# Need help with my point defense system concept



## Deke (Oct 3, 2021)

Hello all, I am working on the point defense system, as well as naming it in my book. The PDS will be an integral part of my naval warfare system, as one could imagine they are vital in any space opera, however they are a bit more important in my book as a lot of the fighting for the little ship that is the focus of my novel is an assault frigate. 

Basically, in addition to its single railgun (my railguns are mounted in turrets, I know a lot of space warships have railguns that are internal and run part or all of the length of the ship but mine are smaller and in turrets) the assault frigate has two internal railgun rocket hybrid assault pod launchers that fire marines in boarding pods into enemy vessels. The marines then climb out the top of the pods and use explosives to clear out point defense cannons to create a flight path for dropships to board enemy ships and take them out from the inside, like a virus spreading throughout the body (covid inspiration lol).

In this novel (and the next book) humans are still in our solar system, and just now starting the process of becoming an interstellar power. So technology has not progressed to the laser/particle beam/plasma stage. So I want my PDS cannons to be flak-based (think BSG reboot). Basically, they fire at a sustained rate, tracking incoming missiles and throwing up a wall of shrapnel, etc. 

What I need help with is coming up with a good name, or I am wondering if you guys think they warrant having their own special name? I could just call them point defense cannons and abbreviate to PDC's, but it seems like maybe it needs a special term? I'm not sure and would appreciate some feedback.


----------



## Oochillyo (Oct 17, 2021)

hey 

I am trying to work out in my head what your ship's weapons look like , have you seen Doctor Who the ep where The Tenth Doctor regenerates (if you havnt here's the link 



 and at one point in the ep they are in a spaceship with exterior attached turrets that can shoot down missiles and fire in like a repeating pattern if that makes sense , is that similar to your spaceship weapons ?

Regards - Declan Sargent


----------



## Serendipity (Oct 17, 2021)

Deke said:


> Hello all, I am working on the point defense system, as well as naming it in my book. The PDS will be an integral part of my naval warfare system, as one could imagine they are vital in any space opera, however they are a bit more important in my book as a lot of the fighting for the little ship that is the focus of my novel is an assault frigate.
> 
> Basically, in addition to its single railgun (my railguns are mounted in turrets, I know a lot of space warships have railguns that are internal and run part or all of the length of the ship but mine are smaller and in turrets) the assault frigate has two internal railgun rocket hybrid assault pod launchers that fire marines in boarding pods into enemy vessels. The marines then climb out the top of the pods and use explosives to clear out point defense cannons to create a flight path for dropships to board enemy ships and take them out from the inside, like a virus spreading throughout the body (covid inspiration lol).
> 
> ...


I'm sorry to be a pain, but there has been a lot of progress in lasers in recent years, which leads me to question your lack of lasers. The USA has recently said they're mounting a laser on a air force plane.


----------



## Deke (Oct 17, 2021)

I thought about lasers, but I really want that gritty feel of projectile weapons. 

As far as the Dr who video, I think that was my favorite Dr. I’ve actually got something like that, the turrets that is, in my dropships.


----------



## AllanR (Oct 17, 2021)

Deke said:


> railgun rocket hybrid assault pod launchers that fire marines in boarding pods into enemy vessels. The marines then climb out the top of the pods and use explosives to clear out point defense cannons to create a flight path


What kind of g-force do the marines experience? How did they get a flight path to the spot where they create a flight path. (ie how does the first group penetrate the defenses) Also, the pods need to be able to match the velocity of the vessel they are fired at, likely needing to slow down considerably.


----------



## Betok_Haney (Oct 17, 2021)

It seems to me that the military LOVES it's banal descriptive names and acronyms, so you seem spot on with your current convention.  Are you looking for a nickname that they crew might call them, like, "Spanker" (because they spank down the missiles), or "Batbats" (due to the sound they make), or "Mildreds" (because of the Chief's horrible, loud ex-wife?).


----------



## Deke (Oct 17, 2021)

AllanR said:


> What kind of g-force do the marines experience? How did they get a flight path to the spot where they create a flight path. (ie how does the first group penetrate the defenses) Also, the pods need to be able to match the velocity of the vessel they are fired at, likely needing to slow down considerably.


It's a point-and-shoot operation, a dumb ai calculates the two vessels' velocity and course then fires. It isn't a super accurate system, it's really just designed to hit the broad side of a barn. Sometimes it misses, such as in the event of a pod taking a hit from PDCs, and marines go flying off into the deep dark. There are retro rockets in the nose to slow them in the event they miss. The pods themselves are angled graphene latticed titanium and are able to withstand anything but multiple direct hits in the same spot.

The G-forces I had to design a system to negate, it's a stasis field, you can't move or be moved inside it, it is short-lived and has to be initially powered from the ship, then a microreactor in the pod (I mean really micro) sustains it for the short flight time. That's how I get away with being able to fire them at insane speeds and not slow them down on impact. Flight times are generally 1-2 seconds, so you don't need to power them for long.

