Hammerhead - Corvette Anti-fighter

[macgivre]

This look like a steam gunboat at the era of fighter jet ... 

Unless the manned turret can be used in remotely operated mode, this is a huge waste of manpower and ressources. 

This is not in any way an escort ship : it is bigger and operate more crew than the ships it is supposed to escort. 
Moreover the manned turret are only effective in close range, so it is useless to prevent a pair of gladiator to lock their target at 3km range and fire their torpedos... 

But this will make a great gunship for ground operations : most of the turrets seems to be able to point downward ... and the bridge is also downward.
But here again, we have a 100m long gunship with only 6-7 usable turrets ... 

In an offensive role, the large size of this ship make it detectable from long distances ... so you have little chance to have the opportunity to get closer enough to use your turrets. 

Frankly I don't see how this ship can be used against organized ennemies ... 
 

[Fizzlefuse]

1 hour ago, macgivre said:

This look like a steam gunboat at the era of fighter jet ... 

Unless the manned turret can be used in remotely operated mode, this is a huge waste of manpower and ressources. 

This is not in any way an escort ship : it is bigger and operate more crew than the ships it is supposed to escort. 
Moreover the manned turret are only effective in close range, so it is useless to prevent a pair of gladiator to lock their target at 3km range and fire their torpedos... 

But this will make a great gunship for ground operations : most of the turrets seems to be able to point downward ... and the bridge is also downward.
But here again, we have a 100m long gunship with only 6-7 usable turrets ... 

In an offensive role, the large size of this ship make it detectable from long distances ... so you have little chance to have the opportunity to get closer enough to use your turrets. 

Frankly I don't see how this ship can be used against organized ennemies ... 
 

It all depends on which ships you’re escorting. While I wouldn’t bother escorting a lonely Hull A/B or even a C with a Hammerhead, I imagine it would be quite effective when escorting a larger vessel or a convoy. Combine it with a couple of fighters and I think you have a very decent escort group.

as a offensive ship it should be quite effective but you’re right on the fact that it will be easier to spot due to it’s size. However, ‘offensive’ doesn’t mean first response or that you come alone.

[Devil Khan]

Listen to what is said.

Each turret has the firepower of a fighter, or more so in some cases.

[Riley Egret]

3 hours ago, macgivre said:

This look like a steam gunboat at the era of fighter jet ... 

Unless the manned turret can be used in remotely operated mode, this is a huge waste of manpower and ressources. 

This is not in any way an escort ship : it is bigger and operate more crew than the ships it is supposed to escort. 
Moreover the manned turret are only effective in close range, so it is useless to prevent a pair of gladiator to lock their target at 3km range and fire their torpedos... 

But this will make a great gunship for ground operations : most of the turrets seems to be able to point downward ... and the bridge is also downward.
But here again, we have a 100m long gunship with only 6-7 usable turrets ... 

In an offensive role, the large size of this ship make it detectable from long distances ... so you have little chance to have the opportunity to get closer enough to use your turrets. 

Frankly I don't see how this ship can be used against organized ennemies ... 
 

If you are escorting a couple of Orions and Hulls for a mining expediition, you want this ship: casual pirates won't touch you with a 10 foot pole and even organized assualt will have to consider gain/losses when facing a couple of those.

[Stahlkopp]

6 minutes ago, Fizzlefuse said:

It all depends on which ships you’re escorting. While I wouldn’t bother escorting a lonely Hull A/B or even a C with a Hammerhead, I imagine it would be quite effective when escorting a larger vessel or a convoy. Combine it with a couple of fighters and I think you have a very decent escort group.

as a offensive ship it should be quite effective but you’re right on the fact that it will be easier to spot due to it’s size. However, ‘offensive’ doesn’t mean first response or that you come alone.

The fighters will prolly not have the range to escort it. However, you could ofc deploy 2 Hammerheads.

[Fizzlefuse]

2 minutes ago, Stahlkopp said:

The fighters will prolly not have the range to escort it. However, you could ofc deploy 2 Hammerheads.

Maybe. I guess a convoy isn’t exactly going across the street. But then, you plan for a long trip and take a starfarer with you  

[Devil Khan]

Forgot to add this aswell. Star matrix ship

https://sketchfab.com/models/d12d089f6d18451c89602110da5c4c83

[Danakar Endeel]

9 hours ago, Boildown said:

This is what I thought the corvette would be before we got the Polaris.

