What would you want in a dedicated CV?

[Scrollreader]

Assume that you happen to be in a position to influence the design of a new Squadron sized dropship to replace an aging and underperforming fleet of leopard CVs, Auroras, and other scattershot solutions for fighter deployment.  What would your preferences be?  Aerodyne or Spheroid?  Is the only thing that matters Cargo and Quarters for sustainable ops?  Do you want a Subcap weapon for orbital removal of fixed air defense?  Should the dropship be able to contribute to the ASF battles via armor or weapons, or should it be primarily be a drop collar and hangar with only a reasonable self defense option or two? 

[AlphaMirage]

I think the Carrier dropship is actually probably the peak design, I would take that and 60% it for 500 tons cargo and room for half the squadron of tech crew (or upgrade the Aircraft bays to ARTS).

Where I think it fails and this is a totally clan thing is that it is meant to serve as a warship escort and anti-fighter craft in addition to carrying its fighters. I don't think that is a smart move as it means the carrier could become disabled or destroyed and render itself unable to serve its role as a carrier or be useful in search and rescue operations post-mission.

For extra capability I'd only pick one of the two options depending on how big you wanted it to be
Three Sub-Cap missiles in the nose or satellite imagers to aid ground targeting

[Kerfuffin(925)]

The Aesir/Vanir is the platonic ideal. Aside from being spheroid maybe.

[AlphaMirage]

The thing with the Aesir is that I would use that as a warship escort but not for squadron deployment. It's more like the Titan or Vengeance than a Leopard

[Scrollreader]

Absolutely.   5ktons is probably the top end for a leopard cv replacement, and even that is awfully close to just using a Gorgon instead, unless you can sell a new or vastly improved mission capability.

[Frabby]

In a vacuum, such a ship should be small to medium sized, with above average speed, a modicum of armor, point defense, and most importantly ample supplies of fuel and consumables. Essentially, a bigger relative of the Leopard CV with a thousand tons of fuel.
Leave the fighting to its fighters and make sure it can outrun anything threatening the mothership.

[Daryk]

A replacement for Leopard CVs?  Well...

1) CHEAP
2) At least as fast as the slowest fighters it has to carry.
3) LOTS of fuel.
4) Enough room for the AsTechs to make the full tech teams necessary to support the Squadron.
5) At least one White Shark launcher, with enough of a magazine to carry both standard and nuclear ordnance.
6) Enough Point Defense weapons to resist a White Shark salvo.
7) Enough AAA weapons to survive an attack by a squadron.
8) Enough armor to survive an attack by a squadron.

[Cannonshop]

What do you NEED?

Okay, hear me out.

what does a Squadron of ASF operating from a Carrier need?

We're talking fuel, spares, maintenance and deck crew (and spaces), plus carrier crew, plus detection range and communications to coordinate over long distances, plus support for the fighters to extend their range and operating radius, because if the enemy can get in striking range of your carrier, you've done something horribly wrong.

The primary WEAPON of a CV, is its air wing.  That is the whole and sole purpose of the carrier, everything else is tertiary, or better handled by another dropship.

This isn't to say that bad things don't happen, and it's good to have point defenses for leakers who get through, but if you're trying to use a carrier as a combat asset of its own, you've already lost the thread (and will likely lose the conflict.)

YOur main angles should be, then:

1. Adequate support for your embarked air-wing(s).  This is fuel, food, spare parts, bunk space and so on-your carrier is an airbase, equip it as such.

2. Adequate support for your carrier's crew-this means fuel, spare parts, and bunk space, to keep the ship running and allow you to support your embarked air wing.  (does no good to have a carrier if you can't keep the decks pressurized or feed them.)

3. Adequate detection range and mobility to avoid being isolated and engaged by enemy forces.  Ideally in the dreaded defensive situation, the enemy should be asking "Where did all these fighters come from??" not "Why haven't you hit their carrier with our naval PPCs yet?"

4. Adequate to minimal protection from enemy fire-if you're positioning your carriers close enough to the action that they're taking fire, you did it wrong, but...incidents happen.  Weapons should be focused on point defenses only-your striking power is the Air Wing, not your deck guns. Armor should be cheap, minimal stuff that doesn't cost a lot to replace, but isn't thick enough to encourage members of the brotherhood of the Randy Sheep to blunder into the thick of enemy fire seeking glory.

That, after all, is why you have the air wing-their job is to blunder into the thick of fire, your job is to fix the damage to them, refuel them, rearm them, and send them out to do it again.

5. Common parts.  The Carrier's own systems (Propulsion, mainly) should be easy to source, maintain and replace using common components found on commercial or large-batch military production models that are also easier to replace than something custom that can be lost with the destruction of a single factory.  Avoid imported components whenever and wherever possible-other nations can o this thing called 'embargoes' which can cripple your naval programs if you don't have the ability to ignore them.

[Daryk]

Good points all!  :thumbsup:

[Tyler Jorgensson]

An Aesir/Vanir merged with a Titan Monitor merged with the looks of a Tiamat or Conquistador. At least for a Star or more of Aerofighters. Anything smaller would be based on Dropships in system or on planet. I wouldn’t want to be carrying Leopards when I could be carrying a Vengeance class instead.

[AlphaMirage]

Staffing a Vengeance is a difficult ask though and likely overkill for the great houses. Additionally you could have one guarding a jump point so it makes sense to use a smaller vessel for patrolling.

[Tyler Jorgensson]

Yeah I’m at work so I don’t have time to work out what I’d really want for a smallish fighter carrier. A large one is easy to imagine.

[Jellico]

Where I think it fails and this is a totally clan thing is that it is meant to serve as a warship escort and anti-fighter craft in addition to carrying its fighters. I don't think that is a smart move as it means the carrier could become disabled or destroyed and render itself unable to serve its role as a carrier or be useful in search and rescue operations post-mission.

Having spent too long in SLDF Titans trying to justify them against Vengeances, the magic acronym is ECM.

You fly your DropShip in at the center of your formation and never stop Evading. Even at short range an enemy ASF needs to overcome +4 to hit you and the DropShip is going to get acceptable to-hits. You won't be hitting anything at long range, but that isn’t the game you are playing.

