Author Topic: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?  (Read 413 times)

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2047
Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« on: 17 March 2018, 21:18:39 »
Ok, the Newgranges were very impressive, but I'm wondering--where they fatally flawed?

The reason is simple--the Newgrange can repair a warship. But in doing so, it becomes completely immobile due to KF interactions and thus needs complete space supremacy--not superiority, but supremacy. At the same time, it is a vital strategic target. 
It would seem that a better design would be a large repair ship that erected a frame (possibly transported by dropship/spacestation that was carried via drop collar) around the ship to be repaired, tht would function as an unpressurized bay.

Granted, erecting the frame would take more time, but it would also leave the repair ship free to escape if an attack occurred, thus savihg the far more valuable repair ship.

It seems that the Star League never even considered this flaw--likely because before Amaris, there was nobody who could challenge them.

idea weenie

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1680
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #1 on: 17 March 2018, 21:29:07 »
The NewGrange is the difference between having a Warship that can jump back for full repairs, and a Warship that must be abandoned due to damaged seals on the KF core.  A NewGrange also would allow construction of a non-jumpable station on-site, using the full NewGrange's machine shops and assembly bays to speed up construction.

That would be some interesting rules, where a station would have a construction and cost multiplier based on what was being used to build it.  I.e. a space station built in orbit over a House Capital should be fairly easy, while a space station built over an uninhabited planet would have to be transported to the location (i.e. traveling to and from the Jump point), and would have to either assemble itself (similar to the ISS, where a single habitable location is built first, and the engineers/technicians assemble more components out of what is also provided), or have another vessel help out (i.e. a NewGrange class).  The NewGrange would have its on-board machine shops that would provide benefits to construction rate (it can build the necessary components out of basic materials instead of needing final products in cargo bays).  This would of course require a change to the Space Station cost multiplier (instead of *5 overall; it would have a base price, multiplied by situational effects).


But you are right, having a droppable 50 kton space station that just acted as a gantry, with cargo bays for repair materials would be a much better solution.
« Last Edit: 11 April 2018, 23:38:22 by idea weenie »

Vition2

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 739
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #2 on: 17 March 2018, 23:20:15 »
"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - Douglas Adams

Not even being facetious with that comment.  There are sooooooo (add additional "o"s if necessary) many different places to hide that it is abominably easy to hide something even as large as a newgrange - hell you could hide the entire SLDF navy in interplanetary space without being particularly careful.

All that's really needed to maintain secrecy is to use a tug to get the broken warship to the site of the Newgrange, using minimal thrust it's entirely possible to keep the location secret (small enough drive plume to not be particularly noticeable).

marauder648

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4805
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #3 on: 18 March 2018, 04:51:35 »
Most definately not.  The ability to bring a complete repair facility along with the fleet would be indispensable.  Instead of having to send a badly damaged ship home in a journey that could take weeks or months, and you risk loosing the ship and crew, you can bring in a Newgrange and put it somewhere safe and secure before taking the damaged vessels to it for repairs.

A facility that could house a Warship for repairs would take a fair bit of time to build whilst  a Newgrange can perform on site repairs.

If you're worried about security, just put her in the Oort cloud of a system and tow the damaged ship to her.  Lost in all that space you'll almost never find her.  Or you just have her sitting amongst a group of DDs and a cruiser or two and then its too big a challenge to get close.

They operate like the Mulberry docks at Normandy or as a mobile floating dry dock does nowdays.  And whilst having as ship docked is a major issue, not when you consider how bloody huge space is as Vition2 pointed out.
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Charistoph

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 323
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #4 on: 18 March 2018, 12:17:04 »
If you're worried about security, just put her in the Oort cloud of a system and tow the damaged ship to her.  Lost in all that space you'll almost never find her.  Or you just have her sitting amongst a group of DDs and a cruiser or two and then its too big a challenge to get close.

Not even that far, just jump in at limit+10-25% distance from either standard point and that is more than far enough away to detect anyone who decides to come after you.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

idea weenie

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1680
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #5 on: 18 March 2018, 13:51:08 »
A facility that could house a Warship for repairs would take a fair bit of time to build whilst  a Newgrange can perform on site repairs. 

Not that much.  IIRC an unpressurized repair bay only takes up 2.5% of its capacity.  So for every 1000 tons the Unpressurized Repair Bay masses, it has a capacity of 40,000 tons worth of a single vessel (specialized rules for the Repair Bay are not going to be posted here).

