters and dropships, then run the gauntlet of missiles and naval lasers before getting in range to engage.  It could be assumed that any strike that did manage to break through would be scattered, its fighters damaged and pilots rattled by the seemingly never ending stream of missiles and laser beams as big as their fighters firing at them.  The large lasers could then hopefully pick off crippled fighters and further reduce the damage that a Farragut might take.

Against small craft the Farragut is also hard to damage and can even prove a challenge for capital grade weapons to threshold.

Fore armour – 200 (20 point threshold)
Fore-sides/Broadside armour – 250 (25 point threshold)
Aft-sides armour – 250 - (25 point threshold)
Rear armour – 143 – (15 point threshold)

And a meaty 95 structural integrity allows the Farragut to take a pounding even with her armour gone, but hopefully a commander would roll away an exposed area to save that happening.

Whilst a Farragut’s centrepiece allows her to reach out to extreme range the limited (or non-existent depending on the time period you’re playing her in) bracket firing she can do means that like most ships of the time she must close but her guns allow her to reach out and barrage a foe as she’s getting into range.  A slap from a H-Naval Gauss is not something anyone wants .

A final layer of protection or a long range weapon is the Farragut’s aerospace compliment.  With 36 fighters carried the Farragut carries more fighters than any other ship in service until the massive boondoggle that was the Enterprise entered service or the later McKenna’s who carried 50 fighters a piece. This gives you enough aerospace assets to form a decent screen whilst also giving you enough to throw into an attack if needs be.  Two dropships are also carried but this is the only area where the older Monsoon’s outclass the Farragut, as each of the older ships could carry six dropships.

I would assume that the Farragut’s dropships would be combat ones, not freighters. With a 183,414.5 tonne cargo bay the Farragut has lots of internal stores and if needs be another friendly dropship could load up and carry cargo over whilst her two escorting dropships sit nearby.

With a beefy organic aerospace wing you can do a fair bit, but remember that fighters are also your best protection against hostile strikes, and even with her protection and guns a Farrgut’s greatest threat does come from hostile aerospace assets and you’ve got 36 counters for that threat carried on-board.

Fighting one

The high threshold thanks to the Farragut’s thick hide makes fighters less likely to cripple and knock her out with lots of crits but instead they would have to chew away at her armour and this obviously takes time. The same goes for assault dropships, unless you’re in a Pocket Warship you’re not going to threshold the armour and need to burrow into it with repeated strikes, whilst enduring return fire from guns far bigger than yours. 

As with all capital ships swarming one with fighters is the easy but boring route, but with so many missile launchers and the fact that a Farragut is going to have her own escorts and fighter escort means that taking one down with this method may be exceptionally costly.

Facing one with a Capital ship is going to be a foreboding task. Whilst the Farragut lacks the armour of a Texas she’s as well protected as a McKenna (save on her stern) and packs a brutal if inaccurate at long range punch. 

No matter how you engage a Farragut you’re going to take casualties doing so, this means that basically even with Capital ships you’re going to have to engage her with two to one odds, more if you’re in small ships like destroyers who can be ripped of their armour with a few hits.

Contemporaries

For her time the Farragut class has a fair few contemporary classes, the main rival is the Atreus class, but these ships are smaller, more poorly armed and protected in every way.  Yes they could hurt a Farragut but in a one on one fight, the Farragut has the advantages in firepower and protection.  The Lyran’s Tharkad class is another contemporary, exceptionally well-armed but still not enough to safely engage a Farragut without support.  The Texas and McKenna’s are the bane of a Farragut in a single ship on ship engagement.  With their massed batteries built for bracketing fire they can engage at ranges where the Farragut is far more dependent on luck than any accuracy and can start wearing her armour down.  The Texas is basically outgunned by a Farragut but can engage the bigger ship at longer range and if she can control the range then the Farragut won’t really stand a chance.    This goes double for the fearsome McKenna who’s massed Heavy N-PPC’s can flay almost any ship apart before they can seriously threaten her, and the McKenna who replaced the Farragut in service is by far the superior vessel in a pure gun battle.

