Tell me about...the Essex-class Destroyer

[Liam's Ghost]

Something to keep in mind is that the 2750 ships were designed for aerotech I, which is a very different system from anything current.

And they weren't even designed to a single coherent set of rules either. Each one was more or less just thrown together in a way that seemed correct to the person doing it. And even after that, the ships we got in 3057 probably weren't converted from those original stats, but the prior conversions in the back of the battlespace book, which also seemed to be at least partially guesswork (since the cargo loads there bore no resemblance to how they would work out in the construction rules at the time).

The Essex and Sovetski Soyuz are 2 of the 3058 redesigns i line more than the original 2750 versions.  Still wondered why the huge art discrepancy happened though.

I seem to recall that it was because the guy doing the art didn't realize prior art existed.

[Alan Grant]

Weird detail about the Essex, I just picked up on. She has a LOT of cargo space relative to her size.

The Lola III has a comparable situation. Ton for ton the Vincent is even more cargo-laden for her size.

When you step away from those three, you see a lot of warships with very little cargo space in comparison. Yes the bigger cruisers/battlecruisers/battleships/troop transports/cargo devoted warships have more (some don't). I'm talking about the ships in that comparable tonnage to the Essex across the Star League, Inner Sphere and Clans.

Honestly having seen that and really thought about how much cargo tonnage she has available, I'm a little surprised the Clan version doesn't have a second ASF Star or something.

She holds almost as much cargo as an Olympus recharge station.

[Liam's Ghost]

That's a byproduct of how they were initially generated. As I mentioned earlier, they predate the construction rules and seem to have been initially generated in an arbitrary fashion with possibly little to no coordination between designs. So we had relatively modestly armed ships like the Essex or Vincent next to hilariously overgunned ships like the Aegis and Black Lion, and all of them were canon.

So the construction rules were probably written to accommodate both styles of design without invalidating* the prior stats. And... well... if you're not carrying a Black Lion's fraction in guns and don't have anywhere else to put it, you're gonna have a lot of cargo.

*And by prior stats I'm pretty sure I'm referring to the conversions of the aerotech stats in the back of the battlespace rulebook rather than the actual original aerotech stats.

[Luciora]

I do recall reading that the artist was unaware.  Just seems a pity is all.

[Wrangler]

The top picture is a Vincent.  Unless it was derived from the Vincent? 

3rd edit: might be a really old editorial mistake, its mentioned in the notes.

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Vincent

The first one was a big boo boo by who ever grafted back space behind it that they never fixed via errant.  It's definitely a Vincent.

[Cannonshop]

That's a byproduct of how they were initially generated. As I mentioned earlier, they predate the construction rules and seem to have been initially generated in an arbitrary fashion with possibly little to no coordination between designs. So we had relatively modestly armed ships like the Essex or Vincent next to hilariously overgunned ships like the Aegis and Black Lion, and all of them were canon.

So the construction rules were probably written to accommodate both styles of design without invalidating* the prior stats. And... well... if you're not carrying a Black Lion's fraction in guns and don't have anywhere else to put it, you're gonna have a lot of cargo.

*And by prior stats I'm pretty sure I'm referring to the conversions of the aerotech stats in the back of the battlespace rulebook rather than the actual original aerotech stats.

there's actually a strategic and tactical reason for that cargo fraction though...

Independent operations forward fo the line of advance, deep commerce strike raiding, and long duration patrols.  The cargo fraction on the Essex makes perfect sense if her actual intended job, was to run 'cavalry sweeps' through enemy systems behind the front lines or carry out convoy elimination missions ahead of the planned line of advance.  for those, you'd NEED a deep cargo and good manuevering speeds, while the relatively 'light for the mass' firepower is not a hindrance if you mainly expect to be hitting convoy escorts, merchant traffic, and so on to disrupt the enemy's supply or resupply efforts, and the deep cargo bay means you have food, water, and spare parts to carry out an extended mission without support.  (also useful for peacetime missions, like exploration or sustained antipiracy patrol.)

[Alan Grant]

I understand the point about the arbitrary way they were designed back in the day.

Making the most of it, it does add an interesting attribute to the Essex. As in the Essex can go a long time without resupply. Adds a slight twist to the conceptual angle of sending two as part of Taskforce Serpent for example.

I'm not sure how easy or difficult it is to pull complex from cargo bays for the warship's own use. But I find myself contemplating possibilities like replacement ASF airframes for equipment losses, replacement Barracuda missiles for its own launchers. (In addition to the more obvious, fuel, water, food, spare parts etc.)

[Weirdo]

Oh certainly. Especially in the case of missile tubes, a lot of ships only carry enough rounds in the magazine for a single tactical engagement, and if you're enthusiastic enough with them, running dry is very ready. It makes sense that this only represents the 'ready' magazine, with many more missiles in storage. Big cargo bays also make sense for NAC-heavy ships. I forget where, but I recall fluff saying that the fusion charges used to fire those are VERY hard on the barrels, and that ships tended to carry spares that they swapped out during downtime.

(By the way, stuff like this is actually why the Soyal-class has mech cubicles: the initial idea was to carry LoaderMechs for pulling those gigantic Mass Driver shells out of cargo, and then that got expanded because the designers had poor impulse control and lived in a universe even more obsessed with mechs than us fans are.)

Another benefit of big cargo bays is fuel. WarShips *can* recharge their drives with conventional sails, but in an active situation it makes much more sense to skip that and just reactor-charge things while maneuvering and fighting in-system. That uses up a lot of fuel, especially if you're also charging an L-F battery at the same time.

[Alan Grant]

Good stuff.

Interesting point on the fuel and recharging, I hadn't considered that.

[Weirdo]

For reference: Looking at 3057r, all Warships except the Fredasa, Nightwing, Tracker, Vigilant, and Pinto expend just over 288 tons of fuel reactor-charging their K-F drive. Charging an L-F battery requires the same amount on top of that. And that's in addition to any fuel they expend while maneuvering.

The smaller ships listed expend just over 144 tons for a charge.

In all cases, it still takes just over a week to charge safely without having to make any quick-charge rolls.