JumpShip of the Month (Hahahahaha): Star Lord Class JumpShip

[Giovanni Blasini]

JumpShip of the Month (Hahahahahahahahahaha): Star Lord Class JumpShip



No, wait, that's not right.



Perfection.

Yes, folks, I'm still doing these and, this week, do I have a doozy for you!  While I've been trying to keep to chronological order, I've also only been doing articles for ships where we have concrete stats.  That means this week, we jump (heh) to the year 2590 for the Star Lord class JumpShip.  Besides hanging out with a green woman, a sentient tree, and an uplifted raccoon, what do we know about the Star Lord?

Two things stand out about the Star Lord.  First, at six docking collars, only the Monolith (9) and the Leviathan (at least 7) class JumpShips exceed its DropShip capacity.  Even among WarShips, this much capacity is not common, making the Star Lord one of the heaviest haulers available.  One additional feature of the Star Lord's docking collars are a series of grapples that can support and reel in ships of up to 10,000 tons.  While it wasn't a thing when Tech Readout 3057 Revised was published, nowadays I'd treat this as the docking arms quirk, which gives you a benefit on docking rolls.  In-universe, this ends up giving the Star Lord a secondary role as a resucue ship, since it's basically as close to a tug JumpShip as we ever really see.

At 274,000 tons, the Star Lord is a bit past the midpoint for JumpShip mass.  While those docking collars take up a sizeable amount of the available mass, there's still plenty of room for 661 tons of cargo and 50 steerage passengers, something we rarely see on JumpShips.  These passengers can enjoy more amenities than are usually found aboard your typical cargo dropper, such as the 110-meter grav deck, though in an emergency they may find themselves sharing the 10 life boats and 6 escape pods with the 30 crew (plus 20 shuttle crew).  This too, though, is a bit of a rarity: the Star Lord has capacity for 96 people in its escape pods - with shuttles, it would have excess evac capability.  Cargo is described as split into individual bays near each docking collar, though thr rules of corse abstract this as a single hold.

From a logistical standpoint, the Star Lord has 100 tons of internal fuel.  While well short of the 395+ tons needed for a fusion-powered jump, it's enough for 25 days of slow transit thrust at 0.1 Gs, and should easily be adaquate for stationkeeping.  With that healthy cargo hold, a Star Lord has some level of independence.  Four small craft bays provide a handy number of shuttles.

What the Star Lord can't do is fight: with no weapons of any kind, and limited armor (79 tons, for 32 capital points spread across the ship), a Star Lord is a sitting duck on the battlefield.  Like most JumpShips that survived the Succession Wars, the Star Lord did so by being inoffensive, and by the agreement that eventually fell into place not to target shipping.  For those trying to target a Star Lord...well, it ain't difficult to do, and the only thing a Star Lord has to defend itself are any carried DropShips and small craft carried aboard.

Because of its value, and its vulnerability, if you have a Star Lord transporting your precious DropShips, and you're in an environment or era where targeting JumpShips is considered fair game, I cannot stress enough the need to protect your Star Lord.  A couple fighters alone isn't going to cut it: you're going to need to devote a collar or two to heavier combat assets.  Yes, this could reduce the quantity of ground forces you can cart along, but you have six docking collars: you're still ahead of the game giving up two.

This brings me to what may be the strangest way you could make a living with a Star Lord: mobile rescue and repair ship.  First off, you're kind of a tug JumpShip, and you have docking collars to spare.  Use one for a Model 96 Elephant or Model 97 Octopus to extend that capability, and double as an assault boat to help defend your JumpShip.  A Mule with spare parts or even some production facilities aboard (akin to a small orbital factory) can help get a stranded JumpShip repaired for less catastrophic issues.  Throw in a passenger ship like a Monarch or a Dove as a hospital ship, or maybe a Leopard CV if you want a bit more defense, and you still have three docking collars available - I'd probably go with a Dove or Leopard CV, since your Star Lord has passenger berths, too.  The remaining three docking collars can carry the DropShips from the most common Inner Sphere JumpShip, the Invader.