The big bonus is your ASF are flying in your ECM bubble which is a pain for the hostile. Squadron combat is a numbers game and even a small 10% buff adds up quickly. Because it is capital ECM you even get protection from capital missiles.

This works well with assault DropShips as well as hybrid CVs like Leopards and Titans. For an Aesir the plan is to stand back and throw missiles while the NL45s provide ECM support.

[Alan Grant]

Jellico's point is VERY important. In a wide open space battlefield, there is no cover except that you bring with you. That's basically what ECM represents.

I don't always do that with the ASF carrier itself. I find it's a great use for some other small dropship that I regard as useful but expendable. For the Inner Sphere the Avenger for example is really good at serving in this role. Especially in the later eras where it's too small to be an effective combat dropship in its own right against anything but another small combat dropship. But turn it into a combat support platform for an ASF squadron and you have some magic and greater utility for it.

But push come to shove, I would use the carrier itself for the role. Especially if the opposition is bigger, tougher, has a lot of capital or sub cap missiles etc. Where the odds for the ASF squadron aren't too great and they really need to win or it's heck for all my forces because we lose space superiority.

As far as the CV build.

The thing that struck me when I contemplated this question, is that I'd want 1-2 small craft bays in addition to the 6 ASF bays.

They might be used for spare ASF airframes if you know you are going into a long campaign without resupply. But they can also operate in the usual shuttle roles in addition to pilot search and rescue. Or transporting small numbers of troops for boarding operations. Or ECM support. Or small craft specializing in patrol duties for long term system patrol deployment. What they offer is some open architecture flexibility and the ability to round out the force with a couple specialized small craft platforms based on the mission.

There are some roles that small craft are good at but you rarely see used because so few dropships have the bays. Including small craft bays is one of the things the Vengeance gets right that I really wish other carriers like the Gorgon had picked up on.

[AlphaMirage]

I suppose that works Jellico. I always put my forward ECM on the Small Craft so it serves as basically a Growler with the extra bonus of firing AMS multiple times per turn so I don't sweat capital missiles as much, against fighters its interceptors I'm worried more about as you should be evading until you are in short/medium range anyhow.
 
For dropships particularly assault types absolutely all of them use ECM in my doctrine its such a cheap bonus it would be foolish not to.

[Jellico]

Around TRO3057 FASA forgot small craft existed so didn't put Small Craft Bays in a lot of places where they were needed, like Titans. You can't rely on them being there.

[Scrollreader]

I feel like we're Feature bloating back into a larger Carrier Vessel, here.   :P

Even assuming the crew live on the small craft (they have Quarters, after all), that's 200 tons for the Bay, 35 tons (Steerage) for the tech team, and further tonnage for actual marines.  That's a lot to ask for a small to medium ASF carrier.

I suppose to some degree it depends on what purpose you have for your dropships.  While somewhat "with the DropShips you have, not the ones you want", in general I would suspect major engagements to be the places for something like an Aesir or a Vengeance, due to collar count and concentration of forces.  What is the purpose of a smaller CV?  Garrison reinforcement?  Pirate Hunting?   Integrated air support for ground pounders?  Jumpship and Dropship protection?

[Maingunnery]

For a smaller CV I would likely use them for system patrols or orbital guards of minor systems.
And even in those cases I would want to to have a SC bay so that they could perform custom checks without risking the DS.

[AlphaMirage]

Yeah I think a hypothetical small CV should have a fighter and small craft option. 6 fighters take up 900 tons and 4 small craft are 800 so if we use my 500 tons of cargo the small craft version will have an extra 100 tons for specialist equipment or to embark marines.

Like Maingunnery said small craft are very useful for police and customs work. I would even say if you had a small craft carrier and 2 fighter carriers that would be a stout planetary defense that could definitely contest any enemy incursions with normal transports like the Overlord.

[Scrollreader]

Oh, a variant with Small Craft capabilities is absolutely a good idea.  Especially for a restive or recently conquered planet.  Customs checks are far more likely to be ad hoc in such a situation,  and the ability to drop some BA on a problem is great.  But trying to add that capability to a base CV is going to add a lot of extra cruft to what is supposed to be a leopard replacement.   

... In all honesty, that might be a good refit option for those old Leopard CVs.  Replace all six ASF bays with a couple small craft and some BA Bays/Quarters.  Should leave enough room for supplies for a nice long operational time. 

[Tyler Jorgensson]

Totally forgot in my hypothetical large carrier about small craft bays: at least a couple Battle Taxis and a couple AMS/ECM platforms like the Wurger.

Got some time tonight so I’ll throw together an idea and post it in the fan made section.

[Cannonshop]

Jellico's point is VERY important. In a wide open space battlefield, there is no cover except that you bring with you. That's basically what ECM represents.

I don't always do that with the ASF carrier itself. I find it's a great use for some other small dropship that I regard as useful but expendable. For the Inner Sphere the Avenger for example is really good at serving in this role. Especially in the later eras where it's too small to be an effective combat dropship in its own right against anything but another small combat dropship. But turn it into a combat support platform for an ASF squadron and you have some magic and greater utility for it.

But push come to shove, I would use the carrier itself for the role. Especially if the opposition is bigger, tougher, has a lot of capital or sub cap missiles etc. Where the odds for the ASF squadron aren't too great and they really need to win or it's heck for all my forces because we lose space superiority.

As far as the CV build.

The thing that struck me when I contemplated this question, is that I'd want 1-2 small craft bays in addition to the 6 ASF bays.

They might be used for spare ASF airframes if you know you are going into a long campaign without resupply. But they can also operate in the usual shuttle roles in addition to pilot search and rescue. Or transporting small numbers of troops for boarding operations. Or ECM support. Or small craft specializing in patrol duties for long term system patrol deployment. What they offer is some open architecture flexibility and the ability to round out the force with a couple specialized small craft platforms based on the mission.

There are some roles that small craft are good at but you rarely see used because so few dropships have the bays. Including small craft bays is one of the things the Vengeance gets right that I really wish other carriers like the Gorgon had picked up on.

I look at it differently.  If you're in a position where you're trying to use your Carrier as a strike asset, you've already lost on the strategic battle, because you let your carrier get into that situation instead of eating the tactical L and pulling it out, you're likely to eat the Tactical loss AND lose on the strategic level.