I don't mind the Polaris, but now I do question whether I need my Retaliator and my Redeemer.  The Retaliator is basically obsoleted by the Polaris.  And the Redeemer, other than boarding actions, is obsoleted by this gunship.  But I've never been super interested in the boarding part of the Redeemer, I wanted the gunship part of it.

Anyways, haven't bought one yet, gunna wait and see what else is revealed over the next week.  But I might get one Dec 4th, and I really wasn't intending to get anything this go-round.  It does look really cool, people are going to want to crew this thing, and based on my knowledge of computer games this ship is going to be "OP" in the verse, because its design is so well focused.

Well, the Redeemer might still have a role to play as it will undoubtedly be more mobile than the Hammerhead and would be able to give chase or reposition itself quicker if needs be. In addition to that there's still the article about ship modularity where the Redeemer was used as a prime example. Effectively it's a more versatile and more compact version of the Constellation.

Quote

For example: if you have purchased a Redeemer, then using the new system you would have a variety of new modules available to refit the ship, internal and external, to suit your play requirements. If you wanted to make it a Bounty Hunter ship, you could buy a “Stasis Chamber module” for the lower deck and you would be able to capture and store fugitives to be delivered for their bounties at your leisure. You could configure the upper deck to be outfitted with a “long range communication suite” allowing you to keep in touch with your “Infoagent” even when in deep space. Fed up of Bounty hunting? Swap in a larger cargo module in the lower deck to make that profitable run you have been planning for a while, or add the Explorer Module with deployable vehicle for some planetside recon.

But yeah, to me the Retaliator already became the odd duck with the ridiculous torpedo storage arms and basically became obsolete with the Polaris. Then to add insult to injury CIG released the Eclipse where 50% of the ordnance of a Retaliator can be delivered by just 1 person while benefitting from stealth. So a 7 crew ship for a measly 6 S9 torpedoes while the same 7 crew could comfortably operate a Polaris with 28 S10 torpedoes or just 1 person can deliver 3 S9 with a stealth bomber. No-brainer there (except for the increased pricetag of the Polaris and Eclipse).

[Stahlkopp]

12 minutes ago, Danakar Endeel said:

But yeah, the Retaliator basically became obsolete with the Polaris. A 7 crew ship for 6 S9 torpedoes while the same 7 crew could comfortably operate a Polaris with 28 S10 torpedoes. No-brainer there (except for the increased pricetag).

Well, it did not make the Tali obsolete. Sure, the crew requirements are a little bit off but that's the only real thing in favour of the Polaris.

The Polaris is a huge target and will be far less replaceable compared to the common Tali. Higher insurance costs as well as running cost like fuel and maintaining.

Plus the S10 torps will be more expensive and if a Hammerhead shoot them down... The Polaris is a torp boat but its mass and size are a negativ aspect to do so. It'll be indeed the best as a support ship for a small militia's fighter/bomber wing and to bring the hammer to ship-to-ship combat if needed. 

 

That said I see the Hammerhead not as the 'OP kill'em all' ship. It'll dominate everything in its size in its gun range. Its natural foes are indeed missle boats and bombers - I doubt that the Hammerhead will ever become a capital and so no capital shields. It'll excell in its role and shred fighters but I still would not mess with a wing of Talis, Glads or Eclips. 

 

It'll be a good long range escort against the common pirate wings but it lacks the Polaris ability to support a fighter screen.

[Danakar Endeel]

7 hours ago, Reavern said:

I re-watched the Aegis video and learned that the Hammerhead apparently has two remote turrets in addition to the six manned turrets. Unfortunately, it's unclear where those two remote turrets are located on the ship.

Also, the video explained that there is a small galley for the crew to eat, and internal diagrams show the engine room is the same room as the one with the cargo lift. Regardless that the ship has these rooms, I still believe that the ship will increase in size during the ship production pipeline. The concept artists can get away with blocking out a kitchen nook and claim the crew can eat, and place the ship's power plants on the walls of a room with a cargo lift in the middle, but I guarantee those aren't getting through production.

The Carrack was increased in size just so they could make the hallways hexagonal in shape -- a purely aesthetic design choice -- which increased the width of the hallways by 2 metres, and consequently the whole ship. The Carrack also has a dedicated drone room, as well as crew amenities, such as a pool table!

That is why I believe the Hammerhead won't be as spartan when it's finished as the concept art portrays. CIG will add several rooms and the missing features that I mentioned, and the ship will probably be at least 25% larger.