A modified Mammoth 52 kton Dropship could convert its 40,000 tons of cargo capacity into the framework for an unpressurized repair bay.  That bay would have the capacity to handle vessels up to 1.6 Million tons.  Have a second cargo Dropship serve as the repair parts depot, and dock it to the first.

A NewGrange can handle up to 4 Dropships, so it could deploy two Mammoth-sized Repair bay dropships, two cargo Dropships, and have a third vessel in its own repair bay and work off its internal cargo supplies.

You could even have other ships (such as the Potemkin class) carrying additional repair Dropships on an as-needed basis.  As long as one of the vessels had devoted 38,000 tons (37,750 if you want precision) to an Unpressurized Repair Yard, that would be large enough to fit the Potemkin inside

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2047
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #6 on: 18 March 2018, 15:55:36 »
And also, we have to take the tactics to protect a newgrange in light of hte fact that none of them survived the Succession wars. It gets to the old problem that what can be done with the rules isn't what was done in canon, or it didn't work, which implies that there were other factors at play that made hiding out in the oort cloud less useful, and it still doesn't change the fact that once a Newgrange has a ship internal to it, it can't move, either in real or ftl space. Building a big factory ship with attached "drop-hangers" also has the advantage that you can now repair more than one ship at a time.

marauder648

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4805
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #7 on: 19 March 2018, 04:25:55 »
One would say that its more due to bad writing that none survived outside of ComStar.  We can assume that Kerensky and friends took many with them.  Some units which have great rules are flogged, flayed then shot in the fluff.  The Quixote class for example.  Amazing anti-fighter ship, huge number of dropships, lots of cargo, great protection and all that jazz.  But fluff "Yeah she sucks harder than a dyson."  Plus the answer of how these things were lost was never explained. To loose that many, would they be taking them with them into battle against Caspars?  The Rim World's mobile fleet was gutted and didn't really recover during the taking of the Hegemony, so their main mobile units are M5 Caspar's.  Which can't go hunting and chasing ships as they don't jump outside of tightly controlled situations.  So what was causing all these losses? Were the crews holding open pit BBQs in ammo stores or something? :s

A lot of the stuff with chunks of lore stop making sense when you think about it too much :p
Ghost Bears: Cute and cuddly. Until you remember its a BLOODY BEAR!

Frabby

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2858
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #8 on: 19 March 2018, 06:08:23 »
As for the original question, I believe a mobile fully functional repair yard is more practical than shipping in a disassembled repair yard that has to be assembled before it can do its job, then disassembled and packed up again to be moved out.
Remember that the Newgrange was a military vessel and thus used for "field repairs" to JumpShip cores.

I imagine that the civilian sector, more concerned with economic viability than speed and ease of logistics, would indeed have shipped in a modular repair yard on DropShips - while it would take much longer, it would also be cheaper to salvage or rescue civilian cargo JumpShips in this way.

As for why the Newgranges died out, I reckon their logistics train (which must've been staggeringly huge) quickly became unsustainable once infrastructure became a target in the Succession Wars.
Author of the BattleCorps stories Feather vs. Mountain, Rise and Shine, Proprietary, Trial of Faith & scenario Twins
Sarna.net BattleTechWiki Admin

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2047
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #9 on: 20 March 2018, 00:31:14 »
Wou7ld it take too long?  A  100,000 ton dropship or space station could have a bay as large as the new granges, and be deployed relatively quickly--certainly quickly enough that the main time waste is going to be repairing the ship, rather than getting into the frame. Meanwhile, you keep all of your machine stops and storage on a ship that you've equipped with an LF battery, and can immediately jump out if a threat appears.

beachhead1985

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2665
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Reply #10 on: 21 March 2018, 20:56:48 »
Ok, the Newgranges were very impressive, but I'm wondering--where they fatally flawed?

The reason is simple--the Newgrange can repair a warship. But in doing so, it becomes completely immobile due to KF interactions and thus needs complete space supremacy--not superiority, but supremacy. At the same time, it is a vital strategic target. 
It would seem that a better design would be a large repair ship that erected a frame (possibly transported by dropship/spacestation that was carried via drop collar) around the ship to be repaired, tht would function as an unpressurized bay.

Granted, erecting the frame would take more time, but it would also leave the repair ship free to escape if an attack occurred, thus savihg the far more valuable repair ship.

It seems that the Star League never even considered this flaw--likely because before Amaris, there was nobody who could challenge them.

It's my understanding that in the Meta; the concept of mobile yards predates the rules about KF-drive field interaction.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman