Im getting a sinking feeling out of this thread.

We just escaped the pun trap, not again!

There's a certain backdraft dragging it into dangerous waters with all these bad nautical puns. But we need to keep this thread firmly on course, otherwise it will be hung out to dry.

For starters, we could talk about what sort of upgrades and stats would be more sensible for the warships. I'm not even totally opposed to the idea of submersible main battle ships in a world with killsats and strategic railguns; it would sure help a ship's survivability in such a world to dive and hide.

However, most ships would still follow the much cheaper design of a surface ship, possibly with radar reduction paint and hull designs.

What about a ship's Matrix rating? If anywhere warrants a high-level commlink (and 6+ Signal), it'S a ship's board computer, is it?

Well, if it's milspec, the device rating is supposed to be 7+ (and the lowest rating milspec commlink is R5), and I think maritime radar is an example from the core book of signal 10 or 12 or something.

And as we all know, its RADAR that does the long range communication.

Ships are running off of Nexus, not commliks.
The entire command structure for the ship is in cocoons with life support systems and valkyrie mods.
They've got 3 or so mages (1 for each shift) on board to do Spirit Watch/Counterspelling/Banishing.

They have ECCM, ECM, EW experts doing their thing.
They have drones, and regular crewmen.
They're linked to Sat Links, TacNets and st00f.
They've got Signal 7 or 8, they have high end Radar and other sensors.

Are they on the Matrix, or are they on the matrix version of a milnet?

It ... communicates impeding doom?


Yes, Nexi, not commlinks, but military Nexi rated 6+. The individual experts also should have workstations with high stats, optimised for their respective tasks. Also, a command ship should have their own matrix warfare squad.

I guess they would run heavily encrypted systems, but since the Matrix in SR4 isn't split into PLTG anymore, no MilNet. Secure shit, though. Probably, the ships communicate exclusively via sattelite. Soldier troops should, too, actually; it makes everything more secure and locating enemies via triangulation harder.

Ships communicate via Sat. Maersk's supercarriers (cargo, not drones) are almost entirely automated and are piloted by satlink.

Sounds good.

Individuals will have a 6 response station with a hardwire link to the nexii.
I agree matrix warfare squad, automated defenses etc, running on a separate dedicated nexus.

-- Cannot be launched unless the vehicle has Ballast Tanks itself. There's not a lot of munchkin potential here. Only Watercraft can have Ballast Tanks (p. 133, Arsenal).


-- If the magic just accelerated the mass it would probably kill or disable the crew and damage the structure of the vehicle.

-- Note that individual ships don't need to have the Matrix defense crew, they can be distributed among the ships or centralized on fleet command vessels. Most of the "fleet" is going to be drones probably anyways.

No, no. Ballast tanks are a way of allowing its density to increase to higher than that of water, so they can [I]submerge[I]. Releasing from a submerged vessel isn't submerging.

Silliness aside, I could definitely see a submerged ship launching air and groundcraft from low depth.

In that case the airplane needs two or three things.

1: Flotation (To rise to the surface)
2: Full life support (so they do not take in water)
3: Amphibious Operation Lvl 2

Since the airplane have flotation devices and full enviroseal it would launched from the sub, float up to the surface assisted by amphibious operation modification and then activate (preferably) VTOl to take off.

Like this?

You could also put the aircraft into some sort of giant missile. Ammunition doesn't require special modifications to work underwater.

The poor pilots. Isn't it enough to kill the seamen?

Well, it would work with drones at least.

The aircraft wouldn't need any modifications themselves. Just a delivery platform.

Plane-sized sabbots to fall apart on breaching surface? A plane-cannon?
Devoted plane-carrier minisubs to double as launching/landing pads actually don't seem too farfetched to me.

Hermit: there's nothing submerged in that picture. Awesome stuff though. Of what am I ignorant if I ask you for the source of that?

Yeah, not the best pic ... it's from the supreme commander strategy game. A submersible carrier. It'S launching stuff in the pic but it's kinda hard to make out.

Video link

Ah. SC never really made it onto my to-do list, somehow. It actually is a pretty clear picture, even on my 3.5" screen.

That would be the more conservative way to get sub-aircraft carriers.
Seriously though. If we can launch ICBMs sub-surface, how hard can it be to get a jet/drone out? Use is a different subject of course, what with big ships being about intimidation for a large part. Also depending on the topic I saw raised recently about penetrate-o water beam-satelites.
If somehow, subs are a feasible choice though, making them mobile bases would be one way to increase their worth.
Maybe something to consider for alt.War?