Yeah, in addition to that I also do not recall seeing any escape pods anywhere. For the number of people onboard you'd also have to devote one or more areas to escape pods. Heck even the Starfarer has 3 areas solely for 6+2+2 escape pods. Now they could put them somewhere in those long corridors just to break up the hallways but they are not listed atm.

Also, the floorplan only showed 2 engines/powerplants sitting in the area with the cargo lift as a mockup but no other components were shown. Now ofcourse they could just line the components up along the walls a bit but it feels a bit odd to cram all ship components in a cargohold and it would need quite a bit of room to put in all those Large components. So far it seems that all they can fit in there is the 2 Powerplants

 

[Devil Khan]

that floor plan is incomplete. if you check the other schematic it is very different floor plan.

Also  The tali and the Polaris and the Hammerhead are three Very different roles.

[Gremlich]

12 hours ago, DASKOMMTDAWEG said:

Maybe we should steer clear from terran saltwater navy wording.

It is CR's game, eh. He can determine what's what, however incorrect, vis-a-vis IRL terminology. IRL Cap ships were named for, duh, State Capitals, People, and States - soooo, if CIG follows that practice...

11 hours ago, faquarl25 said:

The Polaris doesn't know if it wants to be a carrier,

There is no way the Polaris could EVAR be considered a Carrier - would you extend that to the Connie with its snub? No.

I think of the Polaris as more a Cruise missile destroyer (with one helicopter) in the "terran naval" sense. Even a "littoral" ship.

[Danakar Endeel]

16 minutes ago, Devil Khan said:

that floor plan is incomplete. if you check the other schematic it is very different floor plan.

Also  The tali and the Polaris and the Hammerhead are three Very different roles.

Yeah, I grabbed mine from the AtV segment as it seemed to be an in-editor floorplan. It's likely that it was from an older mockup used for general sizing. The one you linked also doesn't show the docking collars anymore so maybe they did away with those too already.

Still, I was expecting the Hammerhead to have at least another 1/2 level in the back; just for fitting all the required Large ship components as there doesn't seem to be enough room for them in the 'cargohold'.

 

[Gremlich]

8 hours ago, Hector said:

Thinking about replacing my phoenix and redeemer for this beast

I wouldn't. The Phoenix is rare and the Redeemer will be changed into a real beast.

[Devil Khan]

10 minutes ago, Gremlich said:

It is CR's game, eh. He can determine what's what, however incorrect, vis-a-vis IRL terminology. IRL Cap ships were named for, duh, State Capitals, People, and States - soooo, if CIG follows that practice...

USA is not the center of the universe, and state capitals were only used for some US battleships

The Redeemer and Hammerhead are two different roles.

It's like you are trying to get a square peg into a round hole.

[Gremlich]

1 hour ago, Danakar Endeel said:

But yeah, to me the Retaliator already became the odd duck with the ridiculous torpedo storage arms and basically became obsolete with the Polaris.

People need to consider their application of force. As there are different scale of exploration, there are ships which fit those scenarioes, whether 315p, Terrapin, DUR, (Phoenix), 600i, or Carrack, the ships needed to provide assault support vary as well according to scale and mission - for example: Cutlass, Hoplite, FL MIS, Retaliator, Redeemer, Polaris, Hammerhead - you could even use the FL MAX and SF for ground support opns (personnel and eq delivery).

5 minutes ago, Devil Khan said:

USA is not the center of the universe, and state capitals were only used for some US battleships

The Redeemer and Hammerhead are two different roles.

It's like you are trying to get a square peg into a round hole.

You're right on. But consider the practice for naming ships was observed by the Europeans as well. (Bismark? Prinz Eugen?)

Yes the Redeemer and Hammerhead serve two different, though related, purposes. The redeemer is assualt - plain and simple whilst the Hammerhead is more combat support and defense. People need to understand the differences and capabilities of ships and imagine their application in combat and peacetime.

[GalYurr]

Listed with different dimensions in the brochure.

[Zee]

2 hours ago, Stahlkopp said:

The fighters will prolly not have the range to escort it. However, you could ofc deploy 2 Hammerheads.

I bought two. I also own 8 Super Hornets. Putting a flight of 4 Hornets with one gun boat and the other with the second, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to defend whatever I plan to with little to no interference. 

For major ops, I plan on pairing these beasts with a Polaris. The intent would be to maximize my attack and defense capabilities at once.

[Devil Khan]

One thing to note: No ship has internally laid out in concept and when they have finished.

There will be a captains quarters, security "office" and a mess hall. 

[Zee]

14 hours ago, Reavern said:

Of course that's a potential problem. However, I believe that Pirates and criminal Orgs will always have greater difficult operating and maintaining cap ships than lawful players and Orgs, for numerous reasons.