So, that's the Star Lord.  Thoughts, ideas, comments, suggestions?

[mikecj]

Nice, I like the rescue ship idea.  Thanks for sharing!

[I am Belch II]

Nice write up.

[Luciora]

To be honest, I was expecting an Amaris joke.  But it works for a good article.   :)

[Maingunnery]

Nice, I like the rescue ship idea.  Thanks for sharing!

I agree, this JS has been a odd duck for very long, but this idea of it being a rescue ship is making a lot of sense.

[grimlock1]

And I finally understand why they bother with solar sails when they could just trickle charge off the fusion engines.
Thanks.

[Frabby]

For all we know, being a rescue ship is a distant secondary concern (how often do you need a rescue ship anyways).
First and foremost, the Star Lord is a regular hauler.

We've never gotten hard manufacturing data, but the general impression given is that it's a pretty rare vessel, compared to the ubiquituous Invaders and Merchants; and it's even notably rarer than the Scout class that is known to be a niche design. Of the five standard JumpShips, only the Monolith is yet rarer.

This begs the question, what's going on here? The Star Lord should, at least on paper, be a vastly superior vessel to the Invader in particular. What in-universe factors make JumpShips with more than 3 collars so rare and apparently unattractive?

Fluff keeps mentioning the high upkeep costs, but surely that can only be a small part of the reason because for all we know, even the Star League didn't go for max hardpoints on their JumpShips. For some arcane reason, 3 hardpoints seem to be the optimum which is not only why the Invader became so popular as to be the staple standard JumpShip, but also why the construction of the 3-collar Tramp was ever considered feasible even when it is almost the size of a 6-collar Star Lord. Even the 4-collar Liberty lost out to later designs with fewer collars.

I have a couple of theories, but no definite answer. I'd like to hear your theories.

[AlphaMirage]

I think it was more related to cost and coverage. 

More Jumpships would give you greater coverage with only a small need for something big to run particularly high volume routes which were likely uncommon.  I also think that most trade might have just been simple triangle routes (A sends to B which sends to C then back) with little need for greater capacity.  Two Invaders can cycle that route very fast while carrying dropships through the process

[Daryk]

Agreed.  I think consistent flow is more important than volume, and more ships with fewer collars gets you that.

[mbear]

This brings me to what may be the strangest way you could make a living with a Star Lord: mobile rescue and repair ship.  First off, you're kind of a tug JumpShip, and you have docking collars to spare.  Use one for a Model 96 Elephant or Model 97 Octopus to extend that capability, and double as an assault boat to help defend your JumpShip.  A Mule with spare parts or even some production facilities aboard (akin to a small orbital factory) can help get a stranded JumpShip repaired for less catastrophic issues.  Throw in a passenger ship like a Monarch or a Dove as a hospital ship, or maybe a Leopard CV if you want a bit more defense, and you still have three docking collars available - I'd probably go with a Dove or Leopard CV, since your Star Lord has passenger berths, too.  The remaining three docking collars can carry the DropShips from the most common Inner Sphere JumpShip, the Invader.

That actually makes a lot of sense to me, at least for the larger military fleets. I could easily see a Star Lord acting as a submarine tender to DropShips, or hauling around a DropShip that's equipped to perform depot maintenance on ground units. WikiPedia shows me that the Allies had a lot of such vessels in WW2. Going to write up some ideas for custom units. Thanks Gio!

 

[Frabby]

I think it was more related to cost and coverage. 

More Jumpships would give you greater coverage with only a small need for something big to run particularly high volume routes which were likely uncommon.  I also think that most trade might have just been simple triangle routes (A sends to B which sends to C then back) with little need for greater capacity.  Two Invaders can cycle that route very fast while carrying dropships through the process