We have actual Combat Dropships that can go charge in and scrimmage with enemy fleet assets, Carriers are effectively the airbase for a fighter wing, only it can sink/be truly blown up with not even a cratered runway, losing all the fuel, spare parts, ammunition and maintenance crew for your fighters.
 
You know, those manned missiles with guns of their own?

Yah, that stuff, all the stuff you need to move forward with operations AFTER the set-piece battle, like your mechanics (which are not something falling off an assembly line at Defiance, Lockheed, or Boeing in job lots, or able to be stored in underground warehouses until needed in huge stockpiles the way, say, missile ammunition, autocannon rounds, spare lasers etc. can be.)

If you're taking your carrier into a furball, you're throwing away your ability to repair after the fight, you're throwing away your ability to refuel after a fight, you're throwing away your ability to rearm after a fight, and you're losing experience base to handle and integrate replacements after losses.

It's a situation where you can possibly win the tactical set-piece and be so thoroughly savaged you lose the next few confrontations even as they're getting smaller, because you've lost the infrastructure that keeps your fighter wings fighting to win (or even, lose) a single engagement.

If you're trying to fly your carrier as a strike ship, instead of using strike ships, and you're not retreating with it when you run out of strike ships, you've already lost the war-even if you win this engagement.

[Cannonshop]

Let me expand on that point I tried to make here;

When I write (*or play) a naval engagement, one of the first things I target are the other guy's fighter carriers.  They're strategic objective assets that can degrade an enemy's ability to fight the next ten fights.  Denying enemy fighters a place to land, refuel, rearm and repair while protecting my own assets that do the same allows me greater flexibility in operations, and greater chance of local superiority both in the present battle, and in the next one.

Notably, this is a conservative (meaning 'conserving assets') strategy.  If my ships nail his Vengeance, he's got to abandon airframes even if he wins-he can't board them all on the rest of his ships and keep unit consistency.  If I damage his hangar decks on his other ships in the same fight, he's got to abandon assets even if he wins the current engagement.

Likewise, I will pull back carriers to keep them outside of easy weapons range whenever possible, for the same reason-I can recall fighters, rearm them, refuel them, repair them, rest the pilots and move to another position to engage, and potentially dictate the opposition's movements because as long as I have those assets working, I can threaten whatever operations he's in the system to do.

This is part of maintaining a "Fleet In Being", also known as "Deny the enemy the decisive battle he desires" in order to force him to expend time, fuel, air, food, water, and ammunition trying to deal with the presence of a hostile fleet in being.

Every fighter an enemy has to expend chasing my carrier, is a fighter not securing air-superiority over my planet, a fighter not delivering bombs, not escorting dropships...every Dropship he has to devote to the chase is not providing cover for his landing forces, not acting as a command post, not acting as a supply point, not escorting his transport droppers, and so on.

Thus, charging in with your Carrier makes about as much sense, as practicing ramming tactics with your corvettes. YES, you might do damage, but you'll lose in the long run-it's something that only works once in a set piece battle or immediate tactical scenario, and it's a move that can lose the strategic level conflict, especially if you make a habit of it.

this isn't to say there aren't situations where it's called for, but they're not going to be common unless you've got the Lyran High Command planning out your operations and Morgan Kell's got the brain-flu and can't show up for work.

[Jellico]

Risk vs reward. You have to filter everything through the lenses of limited jump collars. Likewise standing off with ASF isn't as easy as in real life. There is an interplay between standard and strategic thrust. Battletech CVs have to assume that they will be shot at simply because there are so many ways of getting to them. Finally hangers are protected in a way our modern fuel-air bombs can't be.

Clearly something like a Vengeance with its aft canted weapons is supposed to spend its days running away.

With a Leopard it isn't so clear. Cargo space for only a few sorties. No depth with only six airframes. It is a one and done platform where the presence of the carrier probably will tip the balance.

Like anything else, pick your battles. But don't leave a solid weapon off the table when facing perfectly survivable situations which will only cost you more ASF.

[idea weenie]

Can you put capital ECM on a Dropshuttle and launch that Dropshuttle from a Warship?

The Warship is the carrier, the Dropshuttle carries the capital ECM, and Small Craft + ASF perform the strike.

[AlphaMirage]

Why not just use a regular warship/Dropship arrangement? You get more bang for the KF core.

There is also nothing special about Dropshuttles beside lacking the boom and being size restricted to 5ktons

[idea weenie]

Why not just use a regular warship/Dropship arrangement? You get more bang for the KF core.

There is also nothing special about Dropshuttles beside lacking the boom and being size restricted to 5ktons

Dropshuttle vs Dropship cuts down the Warship's KF drive cost.  Not sure about the docking time of the duo (i.e. which takes less time to dock, a Dropship or a Dropshuttle)

[Alan Grant]

I really only meant I would put a carrier in that ECM coverage of its ASF squadron role, as a true last resort.

As I said, I'd prefer to use something else first and most of the time. The Avenger comes to mind or something akin to that. A small combat dropship.

But as a tactical and strategic last resort, it may be better than sending forth a squadron when the opponent will definitely win. If losing that upcoming engagement means I lose space superiority, I lose the jump point, I lose my jumpships, I lose my troop ships, I just flat out lose if this ASF squadron doesn't achieve its mission this sortie.

So on that point I agree with you, keep the carrier alive. My reference to the contrary was truly the .01 percentile exception.

[DevianID]

The Leopard CV is a great vessel.  A slightly larger version would be less economical but if you have 12 fighters plus 2 small craft on something 5k-10k tons in size I think you have a winner.  A step up from the Leopard with a bit more range and capability, without being a full on large carrier craft.  Great for light interdiction roles, with the small craft bays and a generous fuel and cargo hold letting it do important logistic missions, unlike the smaller dropships which cant support logistics missions.  Fuel and cargo are really important, more important then speed if you are budgeting for a smaller size, as they let you support multiple fighter sorties and keep the fleet in action for extended tours.