Perhaps the only ship in the modern era that might be a challenge for a Farragut would be a Mjolnir class battlecruiser, the Lyran vessel is slightly faster than the big Hegemony warship and has considerably higher protection and a monstrous amount of structural integrity.  Both ships are designed to get in close and hammer away and it then becomes a test of firepower vs protection.  A close in slugging match between the two could be very bloody.

Thoughts

As the flagship of a battlegroup a Farragut is a formidable foe in any period, even against more modern 3067 type ships who like her have to get a bit close, which is what you DON’T want to when facing a Farragut.  The Farragut is a lovely ship, her solid and clean lines do kind of make her look like a beer can but there’s a simple brute look to her that makes her look very business-like in her profile. 

A monster for her time and she’d do well even if she was ‘retired’ and ‘scrapped’ in later periods, I can see them being slowly pushed aside to either serve alongside the very limited number’s of Texas class ships or secondary areas, but their maintenance costs (and I assume issues) could be the contributor to the classes retirement rather than doctrinal shifts. If they were main reason the SLDF would have probably just upgraded the Avatar rather than replacing it as it fitted in beautifully with the SLDF’s bracket firing technology due to its massed Naval Laser batteries. 

In the modern period the Farragut would run rampant, House Warships are designed like her, they have to get in close and this would have a Farragut commander going “Praise the First Lord and pass the ammunition!” before ripping anything that looked at her funny apart.  Of course you’d never face a Farragut alone, she’d be escorted by cruisers, destroyers and a picket of corvettes.  Killing a Farragut in a campaign or as part of a larger battle could well be a game changer for the sides involved.  She’s a final boss and should be treated as such.  (and probably has this music- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhWaufQD9Uo which fits really..you’ve broken through the screen, fighters are scattered, a cruiser burning off the port bow..and the Farragut starts to slowly come about guns tracking, charging up to fire…)

Its just the small matter of carrying out the deed and you have to question yourself on what you’re willing to endure to take out the ship.




A Farragut class Battleship in her prime whilst in commission with the Terran Hegemony.




A reactivated Farragut class Battleship now many hundreds of years old with who knows how many miles on her engines leaving the Inner Sphere for presumably the last time, this unnamed vessel is taking part in Operation EXODUS and is proof that the class was far from decommissioned and scrapped.  Here she is moving in formation with a Sovietskii Soyuz class heavy cruiser.



As always comments and thoughts are most welcome.
« Last Edit: 26 December 2015, 11:42:12 by marauder648 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

mikecj

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1762
  • Veteran of Galahad 3028
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #1 on: 25 December 2015, 04:52:22 »
Scary beast  O0
There are no fish in my pond.
"First, one brief announcement. I just want to mention, for those who have asked, that absolutely nothing what so ever happened today in sector 83x9x12. I repeat, nothing happened. Please remain calm." Susan Ivanova
"Solve a man's problems with violence, help him for a day. Teach a man to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime." - Belkar Bitterleaf
Romo Lampkin could have gotten Stefan Amaris off with a warning.

UnLimiTeD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1706
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #2 on: 25 December 2015, 16:08:15 »
Nice article.
Savannah Masters are the Pringles of Battletech.
Ooo! OOOOOOO! That was a bad one!...and I liked it.

Alan Grant

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1439
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #3 on: 25 December 2015, 19:00:58 »
Good read. I always struggled to understand why this class was discontinued. I like your theories on that front.

Also really liked your comparisons to the Texas and McKenna.

What I find interesting is the thought of this ship serving on the Taurian front in the Reunification War. Picturing her (and her escorts) tangling with Winchesters, and dodging fireships.

From the side, something about the Farragut always reminded me of the big ships-of-the-line from the age of sail. I mean the 100-gun(ish), 1st rate ships. They just have that sense of vertical size, scale and bulk and so does the Farragut.
A proud member of the Battletech-Mercenaries community...now with a Clan game!