When you look at the small size of DropShips in general, such pre-determined "triangle routes" or "bus lines" as I like to call them will have a great many DropShips traveling on them compared to overall cargo volume carried. There's never enough hardpoints, not even in the SL era.
When you look at the standard JumpShip classes, the mass in kilotons per hardpoint is
Scout: 90.00
Merchant: 60.00
Invader: 50.66
Star Lord: 45.66
Monolith: 47.77
That makes the Star Lord the single most efficient JumpShip class. And it should also be the cheapest per hardpoint, because the KF drive (and its Germanium needs, supposedly the defining factor in JS costs) has the smallest mass to hardpoint ratio of all JumpShips. Bottom line, even on regular bus lines the Star Lord should rule.
And given the supposed number of JumpShips in operation during the SL era, it's clear they operated in largish fleets. Getting two Invaders' capacity for the mass of, well, less than two Invaders plus reduced crew costs and a ship with overall better facilities, the reason why the Star Lord doesn't reign supreme in JumpShip manufacture must lie in some hitherto unnamed operating or maintenance drawback.

That actually makes a lot of sense to me, at least for the larger military fleets. I could easily see a Star Lord acting as a submarine tender to DropShips, or hauling around a DropShip that's equipped to perform depot maintenance on ground units. 

The space tug/rescue vessel option isn't exactly new though. It was mentioned in the ship's fluff as early as TRO: 3057, and it was said that every Great House keeps some Star Lords in reserve as rescue vessels.

[Weirdo]

For all we know, being a rescue ship is a distant secondary concern (how often do you need a rescue ship anyways).
First and foremost, the Star Lord is a regular hauler.

We've never gotten hard manufacturing data, but the general impression given is that it's a pretty rare vessel, compared to the ubiquituous Invaders and Merchants; and it's even notably rarer than the Scout class that is known to be a niche design. Of the five standard JumpShips, only the Monolith is yet rarer.

This begs the question, what's going on here? The Star Lord should, at least on paper, be a vastly superior vessel to the Invader in particular. What in-universe factors make JumpShips with more than 3 collars so rare and apparently unattractive?

Fluff keeps mentioning the high upkeep costs, but surely that can only be a small part of the reason because for all we know, even the Star League didn't go for max hardpoints on their JumpShips. For some arcane reason, 3 hardpoints seem to be the optimum which is not only why the Invader became so popular as to be the staple standard JumpShip, but also why the construction of the 3-collar Tramp was ever considered feasible even when it is almost the size of a 6-collar Star Lord. Even the 4-collar Liberty lost out to later designs with fewer collars.

I have a couple of theories, but no definite answer. I'd like to hear your theories.

I'm no expert in maritime economics, but I suspect that if one of us were to look into the reasons why not all modern sea freighters are the giant canalmax beasts, the realities there will transfer over to JumpShip economics.

Personally, I suspect a big reason is that no matter how efficient a Star Lord is, a single Invader is still a lot cheaper in terms of initial purchase. When you're a private party such as a shipping company that up till now only operated DropShips, a mercenary unit wanting to be free of transportation clauses, a prospecting group wanting to strike it rich in the deep black, or a pirate wanting something to get away from the damned SLN, a single Invader is a much easier way to attain FTL capability than saving up for a Star Lord.

[Giovanni Blasini]

For all we know, being a rescue ship is a distant secondary concern (how often do you need a rescue ship anyways).
First and foremost, the Star Lord is a regular hauler.

We've never gotten hard manufacturing data, but the general impression given is that it's a pretty rare vessel, compared to the ubiquituous Invaders and Merchants; and it's even notably rarer than the Scout class that is known to be a niche design. Of the five standard JumpShips, only the Monolith is yet rarer.

As of DropShips & JumpShips publication, there were three manufacturers of the Star Lord: SelaSys Inc. in the FWL, Stellar Trek in the DC, and Universal Air in the FS.  Numbers?  Yeah, no idea.

This begs the question, what's going on here? The Star Lord should, at least on paper, be a vastly superior vessel to the Invader in particular. What in-universe factors make JumpShips with more than 3 collars so rare and apparently unattractive?

We don't know that it wasn't, though, during the heyday of the Star League.  Remember, we're in 3025-3145 or so, looking back at the survivors, where the Invader proved to be the fittest JumpShip in the Inner Sphere, at least in terms of ability to stay in production and in the field in relatively large numbers.

For later eras, having more JumpShips could have been more important than having more collars than JumpShips, or the Invader may just win by having two more sites producing it compared to anywhere else.

Fluff keeps mentioning the high upkeep costs, but surely that can only be a small part of the reason because for all we know, even the Star League didn't go for max hardpoints on their JumpShips. For some arcane reason, 3 hardpoints seem to be the optimum which is not only why the Invader became so popular as to be the staple standard JumpShip, but also why the construction of the 3-collar Tramp was ever considered feasible even when it is almost the size of a 6-collar Star Lord. Even the 4-collar Liberty lost out to later designs with fewer collars.

I have a couple of theories, but no definite answer. I'd like to hear your theories.

I'd like to hear your theory, but the Liberty lost out for being kludgy, a side effect of being the first of its kind.  Complexity of JumpShips with more collars could be an issue, though: after all, we didn't exactly see the Leviathan stick around in production, either.

[GermanSumo]

When you look at the small size of DropShips in general, such pre-determined "triangle routes" or "bus lines" as I like to call them will have a great many DropShips traveling on them compared to overall cargo volume carried. There's never enough hardpoints, not even in the SL era.
When you look at the standard JumpShip classes, the mass in kilotons per hardpoint is
Scout: 90.00
Merchant: 60.00
Invader: 50.66
Star Lord: 45.66
Monolith: 47.77
That makes the Star Lord the single most efficient JumpShip class. And it should also be the cheapest per hardpoint, because the KF drive (and its Germanium needs, supposedly the defining factor in JS costs) has the smallest mass to hardpoint ratio of all JumpShips. Bottom line, even on regular bus lines the Star Lord should rule.

i would say, the star lord is mostly in use for civilian cargo transports. but for the military, the economy and effeciency argument doesnt really hold truth. sometimes you need to transport more or less military personel or forces or cargo. so one could assume that the overwhelming majority of the inefficient designs are gobbled up by the military while the majority of the star lords are gobbled up by civilians?!?

[Jellico]

Depends on what volumes the destinations can handle. Then there are the DropShips. Depending on what is in system 6 Mules may be more efficient than 3 Mammoths.

[mbear]

For all we know, being a rescue ship is a distant secondary concern (how often do you need a rescue ship anyways).

I suspect the rescue ship is like insurance: Most of the time you don't need it at all but when you need it, you really ****** need it. ;)

First and foremost, the Star Lord is a regular hauler.

And that's also a good point IMHO. Combine that with your comment about the rescue ship role being a distant secondary concern and you have what could be the equivalent of the United States Maritime Administration or Royal Fleet Auxiliary. They're overseen by civilian operators/admin most of the time, but in an emergency they're assigned to a military command structure. For example, a Star Lord rescue ship would deliver tech support and engineering crews to Tikonov in the Fourth Succession War to repair Crucis Lancer units.

But you have a point: It's not so much that the Star Lord is doing these things; It's the DropShips it's carrying.

[Frabby]

I'd like to hear your theory, but the Liberty lost out for being kludgy, a side effect of being the first of its kind.  Complexity of JumpShips with more collars could be an issue, though: after all, we didn't exactly see the Leviathan stick around in production, either.

Well, since you asked for my theories, I give you my poorly sorted thoughts on the matter. ;)

I like the idea that vessels with more collars are more complex, and thus disproportionally more difficult or expensive to build, maintain and repair. However much I like the idea, though, it doesn't seem to hold water under closer scrutiny:
- The Monolith in particular is hailed as an extremely durable design; yet at the same time "prohibitive" manufacturing and maintenance costs are mentioned.
- The Leviathan was relatively popular. It was phased out not for technical reasons but because its design was too vulnerable to boarding in an increasingly barbaric universe.
- Drive complexity never seemed to be much of an issue when building Compact KF Drives for WarShips, and the critical thing (for me) in this is that House Davion managed to design the Fox class from scratch early on - and it was not the newly-designed-from-scratch-five-collar compact drive that put a spanner in the works.
- LF battery refits for larger JumpShips seem to be widespread by the mid-3050s, yet this includes modifications to their jump cores (and usually fewer collars).