Also, a leopard CV but with 4 small craft and 100 tons for fuel/ cargo support would be great.  Something to send out to far away places to handle all the 'coast guard' duties.  This coast guard 'cutter' could pack a pair of SAR small craft and a pair of aerofighters when on patrol, and could switch to 4 personal shuttles for dedicated jumpship/dropship/space station rescue or boarding/search and seizure.  And at 1900 tons it would be the cheap option for a paramilitary force like the coast guard cutter compared to the military only nature of the leopard CV since the aerofighters are only good at attacking.

[Cannonshop]

The Leopard CV is a great vessel.  A slightly larger version would be less economical but if you have 12 fighters plus 2 small craft on something 5k-10k tons in size I think you have a winner.  A step up from the Leopard with a bit more range and capability, without being a full on large carrier craft.  Great for light interdiction roles, with the small craft bays and a generous fuel and cargo hold letting it do important logistic missions, unlike the smaller dropships which cant support logistics missions.  Fuel and cargo are really important, more important then speed if you are budgeting for a smaller size, as they let you support multiple fighter sorties and keep the fleet in action for extended tours.

Also, a leopard CV but with 4 small craft and 100 tons for fuel/ cargo support would be great.  Something to send out to far away places to handle all the 'coast guard' duties.  This coast guard 'cutter' could pack a pair of SAR small craft and a pair of aerofighters when on patrol, and could switch to 4 personal shuttles for dedicated jumpship/dropship/space station rescue or boarding/search and seizure.  And at 1900 tons it would be the cheap option for a paramilitary force like the coast guard cutter compared to the military only nature of the leopard CV since the aerofighters are only good at attacking.

Your 'coast guard' CV would be an in-system only craft, and only financially viable within an earth/moon axis.  (it can't handle more distant ops in a star system for the same reasons you can't really defend a system with your ground based fighters-it takes too long to get anywhere you need it to be.)

a better 'coast guard' vessel would be a Quetzcoatl Scout, because that one can go from L1 to L1 and maybe get rescue boats or customs inspectors where they need to be before everyone in an accident suffocates or dies of thirst.  (better still, would be something with a limited jump drive AND powerful in-system engines, a 1LY drive inside a star system and you can cover everything out to the oort with something that'll get there before the end of the month.)

[Frabby]

Like most so-called carrier vessels in BattleTech, the Quetzalcoatl, too, is hamstrung by a prohibitive lack of fuel reserves. BT fighter carrier vessels, much like the 'Mech carriers, are really just deployment vessels designed to deliver a bunch of fighters into a combat zone. They are essentially incapable of serving as motherships. The Leopard CV is the least bad of the bunch imho; and the Titan tries to be too many things at once.

[Cannonshop]

Like most so-called carrier vessels in BattleTech, the Quetzalcoatl, too, is hamstrung by a prohibitive lack of fuel reserves. BT fighter carrier vessels, much like the 'Mech carriers, are really just deployment vessels designed to deliver a bunch of fighters into a combat zone. They are essentially incapable of serving as motherships. The Leopard CV is the least bad of the bunch imho; and the Titan tries to be too many things at once.

I'll agree on that-we don't have designs that could logically do the job they're supposed to be doing in the canon.

hence why I made my list in my first post on this, and why I argued what I did in my second and third-the Naval side of the game suffers enormously from "quick toss something up there we need to make page count" instead of anything resembling a dedicated idea of WHAT to fill that page count with...which may be why Battlespace and subsequent efforts to highlight space-naval have failed commercially while the ground game's done little but prosper in the same hands.

I kind of think we almost need to find a way to divorce the two while having them coexist in the fiction.  Different focus, not just terrain and tech, but focus for it.

I had this idea before, but didn't go anywhere with it, but...

With the ground game, we have 'traits' and "quirks"-special rules for certain units reflected in their fluff.  Since Naval is really more Strategic than Tactical, maybe "Doctrines" unique to established factions that alter the tables, not reflecting the tech, so much as how the people using it are taught and trained to use it?

[Insert Clan name] faction forces have Harjel in the hull, while [insert Sphere faction] depressurizes theirs before combat, each alters a different part of the critical hits table and has their own drawbacks (depressurized ops don't apply to transport/landing ships while Harjel applies to everything but fighters, the trade being that ships running depressurized don't have fires but cost more to man, while Harjel protection invalidates blowouts, but leaves the user vulnerable to internal fires.)

You know, like Faction "A" gets a bonus for fighting in groups, while faction "B" gets a bonus for soloing.  because that's how they trained.

Ideas for a general list:

1. Damage Control doctrines differing between factions where one faction has 'Everybody does damage control' while another 'only specialized teams do damage control'.  each giving a different bonus for how to handle damage to the ship.

2. Formation vs. Group vs. solo bonuses to initiative or gunnery

3. This faction trains to absorb damage, that faction trains to avoid damage.

*I don't have all the answers, I'm not a game developer.

[Alan Grant]

I recommend starting a new thread Cannonshop. Otherwise it feels like a bit of a hijack of this one.

[Cannonshop]

I recommend starting a new thread Cannonshop. Otherwise it feels like a bit of a hijack of this one.

Yah, good point...or I could just drop the subject, because it's a digression, and offer an apology for going off topic.

[Tyler Jorgensson]

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/aerospace/in-response-to-a-question-the-luxury-class-dropship/

My response to the thread: i had my opinions earlier in the thread: NOT a Leopard but my 'ideal' Carrier.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

-Need to be spheroid; It gives more armor on the heavier tonnage than Aerodyne. It doesn't expected to be an active combat force either. Other than its cargo capacity it must spend everything for its own safely.
-Something durable enough to withstand at least two full capital weapon battery shots for all sides - I mean, all sides are need to have at least 1,400 armor points. Else withstand only one full capital battery(at least 700 armor points) if it is lance/Level II transport.
-Also spamming LAMS to cut down the enemy Capital Missiles.
-A few AA guns on the left space, and only allowed AA guns are energy weapon grop to avoid any sign of ammunition explosion. Better if it's Pulse Laser, for its accurate shot gives the better chance to harrass the enemy ASFs.
-Need to be fast as well, at least 5/8 is required to deliver them fast with minimum enemy counterattack. Better if 7/11.
-Enough spare cargo space.
-Evenly divided doors, and assign most doors on ASF Bays due to their role of interceptor in a pinch if the ship has both ground unit bay and ASF bay - usually ground forces are only leave the ship once, but ASFs are constantly leave and return again and again.
-At least one Field Kitchen.
-At least one MASH.
-Better if you have any Comm-Scanner or Satellite Imager for provide tactical advantage to your wings.
-Also better with Naval C3, for you may call for the help if the enemy is close to you.
-If you have friendly relation with ComStar or you are Clans, and it's more than Level II transport, add a HPG is not a bad idea too.
-Finally, more than enough Life Boat and Escape Pods, enough to use every single crews, bay personnel and the pilots of the units it carries. Better if all the Life Boat/Escape Pods in a ship could carry twice of the all the crews(include bay personnel and pilots).

[Hellraiser]

I would probably double the size of the Leo in order to add 1-2 Shuttles, bump the speed to 5/8 to outrun things that want to kill you & keep up with Assault Fighters, & add some Cargo space.

[Daryk]

Not a bad precis at all...  8)

[Giovanni Blasini]

You know, you could turn a Danais into a small carrier, with its integral two small craft, by converting some of its cargo tonnage to add six aerospace fighter bays.  Swap the 10 second-class passenger berths normally used for your small craft crews to 22 steerage quarters for the fighter pilots, techs, and shuttle crews, and you're still left with 760 tons of cargo.  That's potentially more cargo per fighter than the entire cargo bay on a Leopard CV.  Compared to canon carrier DropShips, only the SLDF Titan has more tons of cargo per fighter, though the Clan Carrier class comes close.

If you still feel that's not enough, you could instead drop the two small craft.  In fact, that might work better, working from the standpoint that you're converting the existing boat bay to carry six fighters instead of two shuttles.  Keep the passenger quarters as second-class and add two more to the existing ten, and you're at 1186 tons of cargo, nearly that of the SLDF Titan, on a 75 million C-Bill DropShip.  That's an astoundingly cheap escort carrier.

If you insist on having some guns, the Trojan refit of the Danais works as a base, adding two second class quarters, leaving you with cargo reduced to 991 tons.  That's still a respectable amount of cargo for a small carrier DropShip.

[Daryk]

How much does a Leopard CV run again? ???

[Giovanni Blasini]

How much does a Leopard CV run again? ???

It's 168 million C-Bills for the 2581 version, and 221.5 million for the 3054 version.  Even the Trojan, which is armed, is only around 144 million.

[Hellraiser]

You know, you could turn a Danais into a small carrier, with its integral two small craft,

Funny you suggest the Danais, I was thinking of something like it or the Union but I wanted to make it faster (5/8) so I just said "double the Leo".

[Daryk]

75 million does sound astoundingly low for a DropShip of that size.

[Giovanni Blasini]

75 million does sound astoundingly low for a DropShip of that size.

It all comes down to the cost mulitpliers.  Weapons cost money, and the Danais doesn't have any weapons at all.  The net effect is that the Danais ends up being literally the cheapest DropShip in the game, coming in around 2.4 million C-Bills cheaper than a Manatee class cargo-carrier DropShip which, despite not having weapons, has a large number of heat sinks.

[Minemech]

I generally follow the idea that the carrier may support, or be part of an assault ship squadron, but is not to act as such a ship itself. If it were to have naval weapons, I would go for capital over sub but that is unlikely. Since you are aiming for a light ship, do an aero.

[Daryk]

I'd think point defense wouldn't be too bad, but you're right about the multipliers... they're literally the highest in the game.

[Hellraiser]

I tend to arm my custom droppers w/ a combo of MLs & AMS w/ a small selection of longer ranged guns

[Daryk]

Not a bad approach at all!  8)

[Colt Ward]

I feel like we're Feature bloating back into a larger Carrier Vessel, here.   :P

But that is the thing, the most valuable commodity in BattleTech is the drop collar . . . why would you waste one to carry a paltry number of ASF?  If operating solo, a six ship 'squadron' is going to struggle to maintain a BARCAP on patrol with maintenance let alone flight crew rest- unless you are going to double up on pilots which runs contrary to BT organization.  Further, nothing says the carrier always has to be full, but it should be able to transport a significant number of combat parasites through jump IMO. 

Puppy has some good points, but I would have a couple of questions for role . . .

Do you intend for this DS to operate solo- IE patrol on it's own?  is it intended just to operate along with a fleet?  Is it intended to escort landing forces and put down on the planet?  Will this DS need to board/inspect anything on it's patrol- IE customs & interdiction duties?

I think it should be a Spheriod, as pointed out Aerodynes have self-defense and landing issues.

I think it should mix ASF cubicles and Small Craft cubicles.

I think flight crew & support should be given regular quarters to extend the patrol range- the cubicle included quarters can be overflow or storage IMO.  Throw some crates of SPAM where the pilot would normally bunk and let the jokes ensue.

I think cargo & fuel storage are going to be almost as important as the ASF cubicles- this is what lets you set a aggressive operational tempo and stay out longer.

I am not opposed to ammo based weapons on the carrier, their magazines can carry 'extra' supplies of munitions for the ASF/SC compliment.

[Daryk]

The "free" bay quality quarters can house prisoners or rescued personnel.  ;)

[Colt Ward]

Sure, but until you have those items the quarters make good storage.

[Hellraiser]

Not every DS has to be massive to support a limited collar invasion fleet.

1.  If they are going to invade, the house will gather a big enough fleet to account for smaller ships.
2.  Sometimes a small ship is ideal for special operations.  (Leopard, Fury)
3.  Smaller ships are still quite useful w/o ever touching a JS collar in that they can do system sized operations.  (See above + Leo-CV, Gazelle, Buccaneer)
   IE.  A double sized Interdiction & Patrol ship that combines the LEO-CV & Intruder might be ideal for system patrols & shipping interdiction checks & doesn't need to move a Wing/Regiment.
4.  For the cost of some of those massive DS w/ the insane C-Bill modifier you can drop down to a smaller ship class & use the savings to buy a JS.
5.  As for flight crew & marine quarters, I'm inclined to do that on WS & really large DS but for something that is doing system patrol that will stop off at Stations & Planetary bases often, I don't see it as needed at all.

I'm not saying I want my regiment transported by 27 Leopards, but having a Trio of them to split up a company into 3 lance sized special objective/distraction targets isn't a bad idea either.

[Colt Ward]

Not every DS has to be massive to support a limited collar invasion fleet.

1.  If they are going to invade, the house will gather a big enough fleet to account for smaller ships.
2.  Sometimes a small ship is ideal for special operations.  (Leopard, Fury)
3.  Smaller ships are still quite useful w/o ever touching a JS collar in that they can do system sized operations.  (See above + Leo-CV, Gazelle, Buccaneer)
   IE.  A double sized Interdiction & Patrol ship that combines the LEO-CV & Intruder might be ideal for system patrols & shipping interdiction checks & doesn't need to move a Wing/Regiment.
4.  For the cost of some of those massive DS w/ the insane C-Bill modifier you can drop down to a smaller ship class & use the savings to buy a JS.
5.  As for flight crew & marine quarters, I'm inclined to do that on WS & really large DS but for something that is doing system patrol that will stop off at Stations & Planetary bases often, I don't see it as needed at all.

I'm not saying I want my regiment transported by 27 Leopards, but having a Trio of them to split up a company into 3 lance sized special objective/distraction targets isn't a bad idea either.

1-  Collars are still the most limited thing, if you can carry a two Leopards or a Union & cargo DS the latter is a infinitely better choice.  No air/water crossing invasion ever complained about bringing too much stuff.

2-  Smaller ship?  get a Small Craft

3-  Why I pointed out the dropship did not need to maintain a full compliment (capability vs actual use) . . . I was also not recommending a replacement for a Vengence, but rather something 10-20 ASF as a better practical size, though it would depend on OP answers.  If you are on patrol you cannot operate long with a BARCAP up with 6 fighters . . . 4 on 8 off as a cycle?  Maintenance alone is going to mess with that rotation let alone crew fatigue.

4-  Cost in military procurement is rarely if ever a objection.  Once again, not talking about a Vengence or Colossus, just something larger than a Leopard.

5-  How is your ship patrolling if you are stopped off in the main planet's orbit or tied up to stations?  A patrolling ship would need some sort of marines for boarding & inspections, and it would be better to give them quarters rather than use bays due to the efficiencies- same with flight crews, especially if you break the BT mold and have a Blue/Gold flight crew for each ASF (or combat Small Craft).

[Hellraiser]

3-  Why I pointed out the dropship did not need to maintain a full compliment (capability vs actual use) . . . I was also not recommending a replacement for a Vengence, but rather something 10-20 ASF as a better practical size, though it would depend on OP answers.  If you are on patrol you cannot operate long with a BARCAP up with 6 fighters . . . 4 on 8 off as a cycle?  Maintenance alone is going to mess with that rotation let alone crew fatigue.

5-  How is your ship patrolling if you are stopped off in the main planet's orbit or tied up to stations?  A patrolling ship would need some sort of marines for boarding & inspections, and it would be better to give them quarters rather than use bays due to the efficiencies- same with flight crews, especially if you break the BT mold and have a Blue/Gold flight crew for each ASF (or combat Small Craft).

BARCAP is something a Warship does w/ all of it's fighters.  Or at least a full DS Squadron with a wing+ of fighters.
A single Leo-CV wouldn't likely have a BARCAP operating 24/7.  (or at all)
The Leo itself is what is doing the patrol, the 6 fighters are the reaction force if something comes up.
At best 1-2 pilots would run a rotating "Ready-5" (or 10) each shift with fighter(s) prepped (armed/fueled) but not in the cockpit the entire shift.
We are talking about your own system after all, not an enemy system.


Every patrol has an end point.
US Naval vessels go out for a few months & then end up back in port.
Something like a Leo-CV would patrol some area (jump point, freighter route, space station yard, etc etc) for X-amount of time, then come back for to a base to refuel the DS & give the crew a day+ to stretch legs while a different ship went out.

[Daryk]

4 on/8 off?  What kind of sadist are you? ???

Seriously, the US Navy (that singularly unsympathetic institution) never went below 5 and dime.  Subs settled on 6 on/12 off (unless you were qualifying, of course...  ::)).

[Colt Ward]

Lol, I would have referred to you on that . . . worst shift I did for a week was 4 & 4 . . . which sucked because you could be sitting and waiting in convoy then finally moving & setting up for a hour or two.  Then again, that section chief was a Marine . . .

Hellraiser- fine a CAP, and if on alert yeah they would have another pair on ready 5.

[Hellraiser]

Hellraiser- fine a CAP, and if on alert yeah they would have another pair on ready 5.

Any of the CAPs is going to be flown by a larger group is my point.

Each of those patrols is designed for being flown in an area where combat is "likely" or at least a possibility on any given day.
Your flying them when your in open waters or off the coast of a hostile nation.

The Leo-CV example is a patrol in their own system.
The CV is in itself, the CAP, it flies out away from a station or base or along a route looking for anything that shouldn't be there but 99% of the time won't find anything, because its in the home system.

If an Aegis w/ its 18 Fighters & 4 Dropships is the "Carrier" of a taskforce (or even a Fox w/ its 12 & 5) and the Vengeance is a Light/Escort Carrier, the Leo CV is a Frigate/Destroyer with a single Helepad deck on the back.
That helo can support combat actions maybe or do some SAR but it isn't doing a full time patrol because there is just that one helo.

That is how I see the LEO-CV.  The Fighters are essentially added firepower when it is patrolling solo.
That single squadron might participate in CAPs when its part of a larger taskforce & the load is carried by all available ships, but, I don't see it running a "Full Time" CAP of any kind.

Like I said, at best I'd think they would have a pair of fighters "prepped" for every shift & maybe 1 of the 2 pilots actually in the cockpit while the other is on call & the remaining 4 are "off duty" but can be called up if something serious arises.

Meanwhile the 2 on duty "can" actually launch & do a patrol when the ship senses something approaching or wants to do a fly by on a check point w/o getting in too close with the DS.
For example, if a Mining station on an Asteroid is part of what they patrol, the fighters might do a visual inspection pass while the DS is out Long Weapons range or fully out of range.

[Daryk]

Lol, I would have referred to you on that . . . worst shift I did for a week was 4 & 4 . . . which sucked because you could be sitting and waiting in convoy then finally moving & setting up for a hour or two.  Then again, that section chief was a Marine . . .
*snip*

There's a reason we call that kind of rotation "port and stupid"...  ::)

[I am Belch II]

Lots of fighters, and some good anti fighter defence, and the ability to run if dedicated warships get close.

[theagent]

What do you NEED?

Okay, hear me out.

what does a Squadron of ASF operating from a Carrier need?

We're talking fuel, spares, maintenance and deck crew (and spaces), plus carrier crew, plus detection range and communications to coordinate over long distances, plus support for the fighters to extend their range and operating radius, because if the enemy can get in striking range of your carrier, you've done something horribly wrong.

The primary WEAPON of a CV, is its air wing.  That is the whole and sole purpose of the carrier, everything else is tertiary, or better handled by another dropship.

This isn't to say that bad things don't happen, and it's good to have point defenses for leakers who get through, but if you're trying to use a carrier as a combat asset of its own, you've already lost the thread (and will likely lose the conflict.)

YOur main angles should be, then:

1. Adequate support for your embarked air-wing(s).  This is fuel, food, spare parts, bunk space and so on-your carrier is an airbase, equip it as such.

2. Adequate support for your carrier's crew-this means fuel, spare parts, and bunk space, to keep the ship running and allow you to support your embarked air wing.  (does no good to have a carrier if you can't keep the decks pressurized or feed them.)

3. Adequate detection range and mobility to avoid being isolated and engaged by enemy forces.  Ideally in the dreaded defensive situation, the enemy should be asking "Where did all these fighters come from??" not "Why haven't you hit their carrier with our naval PPCs yet?"

4. Adequate to minimal protection from enemy fire-if you're positioning your carriers close enough to the action that they're taking fire, you did it wrong, but...incidents happen.  Weapons should be focused on point defenses only-your striking power is the Air Wing, not your deck guns. Armor should be cheap, minimal stuff that doesn't cost a lot to replace, but isn't thick enough to encourage members of the brotherhood of the Randy Sheep to blunder into the thick of enemy fire seeking glory.

That, after all, is why you have the air wing-their job is to blunder into the thick of fire, your job is to fix the damage to them, refuel them, rearm them, and send them out to do it again.

5. Common parts.  The Carrier's own systems (Propulsion, mainly) should be easy to source, maintain and replace using common components found on commercial or large-batch military production models that are also easier to replace than something custom that can be lost with the destruction of a single factory.  Avoid imported components whenever and wherever possible-other nations can o this thing called 'embargoes' which can cripple your naval programs if you don't have the ability to ignore them.

You're applying too much real-world logic, dude & not following The Rule of Cool^TM!!

Kidding, just kidding.

I actually agree with you 100% on this.

I would also add a couple of other items to the list:

• Is your carrier acting in a strike role, or in an escort role?  This will have an effect on the Thrust of the engines you put into the design.  A CV designed to escort other ships -- whether cargo DropShips/JumpShips or an actual battle squadron of WarShips -- should at least be as fast as the slowest DS/WS it's meant to escort, but doesn't need to be that much faster.  For example, if the primary DS/WS designs you're going to escort are 3/5 designs, then ideally your escort-mission CV should be at least 3/5, maybe 4/6, but 5/8 or faster is going to be wasted.  Your air wing is still your primary "weapon" but is geared to providing anti-ASF cover for the ships you're escorting, with a secondary anti-ship role. 
  
  A "strike" carrier, on the other hand, you do want to have better sped, because you'll want that maneuverability edge for deploying & recovering your air wing (as your primary "weapon"), as well as to help avoid enemy ASF units.
• How many ASF/Small Craft you carry is going to affect the rest of your design features as well.  Something inspired by WW2-era escort carriers, for example, would have a fairly small air wing (6-12, maybe 18 ASF tops, with at most 2 Small Craft), so probably shouldn't have a very heavy weapons suite.  Armor/speed is going to depend more on which role it's going to be ("escort" or "light strike").  Something more like a heavy carrier (54 or more ASF, 6 or so Small Craft) is large enough that regardless of the speed, you'll want to have some halfway decent armor coverage, & definitely load up on the point-defense weapons as much as possible...because that's an expensive asset that you want to protect.

[Daryk]

I think 18 ASF and 2 SC fit a jeep carrier perfectly.

[Minemech]

 The 4/6 curve seems to have been largely recognized both in and out of universe as the ideal base speed line for carrier dropships. A 5/8 curve is acceptable within certain circumstances but is not ideal as a carrier on its own. A key challenge with building carriers in universe is that you want to be economical but not skimpy.

 It is a poorly conceived idea to have a force larger than a regiment in a dropship carrier, and in fact the largest formation one ought to have in one is ideally a wing. The value of aerospace fighters in the Inner Sphere is strikingly high, thus prompting the Successor States to be willing to use more collars. The Vengeance itself has limited use because it is simply too valuable for anything but the most critical of strategic operations.   

[Daryk]

An Overlord converted to a CV wouldn't be bad at all.  18 ASFs and 2 SCs would leave it with about 500 extra tons for support crew, ammo, and gas...  8)

[Cannonshop]

I think 18 ASF and 2 SC fit a jeep carrier perfectly.

TWO??

what roles are your smallcraft filling that you only need two of them?  I'd humbly suggest there are LOTS of roles for a 150-200 ton small craft that would be advantageous for a carrier's operations-enough that you might wanna have more than two of 'em.

Jobs like:

In-flight refueling to extend your fighters in their patrol or strike range (to avoid exposing mr. carrier to return fire from the enemy)
ECM
ECCM
SAR (Pilots still need to be rescued if they eject, and a group of shuttles can do this a lot easier than hauling your whole airbase to peek at every beacon)
Personnel transport/transfer (so you don't have to land just to replace Bobby whose enlistment is up or pick up the FNG's to replace losses)

"Heave To" Health-and-welfare inspections in peacetime
casualty transfer

etc. etc. etc.