The pods aren't going fast enough, and aren't heavy enough, to do more than stick into the hull. Also, you need to be pretty close to fire them, given the high speeds and maneuvers ships would be under during combat situations. Once the raiders are on the hull, they use det packs to blow the PDCs, thus creating a safe flight corridor for the dropships.



Betok_Haney said:


> It seems to me that the military LOVES it's banal descriptive names and acronyms, so you seem spot on with your current convention.  Are you looking for a nickname that they crew might call them, like, "Spanker" (because they spank down the missiles), or "Batbats" (due to the sound they make), or "Mildreds" (because of the Chief's horrible, loud ex-wife?).


That is a good idea. I was toying with acronyms that spelled out something cheeky, but I suppose I don't actually need to spell anything out, I could just use some made-up term. I'll give it some thought. Will help break up having to type out PDC over and over again for sure.


----------



## Oochillyo (Oct 17, 2021)

hey Deke 

how are you 

I am glad there are many people offering you help with ideas , its nice to feel connected with others that care about your work you know  , 

I re read the messages before and the new ones and the picture is a lot clearer now 

Just one question if these pods have people in them and it takes many pods to get through ships what happens to the people in the first couple of pods, perhaps they are fired empty of personal (also so they dont get lost in space if they miss) and then when the path is open or weak people are placed in the last pod. 

Have you got some ideas for how it works and I thought the PDC could be called JackHammers since they move or fire if you think about your spaceships weapon in a repeating pattern and the first couple of hits dont do anything but eventually the concrete is broken up by the on going bombardment of the JackHammer just like what these pods are designed to do to the exterior hulls of other spaceships  

Mayby its not a Sci-Fi sort of name but its cool I think, its your call and I am not the only one with suggestions as I said earlier so taking a look around is fine by me 

Regards - Declan Sargent


----------



## Foxbat (Oct 18, 2021)

The military often has its own sense of humour.
A curtain of shrapnel could just be called a curtain. Imagine the commanding officer watching enemy ships fire their missiles. He turns to bridge crew: ‘Draw the curtain.’


----------



## Eternity_TARO (Nov 24, 2021)

Deke said:


> In this novel (and the next book) humans are still in our solar system, and just now starting the process of becoming an interstellar power. So technology has not progressed to the laser/particle beam/plasma stage.


THe problem I have with this is we already have laser and particle beams and plasma with our current level of technology today.

We have lasers that can shoot missiles out of the sky.  We have plasma weapons.  Hell, a guy on youtube created a plasma based light saber that cuts through a 1/2in of steel door albiet it takes him 5 minutes to do it.  

If you want to use PODS to board ships, fine.  But you will have to be creative in negating laser weapons.  

Also, you have serious logistic problems in firing a POD that is essentially a giant bullet with a person inside of it at an enemy ship in space.

The big problem is that the DISTANCE involved in real space combat is non-trivial and that speeds involved are non-trivial.  Due to both distance and speed it would be extremely hard for this to be a viable strategy unless you disable the enemy ship first.  Without disabling an enemy ship, you would have to make your PODS amazing at course correction, targetting, and homing in on a target.  Otherwise, this system would never be feasible.


----------



## Bowler1 (Nov 26, 2021)

You have some nice ideas happening Deke.

For space warfare I am a fan of chucking around lots of mass, its easy to do and once moving it won't be easily stopped and can do some nice damage. A ray gun to some extent would also laser like show where the shot had some from and self target your ship after firing, while projectiles won't (assuming there is nothing to give away the rail gun position, no flash or anything similar). There will be a loss of speed, lasers being light speed, but staying hidden and being able to fire again and again would I think offset the hard hit of a laser. But speed is always good, so I think a fleet would have a mix of weapon platforms for maximum affect and damage. Laser fire for the first hits (i.e. light speed), but followed up with the hail of projectiles saturating an area of space and destroying the remaining enemy vessels. 

I'm not sure about your turrets. Shooting off mass in space with velocity will cause a push back, so turrets firing off to the side would cause spaceships to drift in the other direction. Bear in mind space really is vast, so close contact is very unlikely. I would imagine rail guns would be an easy technology for a space faring race, like rifles for foot soldiers, and cannon fodder in a battle, but the distance involved means a small shift to once side could easily mean a miss by an enemy vessel. Anyway, turrets have a nice old world feel I don't quite go for it, but I might not care either, please see below.  

I'm not so sure about your pods, the realism (if there is any such thing in a good space opera) of shooting off trained personal on the off chance off hitting an enemy vessel seems very wasteful. If a pod can hit an enemy ship, then why not just shoot it full of holes and wipe it out. After the battle, claim is as salvage, fill in those hole and reuse if possible, and so much easier. Imagine a tank in todays warfare, once hit by a shell it's gone, and a battle is about protecting your assets as much as it is about wiping out the enemy assets. So I think it's easier to simply destroy instead of trying to capture. But as this is a space opera, if the action is good I really wouldn't care.    

Keep the names simple so the reader knows what is what. 

Space opera is what you want it to be, but having a good touch of realism will make the unbelievable more believable.


----------