I think perhaps there was a paradigm shift over time as to why smaller JumpShips are more economically viable than larger ones.
In the beginning, there were primitive JumpShips and their DropShuttles. The JumpShips were hideously inefficient by modern standards, hardly if ever built to carry more than two DropShuttles, and the DropShuttles themselves didn't exceed what we now call Small DropShips in size. This was the technology base on which the Inner Sphere was colonized. The BattleMech had been invented and the Age of War was winding down when the KF Boom-based hardpoint/collar combination was developed. Which is to say, four centuries of spacefaring culture were shaped by these tiny, inefficient vessels. Which probably explains why the vast majority of DropShip designs remained so small.
When the KF Boom technology came, JumpShip capacity soared. In the Star League era, wealthy individuals supposedly owned hundreds if not thousands of JumpShips. But there was still (or already) a flurry of tiny DropShips around, and apparently little need for 100,000 ton super haulers. In that day and age engineering skill and wealth knew no bounds. You had plentiful JumpShips buzzing around so that it was considered viable to build the Explorer class JumpShips for private travelers, a design concept that, in forgoing collars for small craft bays, essentially calls back to the primitive JumpShip/DropShuttle combo; and you had the K-1 DropShuttle which is about the most inefficient way to block a hardpoint that I can think of, yet this too was considered viable. The overall vibe I get is that there would have been large numbers of free traders milling around the jump points, hiring out their hardpoints for the next jump with a very flexible flight plan. With JumpShips jumping out in all directions all the time, there simply was no need for a large carrying capacity. Compared to one Monolith that could only bring nine Droppers from A to B at and one time, three Invaders could bring the same number of Droppers to not one but three destinations while being much more flexible with the timetable as well. Much like a pizza service can make better use of many small vehicles versus a single large van. The numerous small DropShips required numerous small JumpShips.

Then came the Succession Wars. Large-scale fleet maneuvers, lostech, and a terrible slashing down on manufacturing and active fleets. Now suddenly the busy JumpShip buzz was gone, and replaced by tight convoys that could be better guarded. Where previously, spead-out capacities were preferred, the trend reverted to concentration of capabilites. But at the same time, the ruined manufacturing base had largely lost its capability to build the formerly niche super-large ships. Shipyards for large vessels were now rare. They hadn't been popular before, and now that they were, previously unheard-of problems like production cost and maintenance of large vessels suddenly plagued them, making the already ubiquituous smaller vessels more viable again not because of use pattern, but of a change of economic background.

[Giovanni Blasini]

I suspect the rescue ship is like insurance: Most of the time you don't need it at all but when you need it, you really ****** need it. ;)

And that's also a good point IMHO. Combine that with your comment about the rescue ship role being a distant secondary concern and you have what could be the equivalent of the United States Maritime Administration or Royal Fleet Auxiliary. They're overseen by civilian operators/admin most of the time, but in an emergency they're assigned to a military command structure. For example, a Star Lord rescue ship would deliver tech support and engineering crews to Tikonov in the Fourth Succession War to repair Crucis Lancer units.

But you have a point: It's not so much that the Star Lord is doing these things; It's the DropShips it's carrying.

I suspect the Star Lord is still part of it, though, because its unique grapples on its docking collars were cited as one of the reasons it's used in that capacity.  While I personally would be sending it out with tug DropShips on these jobs, it's also entirely possible that tugs are actually less common than Star Lords in some eras.

[Minemech]

 In fleet economic terms, it is better for a navy to field Starlords than to field Foxes. Foxes required the invention of the Pocket warship to make them relevant, as they were too vulnerable, and lacked other practical survival features utilized by light warships. As a project for learning, they made sense, but they needed to be pushed aside as training vessels, or undergo a radical shift in concept.

 In succession war terms, these were amazing vessels, that allowed navies to better project power. It is axiomatic that a cargo ship would escort her through her longer journeys.

[Hellraiser]

As of DropShips & JumpShips publication, there were three manufacturers of the Star Lord: SelaSys Inc. in the FWL, Stellar Trek in the DC, and Universal Air in the FS.  Numbers?  Yeah, no idea.

Actually DS&JS gives us those.

SelaSys in the FWL is making 2/Year

Stellar Trek in the DC is making  1/Year.

Universal Air is not listed but I'm thinking its less than Stellar, call it 2 every 3 years or something.

Also noted is that the FWL is hope to 40% of the operating Starlords.

As for why its not super common, it does have maintenance cost issues & the Jump Sail is prone to problems and it can't quick charge in less than 48 hours.

Those issues and cost to purchase & year low volumes of production keep it less than common in IS fleets.

[Frabby]

Bit of a side tangent, but I collected all such data that I could find for my Sarna essay on JumpShip distribution:
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Essay:JumpShip_distribution

There's also a thread here on the forum about that essay, if anyone has anything to add. :)

[Colt Ward]

In fleet economic terms, it is better for a navy to field Starlords than to field Foxes. Foxes required the invention of the Pocket warship to make them relevant, as they were too vulnerable, and lacked other practical survival features utilized by light warships. As a project for learning, they made sense, but they needed to be pushed aside as training vessels, or undergo a radical shift in concept.

 In succession war terms, these were amazing vessels, that allowed navies to better project power. It is axiomatic that a cargo ship would escort her through her longer journeys.

Huh . . . you are talking about the Fox corvette?  Yeah, its got 5 collars but that is typically sited as the AFFCN being the taxi drivers for the ground forces . . . its also a corvette, its not designed to stand up to much on its own.  The AFFC had two other ships in the works, the Avalon cruiser class and the Mjolnir light cruiser classes . . . though the later became a 'battle cruiser.'

If the Leviathans' had the quirk 'easy to maintain' it would explain how they were easy to board too.

[Minemech]

Huh . . . you are talking about the Fox corvette?  Yeah, its got 5 collars but that is typically sited as the AFFCN being the taxi drivers for the ground forces . . . its also a corvette, its not designed to stand up to much on its own.  The AFFC had two other ships in the works, the Avalon cruiser class and the Mjolnir light cruiser classes . . . though the later became a 'battle cruiser.'

The Fox is not really a Corvette, it is an attempted Churchillian compromise between a Starlord, and a Tramp.

[Colt Ward]

Really?  Pretty sure it stacks up to the Corvettes of the time- Vincent Mk 42 (6 capital weapons & twice the size), Zec (13), Inazuma (11) and the Fredasa (13).
42 capital weapons on the Fox.

[Nikas_Zekeval]

On the economics, the Star Lord might be more efficient, if you can keep all the docking collars full.

Think of it like seats on an airline.  It costs about the same to run a plane that is full versus one that is barely occupied.  But the revenue is what separates the two.  Major routes might be easy to find a replacement dropship when one reaches its destination, but once you get out to the secondary and lower tier routes?  Not as many dropships going or coming, and an Invader's lower capital and operational costs come to the fore.

Think of the Star Lord as the 747/A340, more efficient, when you can fill all the seats.  But on the majority of routes, too damn big.  Those routes are where you get more economical with Invaders, them being the (non-Max) 737/A320 equivalents.

Using commercial airlines as a model, 'narrow body' mid-range aircraft such as the 737/757/A320 family are 54% of US airliners, with the larger wide body, long haul Boeings and Airbusses being only 16%.  Merchants would be 'regional' jets, stuff like the CRJ and ERJ, which has about 24% of the market.

[Daryk]

Continuing with that model, Scouts would be your corporate and charter jets.

[Minemech]

Really?  Pretty sure it stacks up to the Corvettes of the time- Vincent Mk 42 (6 capital weapons & twice the size), Zec (13), Inazuma (11) and the Fredasa (13).
42 capital weapons on the Fox.