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #4 on: 25 December 2015, 20:59:07 »
If there was one problem with these massive ships it was their construction costs and the expense of keeping them in service.  It seems that the Heavy Naval Gauss rifles were possibly maintenance intensive (as with many new weapons) and this made the Farragut seemingly be quite the hangar queen (although this is my own interpretation and not official).  This meant that production of the Farragut’s ceased in 2500 after a mere 52 years of production, a very short time by Hegemony standards.

The fluff cites the high costs as being a reason for the discontinued production, but it doesn't in any way suggest that the design suffered from higher than normal maintenance costs, or that the design was in anyway a hangar queen. After all, this is a design whose service lasted for 300 years, and even after the SLDF's doctrine changed and the Farragut was replaced by the McKenna, the design remained in service for another 100 years.

Vehrec

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 911
  • Mr. Flibble is Very Cross
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #5 on: 26 December 2015, 01:39:28 »
'High Costs' seldom stopped the Hegemony from ordering anything though, so we need to explain this uncharacteristic behavior in some other way. :D  It may simply be accurate to say that the Farragut defeated all comers simply by existing and with no direct challengers arising, the Hegemony shifted procurement priorities.  Early N-Gauss may have also had frequent mechanical trouble, and if they needed to be replaced semi-frequently the infrastructure to produce replacements may have effectively capped the number in service.  Production of high-caliber naval rifles was a limiting factor in real-life construction, though that capped speed of construction, not numbers in service.
*Insert support for fashionable faction of the week here*

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #6 on: 26 December 2015, 01:57:17 »
Yep and it does not say why they were so costly and it don't really make sense considering that 200 years later the Hegemony spammed the McKenna's until it wasn't funny and they had no issue with their cost and production.

Its why I put in as a personal thought that possibly with the new weapon it was a bit more maintenance intensive (as is so often the case with new bits of kit) and this in turn means that the Farra had to spend more time being overhauled or undergoing general maintenance which in turn drives running costs up.

Ninjaed by Vherec :p
« Last Edit: 26 December 2015, 03:15:26 by marauder648 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

DarthRads

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2184
  • Trust me...I'm the Doctor...
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #7 on: 26 December 2015, 02:28:13 »
Where did the second picture come from?

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #8 on: 26 December 2015, 02:32:08 »
I found it on Sarna but I believe it is in the last of the most recent books about the attack on Terra buy the SLDF to bring down Amaris and friends.  But it is definately after Terra's been freed and Kerensky's gone and decided to take his toys and leave.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #9 on: 26 December 2015, 03:22:43 »
'High Costs' seldom stopped the Hegemony from ordering anything though, so we need to explain this uncharacteristic behavior in some other way. :D  It may simply be accurate to say that the Farragut defeated all comers simply by existing and with no direct challengers arising, the Hegemony shifted procurement priorities.  Early N-Gauss may have also had frequent mechanical trouble, and if they needed to be replaced semi-frequently the infrastructure to produce replacements may have effectively capped the number in service.  Production of high-caliber naval rifles was a limiting factor in real-life construction, though that capped speed of construction, not numbers in service.

Sure it could be explained in a lot of different ways, but I didn't find anything in the fluff to suggest that massive maintenance issues requiring lots of downtime was in any way the reason. Considering the design was still in use 300 years later, it seems to me that poor maintenance issues is a very unlikely reason.

Yep and it does not say why they were so costly and it don't really make sense considering that 200 years later the Hegemony spammed the McKenna's until it wasn't funny and they had no issue with their cost and production.

The Hegemony didn't spam the McKennas. The Star League did. There's a vast difference. In 2448 when the Hegemony started the Farragut production, it was just the Hegemony. The Star League wouldn't exist for another 150 years.