Well. The launch of airplanes from Subs faces a couple limitations:

a) Too much acceleration will kill the pilot. You cannot thrust a plane out of a sub the same as a missile.
b) Planes have intakes, and all kinds of pother shit where you do not want water to enter. Sure, you can launch it in a shell, but that massively increases the size. Also, hydrodynamics are tough. Water is a lot les viscuous than air.
c) It's difficult to get planes to starting speed with a missile and not destroy them.

It is, all in all, not feasible except for small drones. Why deliver a payload via a one-use vehicle that costs 20 times as much as the payload when you can just start it on a flat surface at no cost? I could see conservative sub carriers that launch by surfacing, and via catapult. But I have a hard time seeing a missile sub being used to launch fighter drones when it could also be launching shipkillers, cruise missiles, or nukes.

alt.War will certainly cover oceanic war eventually. A little scenario to actually put all those warships to use. This would likely include the covert ops submarine base. After all, those things exist today already.

And SC, while cool, has the annoying tendency to crash when you play a huge-ass map with many players. Which is precisely the reason to get it in the first place.

SoNA has ST about such carrier used by the CAS as well as a scenario seed.

Nice. Well, it featured heavily in all Ace Combat games from AC2, so I guess it had to find it's way eventually.

When I think of a submarine carrier, I think of Tuatha de Danaan from the anime Full Metal Panic. Great anime by the way, specially the fumofu series (the comedy part).

How about "blue noah"? https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...rrier_Blue_Noah

And here I was thinking of the CVN-87 Ticonderoga Submersible Carrier from Rifts: Underseas.

Hey, no one invited physics here. This is a discussion about rules mechanics. The rules say aircraft carriers can go under water. Now the question is, do the rules specify that aircraft *cannot* fly underwater? Because if it's not in canon, I'm forced to assume it's okay. If they do forbid it, do the rules provide an underwater condom big enough to fit an aircraft? No need to get all technical about killing the pilot and drek. If we were worried about pilots, we would have put environmental sealing on our underwater carriers.

Actually, I replied to a side track that said "sub-carriers would be cool though", and I wasn't bringing in physics but common sense.

By RAW, you are correct.

Most ships use ballast tanks to balance the ship in/above the water, it alters how the ship performs. Aircraft carriers for example need to be incredibly stable in order for aircraft to land on them. While a Cruiser needs to be nimble, and agile reacting to the waves to keep it pointed in the direction it is traveling at high speeds.

I'm a former US Navy Sailor, I speak from experience.

-- I'm not sure sub-launched aircraft work well in the rules, even ignoring logic. At a minimum you would need some way to get them to the surface (probably Ballast Tanks 1 as Amphibious won't cut it) and a way to take off (probably requiring Improved Takeoff and Landing 2). Forget capsules as there are no current rules for transporting vehicles inside other vehicles that I'm aware of.

Shaidar: Shadowrun Ballast Tanks (p. 133, Arsenal) are a very specific modification related to having a pressurized hull in addition to the ballast tanks themselves. They do not increase stability or anything.

I know I read it out of Arsenal.

They need a new technical advisory staff over at Catalyst.

Just to put a little info out there, for those discussing submersible aircraft carriers:

Submarine Aircraft Carriers were used in WW2

-- In Shadowrun terms that's an aircraft with flotation carried as cargo on a submarine. Some of the submarines may count as having a launch catapult.

We know this, Shaldar. The exact same point has been made before in this same thread.
The point is though, rating 2 Ballast Tanks (the watercraft-specific vehicle mod from Arsenal) allow a watercraft to submerge to the depths of the ocean, no other questions asked. Only catch is it needs Life Support as well, or the crew needs to have personal scuba gear, for the crew to survive.

To keep the sidetrack for a bit:
There's little difference between a drone and a missile, anatomically speaking. Both are vehicles with a Pilot. One's just not expected to come back, or do more beyond making something -and the ground it's on- disappear.

So let's look at it from a common sense perspective. The main thing I have a hard time seeing is a jet surviving the pressure of existing, let alone moving, at 100 meter depth (Ballast Tank 1 depth)
er
Air intakes can be sealed. The rest should be pretty much watertight already. Also, any craft made to operate at high altitude will have some form of life support system. If it can't be made watertight, at least the pilot can live underwater for some time.