Fighters are your PRIMARY weapons, but a working Naval force is working even in peacetime, and having a decent number of utility shuttles is an asset for a Carrier even in wartime.

at minimum you'll, I suspect want to have at least two small craft for every six fighters just to handle the scutwork jobs that the whole dropship is overkill for and the fighters aren't equipped properly to do.

[Giovanni Blasini]

Y'now, one thing being missed is that, while, the title of the post is more general, the OP's initial question was to ask "What could you use to replace the Leopard CV?" which is way more specific.  I mean, he'd even specified a squadron-sized ship.

Yes, absolutely, due to economies of scale, bigger is better, including for our CV DropShips.  And perhaps the answer really is "squadron-sized carrier DropShips are purely non-viable", but I'd really be interested in exploring that question a bit more, too.

[Daryk]

200 tons is really enough to pack all those miscellaneous missions in.   But I see your point about more is better.  :)

To Gio's point, 6 ASF and 2 SC would be a definite improvement for a Leopard-alike.

[Minemech]

Y'now, one thing being missed is that, while, the title of the post is more general, the OP's initial question was to ask "What could you use to replace the Leopard CV?" which is way more specific.  I mean, he'd even specified a squadron-sized ship.

Yes, absolutely, due to economies of scale, bigger is better, including for our CV DropShips.  And perhaps the answer really is "squadron-sized carrier DropShips are purely non-viable", but I'd really be interested in exploring that question a bit more, too.

Squadron sized dropships are viable because regiment sized are not all that useful. Wing and squad are viable mixes.

[Cannonshop]

200 tons is really enough to pack all those miscellaneous missions in.   But I see your point about more is better.  :)

To Gio's point, 6 ASF and 2 SC would be a definite improvement for a Leopard-alike.

I could actually see that as having some value...not a LOT of value, but some value, especially as a raiding support platform backing, maybe a company sized pirate element or low-intensity operations mission, or as a training vessel for a functioning Naval Academy Program.

The  proportion, at least, makes some sense.

[Minemech]

 When the new warships were introduced to the Inner Sphere, only the Mjolnir and Thera initially carried more than a wing. The former was a million ton warship, the latter a dedicated supercarrier. The Feng Huang was later upgraded to carry more, but that was a visible response to the Thera, and one quite demanding upon that particular Successor State. Assault ships like the Overlord A-3 were designed because the Federated Suns became desperate for warship escorts. It was not paranoia.

 That said, this created an unfortunate paradigm where assault ships easily carried at least a Squadron.

[Hellraiser]

To Gio's point, 6 ASF and 2 SC would be a definite improvement for a Leopard-alike.

That's what I was saying, if the Leo-CV & Intruder made a baby-DS it would make for a solid system interdiction patrol craft.

The Leo-CV much like the Mech-Droppers in TRO3025 was all about "fit in this formation" and not much else.
Its hard to picture a "real world" DS like a Leopard that wouldn't also sport a single platoon of infantry for security, scouting, boarding operations, MP Duty, heck just a few bunks for when a VIP visits or Journalists are attached, etc etc.

I wasn't in the Navy but I'd think that US ships aren't at 100% capacity just getting the basic crew on board.

[Cannonshop]

That's what I was saying, if the Leo-CV & Intruder made a baby-DS it would make for a solid system interdiction patrol craft.

The Leo-CV much like the Mech-Droppers in TRO3025 was all about "fit in this formation" and not much else.
Its hard to picture a "real world" DS like a Leopard that wouldn't also sport a single platoon of infantry for security, scouting, boarding operations, MP Duty, heck just a few bunks for when a VIP visits or Journalists are attached, etc etc.

I wasn't in the Navy but I'd think that US ships aren't at 100% capacity just getting the basic crew on board.

Actually wouldn't be a good interdiction or patrol craft, with a loadout like that, it's a precision strike craft and special operations boat.

six fighters aren't going to interdict anything that you'd need fighters to handle (or guns), but it's a decent setup for precision bombing raids or escorting a company or smaller scale 'mech panty-raid (Get in, get out at minimum risk because the target's too cheap/low value to risk something bigger, and you can therefore afford to lose it.)

See, Interdiction requires something called "Coverage".  six fighters, two smallcraft and a dropship isn't going to give you coverage on a defensive mission, but it'll do just fine for sneaking past coverage to chew up someone's poorly defended rear areas.

[Hellraiser]

Bog standard Union attempting to raid a planet by traveling in normal shipping lanes?
Seems like it could stop one of those.

[Cannonshop]

Bog standard Union attempting to raid a planet by traveling in normal shipping lanes?
Seems like it could stop one of those.

Interdiction on that means you need to have the capacity to search, which requires identification of the sort that says "Yeah, you know, that union looks more suspicious than the hundred or so others that go through every day."

(being as the Union IS the most common dropship in the Inner Sphere and periphery and many of them ARE hauling cargo instead of 'mechs).

If you're stopping EVERY ship that comes through, you STILL need more than a dropship with only six fighters and two smallcraft, unless you don't see a jumpship more than once or twice in a week (and then, it's STILL a good idea to have more than one of these, or something larger, just to handle the traffic overflow and the need for downtime.)

Customs interdiction needs either a ground base, or endurance, and if you're already building for endurance, you might as well build for coverage, which in turn means you don't go for minimums.  (a single fighter squadron IS the minimum here-less than that and you might as well leave a sign saying "Please don't steal my stuff, I can't defend it")

On the whole, a force the right size for a raid isn't going to be coming down the known shipping route unless their target is your shipping, or they've got a pretty good bet you can't stop-and-frisk (Health and welfare) every dropship moving through. (this is how the Blakists were able to make use of  their 'pocket warships'-they filtered into normal traffic and used obscurity to get into range.)

IOW it's a tactic of opportunity that relies on what? right, insufficient coverage.

A dedicated raider in a raid prone area is going to use pirate points and mobility to get close and try to duck under or around your patrol.  (thus, why you want both mobility, and coverage, and dropships, aren't good for mobility-it takes them DAYS to go from jump point to jump point under their own power-by the time even a quick dropship can react without a jumpship, the raid's already happened.)

[Daryk]

*snip*
I wasn't in the Navy but I'd think that US ships aren't at 100% capacity just getting the basic crew on board.

It very much depends on the ship.