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #10 on: 26 December 2015, 03:40:23 »
Yes and again its why I said its a personal interpretation. Sure I could have just said 'they were expensive' but you can read that in the TRO or on Sarna, so I injected a bit of personal conjecture in there as 'cost' does not seem like it would affect the Hegemony.  They terraformed Venus and gave it a spin long long before the Star League instead of going for the easy option of Mars.  Money is no object to the Hegemony, never has been.  I'm sorry if putting some personal thoughts in has got your knickers in a twist.

And yep they were still using them 300 years later, by which point bugs and technical issues with the gauss rifles (if there were any and as Vherec suggested its quite likely) would have been solved, and by that point we can guess that the number of intact Farraguts could be counted on two hands because they were dragged out of mothballs or deep space caches and god know's where the Wobbies found their one, I can assume lying in mothballs at Gabriel. 

Basically it was a personal attempt to rationalise the 'cost' reason when the Hegemony has never ever given a damn about cost.
« Last Edit: 26 December 2015, 03:49:37 by marauder648 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Liam's Ghost

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5531
  • Miss Chitty scoffs at your clan overlords
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #11 on: 26 December 2015, 04:25:31 »
The Hegemony fleet of the twenty fifth century simply wasn't the same beast as the SLDF that spawned the McKenna. Remember that during the buildup to the reunification war they had to reactivate the Aegis and draw ships from the house fleets to get up to a fleet strength of five hundred vessels.
Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4445
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #12 on: 26 December 2015, 07:49:39 »
Personal opinion. They needed the hulls.

The Star League built sat 280 McKennas. These ships (and the 80 Texas) were essential replacements for the Monsoons and Farraguts. The problem is the LF battery gave the McKennas a new and highly desirable ability. Unfortunately tying them down with the slow fleet nullified that ability.

This is where I see the comeback of the battle cruisers. They have battleship throw weights (at long rather than extreme range) and Monsoon armour but NO LF batteries at the time when it was one of the defining features of a Hegemony heavy cruiser. For this reason I feel the 102 battle cruisers were the real replacements of the Monsoons while the McKennas became something new.

So consider the following chronology.

The Farraguts are built to replace the Dreadnoughts and supplement the Monsoons.
Reunification War. Bracketing proven. Stand off DropShips in a guerilla war proven. LF cruisers proven.
After the war you get new ship. Lessons learnt like the Texas. Holdovers like the Congress.
Texas begins replacing Monsoons.
Someone figures out you can build McKennas in numbers. Stop building Texases. Bye bye Monsoon. Woohoo.
Uh oh. Big tactical problems 50 years later. Reintroduce battle cruisers.
Farraguts hang around filling the gaps. It takes 100 years to get 280 McKennas not to mention the battle cruisers.

Kidd

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3514
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #13 on: 26 December 2015, 07:51:41 »
Those single mount NAC40s always remind me of carronades. They'd be murderous against attack droppers hoping to close and bring more short-ranged weaponry to bear.

Farragut. She's old, slow and low (tech) but she'll still kill you easy.

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #14 on: 26 December 2015, 11:23:57 »
Excellent chronology :) And yeah..I like the idea of the NAC's as 'smashers'.  Its a case of 'sure, come close to bring all your guns in range...whats the worst that can happen...'
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #15 on: 27 December 2015, 01:18:17 »
Yes and again its why I said its a personal interpretation. Sure I could have just said 'they were expensive' but you can read that in the TRO or on Sarna, so I injected a bit of personal conjecture in there as 'cost' does not seem like it would affect the Hegemony.  They terraformed Venus and gave it a spin long long before the Star League instead of going for the easy option of Mars.  Money is no object to the Hegemony, never has been.  I'm sorry if putting some personal thoughts in has got your knickers in a twist.

Nothing twisted. I just didn't find the idea very plausible and didn't really have anything to back it up. Maybe if the fluff for Naval Gauss Rifles said something, but they don't, so I offered a refutation of the point. And provided reasons why I thought it was unlikely.

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1862
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #16 on: 27 December 2015, 10:13:42 »
Slight nitpicking... refering to Richard Cameron as First Lord...

Its Director-General.

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1446
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #17 on: 27 December 2015, 12:26:38 »
Where did the second picture come from?
Historical: Operation KLONDIKE, page 11.

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo

Wrangler

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17276
  • Dang it!
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #18 on: 27 December 2015, 13:16:16 »
I'm surprised that Farraguts were with Exodus fleet since the fluff entry in TRO: 3057 Revised mentions the last of them was scrapped December 2766, aka when the Coupe came down on Lord Cameron and friends on Terra.

She a brutal Battlestar Galactica looking ship in way firepower and armor.  I understand why the maintenance issue fluff had to be put in there, because they had to have reason to WHY ship not around anymore.  Lost ship is still a lost ship.  Naval Gauss Rifles were also noted being issue with refitted League-Class Destroyer's second flight. 

Personally, she could been replaced due to industry needing something to do before they lost the skills to make them. Everyone wants to update their military inventory, tech in a ship can get old and in some cases be hard to replace.

I still can not believe the Invisible Truth was able take on Blakist control Farragut in final battle. A Cameron isn't exactly a fantastic ship, specially when she slower than the obsolete Battleship she facing..   xp
I own the mini, but darn radar dish didn't want stay on.   :-[
« Last Edit: 04 October 2018, 11:05:14 by Wrangler »
"Men, fetch the Urbanmechs.  We have an interrogation to attend to." - jklantern
"How do you defeat a Dragau? Shoot the damn thing. Lots." - Jellico 
"No, it's a "Most Awesome Blues Brothers scene Reenactment EVER" waiting to happen." VotW Destrier - Weirdo  
"It's 200 LY to Sian, we got a full load of shells, a half a platoon of Grenadiers, it's exploding outside, and we're wearing flak jackets." VoTW Destrier - Misterpants

DarthRads

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2184
  • Trust me...I'm the Doctor...
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #19 on: 27 December 2015, 18:13:12 »
Historical: Operation KLONDIKE, page 11.

Yeah, I found it later...

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #20 on: 28 December 2015, 02:21:53 »
The Invisible Truth was actually destroyed by the Blakist Farragut, its a shame the battles for the space round Terra have not been that decently written up. You get the view from the Bridge of the Truth but thats mainly Zwick and Berwick talking before the Truth goes bye bye.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

gyedid

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1623
  • Always brighter on the other side of the mirror.
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #21 on: 28 December 2015, 03:46:13 »
I seem to recall the old article (written by JediBear?) mentions that the Farragut is really more of an oversized battlecruiser than a proper battleship.

Consider:
--2 Dropship collars where the McKenna (as well as the Monsoon) has 6
--Biggest guns facing forward, where the bulk of the McKenna's firepower is concentrated broadside and aft-quarters.  Good for killing rival capital ships, but not so good for orbital bombardment.

I think that, much like the Texas and McKenna, the Monsoon and Farragut worked as a complementary pair, with the Monsoon as the command ship and the Farragut as the bodyguard, the blunt instrument.

And the form always suggested "sperm whale in spaaaaaace" to me.  :D

Many moons ago, I did up a Farragut variant where the heavy N-Gauss were moved to the locations of the McKenna's NPPC bays.  It actually topped the canon version with a full 24 HNGs.  Unfortunately I lost that HMA file...

cheers,

Gabe
So, now I'm imagining people boxing up Overlords for loading as cargo.  "Nope, totally not a DropShip.  Everyone knows you can't fit a DropShip in a WarShip!  It's...a ten thousand ton box of marshmallows!  Yeah.  For the Heavy Guards big annual smores party."
--Arkansas Warrior, on the possibility of carrying Dropships as cargo in Warship cargo bays.

TERRAN SUPREMACY DEFENSE FORCE.  For when you want to send the SLDF, but couldn't afford the whole kit and kaboodle.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #22 on: 28 December 2015, 04:52:51 »
She a brutal Battlestar Galactica looking ship in way firepower and armor.  I understand why the maintenance issue fluff had to be put in there, because they had to have reason to WHY ship not around anymore.  Lost ship is still a lost ship.  Naval Gauss Rifles were also noted being issue with refitted League-Class Destroyer's second flight.

But there isn't any fluff about maintenance issues. The reason the ship isn't around anymore is because after 200 years of service, the doctrine it was being used under changed, and the SLDF started to build McKennas, and 100 years after that, the design was finally retired.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4516
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #23 on: 29 December 2015, 05:57:17 »
It seems that instead of being scrapped some Farragut’s were put into storage in mothballs whilst they were official scrapped.  Indeed during the Amaris War the Farragut class served alongside General Kerensky’s forces and survivors of the class accompanied him on Operation Exodus.

A single Farragut would later show up in the hands of the Word of Blake, it’s not known where she was found but it can be assumed that the Farragut the WoBS Righteous Justice was either a mothballed ship discovered at the Ruins of Gabriel or a repaired hulk that had survived the Amaris Civil War.  It’s not known if any of the class survived the Pentagon War or are still in some hidden naval cache awaiting the call to arms once more. Or, if the Righteous Justice, who fell in battle over Terra was the last of her kind, finally making the class extinct.

Do we have a source on this? The fluff from 3057R says that the last Farragut was dismantled on December 20, 2766. I looked through Liberation of Terra 1 and 2, Operation KLONDIKE, Wars of Reaving, and the Wars of Reaving Supplemental for any sign of fluff that contradicts the TR3057R fluff. I don't see anything that indicates that the design fought in the Amaris Civil War, or accompanied the SLDF on the Exodus.

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #24 on: 29 December 2015, 06:13:59 »
Do we have a source on this? The fluff from 3057R says that the last Farragut was dismantled on December 20, 2766. I looked through Liberation of Terra 1 and 2, Operation KLONDIKE, Wars of Reaving, and the Wars of Reaving Supplemental for any sign of fluff that contradicts the TR3057R fluff. I don't see anything that indicates that the design fought in the Amaris Civil War, or accompanied the SLDF on the Exodus.

Look in Historical: Operation KLONDIKE, page 11. you see the picture I linked above in the article.  That is a Farragut.  So we can assume (and yes yes, I know you don't like personal interpretations and next time I'll just go *Mech Name* "Read the TRO/Look On Sarna" and then close the article) that not all were scrapped. The WoB would not have had time to completely rebuild a scrapped Farragut from scratch either.  So it makes sense that not all of them were scrapped and indeed that could be something that was said to keep other nations happy.

"Look Successor Lords, we're disarming a bit, see we're scrapping these old battleships to keep our fleet strength down."
"We're not really doing that are we My Lord?"
"God no! Mothball some and shove them in oort clouds, keep their locations on file though."
"Yes First Lord."

That we SEE a Farragut in the book that goes on about the Exodus and its in formation with a Sov Soy, and it says its the EXODUS fleet and this is long long long after all the Farragut's had all been 'scrapped' is pretty damning evidence that the Farragut's survived, all be it in horribly limited numbers and that AT LEAST one went with Kerensky and friends as that picture is one showing the fleet preparing for EXODUS.  If they fought or not can be left open to (heretical) conjecture, but i'd assume (double Heresy!) that Kerensky and friends knew where the SLDF/Hegemony had mothballed ships that had been 'scrapped' and brought them back into service because they needed the hulls and firepower. 

Unless that ship in the picture is a Vincent that REALLY let itself go or went berserk with to botox, that's a Farragut. She's active, she's with the Exodus fleet.  That means that at least one Farragut went with Kerensky and co and we can then assume (triple Heresy!) that she either fought in the Pentagon Civil War and was destroyed or is still sitting in some long forgotten Cache as no Farragut has been seen in Clan service.  Even if one survived and thats the ship we see in that picture, we then KNOW that she went with Kerensky and friends and from that, using logic you can infer that she either died in the Pentagon civil war or is still in Clan space somewhere and basically forogtten.

With the Wobbies one we can assume that she was put into storage at Gabriel in a decomissioned and mothballed state, possibly with damage that could be repaired and she was then reactivated, repaired and brought back into service. They would not have rebuilt her from parts, thats the work of a decade with plans they don't have, so the Righteous Justice HAD to be intact.

This isn't the only class that went extinct and then re-appeared, the Taurians found a Quixote class FFG after that class had 'all' been converted into the Volga class transport. She may well have been a wreck that was found and brought back into action with Wobbie help but still, it shows that dead ships can live again.  And those that are mothballed are fairly easy to reactivate rather than badly damaged hulks.
« Last Edit: 29 December 2015, 11:12:06 by marauder648 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4783
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #25 on: 29 December 2015, 06:24:58 »

They were 'dismantled', they only needed to be 're-assembled'.  ;)
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society

marauder648

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6470
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #26 on: 29 December 2015, 06:32:46 »
They were 'dismantled', they only needed to be 're-assembled'.  ;)

Something tells me though that they are not like flat pack boxes, but more like Ikea furniture.  And you can bet that you're going to be missing screws and a bit you need. :p

Dismantling a ship and putting its hull plates and the like into storage would still basically require a full shipyard and crew to rebuild the damn thing and that's not going to be easy or quick.  It makes more sense that the 'scrapped and dismantled' ships were mothballed and hidden away as a just in case. Well out of sight and out of mind either in a system's oort cloud or many AU's away from a systems sun just sitting in space without any gravitational effects on them.  So well hidden that unless you know exactly where they are you're just going to miss them. 

Or put in secret hidden facilities like Gabriel, and whilst thats a full yard, we can assume that they'd put her there intact.  Dismantling a ship with a mind to rebuilding it later is quite simply a silly idea and its more logical that the survivors were just mothballed and hidden away.
« Last Edit: 29 December 2015, 06:35:43 by marauder648 »
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

I am Belch II

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7775
  • It's a gator with a nuke, whats the problem.
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #27 on: 29 December 2015, 06:36:47 »
Nice write up.


Like that picture flying with the S.S. cruiser.
Walking the fine line between sarcasm and being a smart-ass

500 is the number of Warships Now. 500 looks like it will stay for a long time.

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4783
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #28 on: 29 December 2015, 06:38:57 »
Something tells me though that they are not like flat pack boxes, but more like Ikea furniture.  And you can bet that you're going to be missing screws and a bit you need. :p

Dismantling a ship and putting its hull plates and the like into storage would still basically require a full shipyard and crew to rebuild the damn thing and that's not going to be easy or quick.  It makes more sense that the 'scrapped and dismantled' ships were mothballed and hidden away as a just in case. Well out of sight and out of mind either in a system's oort cloud or many AU's away from a systems sun just sitting in space without any gravitational effects on them.  So well hidden that unless you know exactly where they are you're just going to miss them. 

Or put in secret hidden facilities like Gabriel, and whilst thats a full yard, we can assume that they'd put her there intact.  Dismantling a ship with a mind to rebuilding it later is quite simply a silly idea.
Dismantling can be a good idea, it allows for quick access to 'spare parts' should the need arise. However you are right that re-assembling a Farragut (or more) for the Exodus will take some work, but it is manageable.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society

BrokenMnemonic

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1446
Re: Warship of Christmas Day - The Farragut Class Battleship.
« Reply #29 on: 29 December 2015, 12:51:15 »
It may simply be that the last one/two/handful of Farraguts were signed over to whichever shipyard had the contract for scrapping them in 2766, only to later receive a stay of execution after the Periphery Uprising heated up, with at least a couple being brought back into service. The SLDF would've counted them as out of service if they'd gone to a disposal contractor, but it also wouldn't be the first time in history equipment waiting to be dismantled at a scrapyard got pulled back into service in a hurry. With the Farraguts being relatively oldtech for the Hegemony, it's possible wherever they were sent for dismantling was outside the Hegemony.

It's more interesting than optimal, and therefore better. O0 - Weirdo