The old Vincent was a legacy corvette, whose goals included dealing with pirates, and feigning the presence of a warship. Its superior tactical thrust, its lack of dropship collars, and its massive cargo stores make it a different ship, and a descent escort for dropships in pirate infested areas. Its use in the 31st century demonstrated no interest in mass production. Its massive cargo bay, and respectable number of small craft given the TRO make it quite handy in a battlegroup, though not so much as a corvette, but rather as three mammoths with a sail. I would actually argue that one of the things that the Fox has in its favor is those two small craft, which can be escorted by an Overlord A-3 to inspect suspicious ships.

 The fire profiles of the Inazuma, and Zechetinu are more aimed at popping off everyday dropships, and making key moves in larger naval engagements. The Inazuma seems to have been inspired by Lyran cargo practices, except more so, to its loss. Still, it has excellent tactical abilities, and can simply use one of its three collars for a cargo dropship when that suits its strategic needs. Its heat profile is part of an issue that plagues the DCA. The point defense on the Inazuma is almost non-existent.
 
 The Zechetinu is a featherweight corvette that is barely larger than a Magellan, yet retains said ships HPG abilities, caries more fuel, and carries an effective armament package for its mass. The Zechetinu II gains enormously from the use of naval missiles. The Point Defense seems out of character for a Free Worlds League warship, and should have incorporated AMS. Otherwise it is a warship that can act as an early warning system, pick off vulnerable dropships, swoop in at targets of opportunity in fleet engagements, while avoiding anything bigger than it can chew. The dropship it takes will suit its mission.
 
 I will note that the Fox has the same movement profile as the larger Kyushu, both of which were designed as taxis around the same time. Both ships make bad choices. Every navy equips its ships with collars related to their strategic roles, hence the Feng Huang has the same number of collars as the Avalon. Notably, the Avalon was meant to be escorted by the ships it carried.

 In sum, replace your Foxes with Starlords.

[Minemech]

On the economics, the Star Lord might be more efficient, if you can keep all the docking collars full.

Think of it like seats on an airline.  It costs about the same to run a plane that is full versus one that is barely occupied.  But the revenue is what separates the two.  Major routes might be easy to find a replacement dropship when one reaches its destination, but once you get out to the secondary and lower tier routes?  Not as many dropships going or coming, and an Intruder's lower capital and operational costs come to the fore.

Think of the Star Lord as the 747/A340, more efficient, when you can fill all the seats.  But on the majority of routes, too damn big.  Those routes are where you get more economical with Intruders, them being the (non-Max) 737/A320 equivalents.

Using commercial airlines as a model, 'narrow body' mid-range aircraft such as the 737/757/A320 family are 54% of US airliners, with the larger wide body, long haul Boeings and Airbusses being only 16%.  Merchants would be 'regional' jets, stuff like the CRJ and ERJ, which has about 24% of the market.

Every naval infrastructure will incorporate Merchants, and Invaders. They may also incorporate Tramps, Scouts, or even Explorers as needed. Keep in mind that an investment in a Fox is also an investment in an Overlord A-3, but you can use whatever assault ship you need to escort a random jumpship, if you deem it necessary. The Starlord had another role that is relevant to navies, and that is an added specialization in recovery operations.

[Hellraiser]

Really?  Pretty sure it stacks up to the Corvettes of the time- Vincent Mk 42 (6 capital weapons & twice the size), Zec (13), Inazuma (11) and the Fredasa (13).
42 capital weapons on the Fox.

Agreed.   Heck it stacks up to every canon corvette ever made from what I've seen.

The Fox very much is a Corvette.   

Its just not a SLDF era corvette.

Its a corvette for the 3050s.

Its got to do double duty as a Transport for the Army like the Robinson AND as a Task Force Command ship since All Warships in the FC travel with a full flotilla of DS & ASF.


The only real failings of the Fox are when you look at Cargo (handled by a Cargo DS really),  Speed  (3/5 isn't great but it will work),  and C-Bills (Expensive sure but its also arguably the toughest corvette ever able to perform well beyond that traditional roll.)

[Hellraiser]

In sum, replace your Foxes with Starlords.

Actually, in a post-Jihad naval recovery world,  I would suggest the exact opposite.

Roughly the same size & collars.

Upgrade your StarLord shipyards to produce/maintain Foxes.