Q: What goes twice as fast as a Leopard CV and has 3x the payload at the same cost?
A: The Nest Carrier.
The Nest is designed primarily as an
intrasystem carrier in a defensive role. If enemy forces jump into a system and are discovered a Nest loaded with heavy ASF can plot an intercept course launching fighters for either a high speed engagement or dogfight, use it's exceptionally powerful engine to avoid combat, and recover fighters after the engagement. Notably, the Nest can launch most of it's fighters in one minute, a trait shared with the Leopard CV and unavailable to larger carriers which are limited by doors. All of this functions in a package that could even be a dropshuttle instead of a dropship.
The exact loadout can launch 9 fighters and a small craft in a single round. The small craft can flexibly be used to impose an ECM to-hit modifier on opposing fighters, in combat against enemy large craft, in boarding operations, in a detached patrol, or in search and rescue missions. Since it transports small craft bays though, a
second fighter can held as cargo in each small craft bay, providing the ability to launch a second wave after the fighters are brought to readiness, or providing endurance over multiple engagements. Alternatively, the space can be used for cargo to radically increase endurance. Compared to a Leopard, the Nest also manages to mount 30% more armor with an unusual focus towards the rear on the theory that in any combat the Nest should run away.
Many cost-cutting measures are employed. There are only 70 days of supplies between food and maintenance. Users are advised to create caches of supplies around the system they are defending. The central fuel tank is capable of refueling all carried craft about once while traveling at an average of 1g over 70 days. Weapons are limited to point defense and one AC/2 bay discouraging lightly armored fast interceptors at long range. Quarters are spartan with only officers benefitting from non-steerage quarters. Even a basic unit of marines for boarding actions was avoided---a smallcraft can handle that mission.
Comparing with other 3025 era carriers:
- Leopard CV: 1.9k tons, 4/6, 6 ASF, 48 days endurance[air], 168M C-bills, 28M/ASF.
- Union CV: 3.6k tons, 3/5, 12 ASF, 116 days endurance[fuel], 214M C-bills, 18M/ASF.
- Nest: 5k tons, 7/11, 10 Small Craft, 97+ days endurance[fuel], 167M C-bills, 17M/ASF.
- Vengeance: 11.4k tons, 4/6, 40 ASF+3 Small Craft, 40 days endurance[air], 383M C-bills. 9M/ASF.
- Nest: 5k tons, 7/11, 10 Small Craft, 70 days endurance[air/fuel], 167M C-bills, 8M/ASF (with 1 ASF/bay stored as cargo).
The Nest is able to compete with the endurance of the Union CV and the cost/ASF of the Vengeance even given the high acceleration profile.
Nest Carrier
Type: Military Spheriod
Mass: 5,000 tons
Technology Base: Inner Sphere (Standard)
Introduced: 3025
Mass: 5,000
Battle Value: 2,156
Tech Rating/Availability: D/X-E-D-D
Cost: 167,216,000 C-bills
Fuel: 230 tons (6,900)
Safe Thrust: 7
Maximum Thrust: 11
Heat Sinks: 124
Structural Integrity: 11
Armor
Nose: 161
Sides: 162/162
Aft: 191
Cargo
Bay 1: Small Craft (4) 2 Doors
Bay 2: Small Craft (4) 2 Doors
Bay 3: Small Craft (2) 1 Door
Bay 4: Cargo (214.5 tons) 1 Door
Ammunition:
180 rounds of AC/2 ammunition (4 tons)
Escape Pods: 1
Life Boats: 0
Crew: 2 officers, 3 enlisted/non-rated, 4 gunners, 50 bay personnel
Notes: Mounts 39.5 tons of standard aerospace armor.
Weapons: Capital Attack Values (Standard)
Arc (Heat) Heat SRV MRV LRV ERV Class
Nose (2 Heat)
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
RS/LS Fwd (2 Heat)
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
RS/LS Aft (4 Heat)
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
Aft (9 Heat)
3 AC/2 3 1(6) 1(6) 1(6) 0(0) AC
AC/2 Ammo (180 shots)
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
2 Small Laser 2 1(6) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) Point Defense
Design tradeoffs and alternatives:
- Speed(and lack of weapons). A 7/11 carrier is unusual---that's typically an assault dropship speed. A more standard alternative is to have more weapons instead. Given the role of a carrier, using it in direct combat intentionally seems quite risky. In a defensive situation given the choice between "run away" and "fight", it seems that the cost of the engines necessary to run away are typically cheaper than the weapons necessary to convincingly fight.
- Size. The 'startup cost' of a reasonable dropship seems to be about 80M C-bills, so a cost in the neighborhood of twice that allows you to amortize the startup cost effectively. That puts you in the neighborhood of 5K tons, which seems like a nice round number that also fits in a dropshuttle bay should that ever be relevant. At the same time 10 fighters is a pretty potent force, able (for example) to very plausibly take out an invading Overlord for a small fraction of a loaded Overlord's price.
- Endurance. Sacrificing a smallcraft bay in favor of cargo provides no additional endurance given recent rules changes since a Smallcraft bay can be used to transport 200 tons of general cargo.
- Small Craft. You can make a case for using small craft like the Interdictor instead as an alternative since a fully loaded cost is equivalent to ~18 Interdictors. The typical disadvantage of small craft vs. ASF need not come into play since the Small Craft could just target invading dropships, bypassing ASFs. It's a good strategy, limited by the fuel range (~10 burn-days) and limited sensor range of a small craft (1/10th a large craft or nonexistent). A Nest+ASF strategy is slightly more expensive for the force, but with much more endurance and better sensors.