Then there's the means of getting to the surface.
The launch-planes-into-torpedo-tubes concept is nice and pink mohawk but pretty unrealistic, for the high acceleration chunky salsa you mentioned. Then again, aircraft carriers are long by default. A longer speed up trajectory would make it feasible. I'd think a gauss rifle type magnet array 'catapult' would be feasible. Of course the launching tube would have to be holding water, to prevent the 'bellyflop from the high board' effect. It still leaves the question of much water a plane could be shot through like that, and of course, an option to land.
There's plenty alternatives though.
I mentioned a simple courier, plane-case sized minisub, to function as a VTOL takeoff and landing platform that could take planes to and from the surface. Why this over just having the carrier surface? Reduced signature. This seems the most 'possible' qay to me.
.
Alternatively a plane could take a deflatable variant of the Lighter Than Air mod. That would again leave return impossible though.

Another idea I've been playing with though: all a jet engine needs to run is a fuel and oxygen. Hydrogen engines will be a lot further advanced 2072 than they are now,. Hydrogen run jet engines are nothing new, but we've seen them be used in concept and real aircraft. Being underwater gives it acces to large ammount of both h2 and o2. Question is; can it electrolyse fast enough to keep it running? Otherwise, interal tanks would.
Of course, a jet engine can jet water without difficulty.

Use is the big unknown still though.

Reading the wikipedia article, I think the best solution for an actual submarine carrier that actually carries human-piloted aircraft would be turning the aircraft into seaplanes, this way, they can takeoff and land on the water, without the need of a runway.

...You're saying you can't carry a drone in a van by RAW? O_o

-- If its not in a drone rack, yup (minidrones carried as personal gear exempted). I'd love to know where they hid the rules or even guidelines if it exists.

-- If you can find a page reference about vehicle cargo in SR4 do let me know.

While it is not forbidden to load a drone (say a Steel Lynx) into the back of a van, there is no rule about cargo capacity, neither for volume nor for mass... Sometimes abstraction in rules can go a bit too far.

Given current technology, I would tend to say 'no' given the size requirements. In the future? Maybe - but then it would still be easier to take that electricity and convert it directly to propulsion via a propeller.

You could also theoretically add additional fuel tanks on the wings, but instead of fuel, it carries liquid oxygen, or you could somehow dilute the O2 directly in the fuel, like we do with rocket fuel (anyone know what fuel is in those removable rockets they put on jets to reduce the runway length they need?0

The solid-fuel JATO packs?

A jet engine can't function underwater. Even a simple pulsejet wouldn't work. At all.

Well, a normal turbine engine might, but then you'd have the problem of the waters resistance.
You can't move something under water with the same speed you would move it in the air, because the resistance would basically be like working in molasses in comparsion.
And then you need to make sure it can hit ZOMGWTFBBQ Speeds needed to lift off from out of the water against the bigger drag of the water in basically NOWISH when coming up.
Maybe if we were working with some super cavitational stuff we could figure something out. There are Torpedos using this today i think. Or at least, developed.
Also, the under water rail gun makes use of this too.

-- The Russian Shkval is the only supercavitation torpedo in known use. Current supercav torpedoes have rather bizarre operational use because of the lack of guidance (research continues on ways to have sensors extend out of the cavitation bubble and not be blinded by the noise and water movement) and the fact they can only form the bubble at low pressures (meaning it can only kick into supercav speeds at very low depths). The Shkval is basically a fast unguided rocket that happens to move underwater. It uses a vortex combustor ramjet for propulsion.

-- See the old SciAm article which describes it pretty well: http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~kagan/p...eUnderwater.pdf

Yah, that's the one i was thinking about.

Well, the I-400s were good in concept. Using a catapult launch then recovering the planes via crane from the sea (the planes were seaplanes). Regardless, a submersible aircraft carrier of any sort will surface to launch planes. Plus in the world of Shadowrun, where VTOL is more common, you don't have as much of the problem regarding launch distances....

Heck, you could have a retractable sealed door that opens as soon as the ship surfaces and the VTOLs come swarming out. I'm thinking the Atlantis submersible aircraft carrier from Supreme Commander.

Also: Magic.
High Force Levitate Spell or movement Power or shape element(water) to make for a quick and easy take off/landing.

At the bottom of the article:

Flying Submarine. Awesome.

Yeah, there are those too. Pick a spirit of Water so he can move the water away from the launch tube just like Moses did to the Red Sea?

Ferrexample laddie

Which reminds me from this US Navy Readying Electro-Magnetic Launch for New Carriers Which Will Also be Ready for New Lasers and Railguns Later.