Firstly, insurance. CIG has explained that Pirates can't obtain insurance like lawful players. There will be a different form of insurance available for criminals, which will probably be more expensive and take longer to replace ships, especially cap ships.

Second, it won't be as easy to elude law enforcement in a cap ship. CIG has said that the quantum jump mechanics will be revised so that the larger the ship, the longer it will take to spool a quantum drive, and the cool-down time will be longer before it can make another jump. Also, cap ships require large jump points, which limit the Pirates' possible escape routes. Pirates probably won't risk using a cap ship, like the Hammerhead, in UEE star systems, because the risk of losing it will be too great. As for lawless star systems, it probably won't be difficult to track down a Pirate-owned Hammerhead, and the bounty on it will be so high that countless bounty hunters will be gunning for it. (It'll be like the Hunt for the Bismark.)

Third, cap ships are expensive to operate and maintain, and Pirates only source of income is successfully looting ships. Piracy will be a high-risk, variable-reward enterprise. Pirates will always be risking imprisonment or death, and they might only come away with a few cargo boxes of crap. If a Pirate suffers a string of bad luck, they could easily bankrupt themself. If and when that happens, they don't have the same options as lawful players, because their Crime Stat will prevent them from accepting easy missions for easy money.

A Pirate Org would need a high success rate to afford to operate and maintain a cap ship, like the Hammerhead. As I've mentioned before, my prediction is that Pirate Orgs will use stolen ships until they break, and then won't bother repairing them; they'll just steal another ship instead. Pirates will have a hangar full of broken ships that they can't even sell because they're stolen. So if a Pirate-owned Hammerhead is mauled by a lawful Org's fleet, it probably won't be repaired and out raiding again anytime soon.

That's why if and when lawful players encounter a Pirate-owned cap ship, they should do everything they can to spoil it. Meaning that they shouldn't just give up and dump their cargo to pay the "pirate tax". They should always resist. Fight, run, hide, and stall as long as possible, until NPC law enforcement and/or lawful players intervene. Any damage inflicted on the Pirate cap ship will be exponentially greater than the losses the Pirates can inflict, because insurance is on our side. It might even be worthwhile for lawful players to kamikaze Pirate cap ships.

Another option is to self-destruct your ship and eject, rather than allow Pirates to capture or loot it.

My point is that the best way to deal with Pirates is to make their "job" as difficult and expensive as possible. Make it so that Pirates can't afford to use cap ships, like the Hammerhead.

Well said!

[Danakar Endeel]

I noticed that the Hammerhead is listed to have 4x Marsden 683 missile racks.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/voyager-direct/Behring-Racks/Behring-MSD-683-Marsden-Missile-Rack

 

If these are regular external missile hardpoints instead of specific 'bespoke' launchers (like on the Constellation) you may be able to change the rack. This could mean that you might be able to equip it with 4x S6 torpedoes (616 rack) or 8x S5 torpedoes (625 rack) if you desire. Or load it up with 62 S2 Rattler cluster missiles etc.

 

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/voyager-direct/Behring-Racks/Behring-MSD-616-Marsden-Missile-Rack

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/voyager-direct/Behring-Racks/Behring-MSD-625-Marsden-Missile-Rack

 

EDIT: Hang on, someone spotted retracting missile pods on one of the concept images, so they may be 'bespoke' launchers after all and locked to S3 only. Ah well...

[Zee]

16 hours ago, GeraldEvans said:

Don't need to roll. Tip the nose up (bridge is underneath) and maintain path through a little downward strafe. The bottom and four wing turrets would have a view.

There's a turret on the top as well.

[GeraldEvans]

There's a turret on the top as well.

Yes but it's likely not possible to have a line of fire on a target with all six turrets. I suggested the nose up attitude since the bridge is on the bottom and the pilot may wish to see.

[faquarl25]

1 hour ago, Gremlich said:

It is CR's game, eh. He can determine what's what, however incorrect, vis-a-vis IRL terminology. IRL Cap ships were named for, duh, State Capitals, People, and States - soooo, if CIG follows that practice...

There is no way the Polaris could EVAR be considered a Carrier - would you extend that to the Connie with its snub? No.

I think of the Polaris as more a Cruise missile destroyer (with one helicopter) in the "terran naval" sense. Even a "littoral" ship.

My point is that the Polaris makes significant comprises in order to have the hangar. It could be much smaller, faster, and maneuverable if it didn't need to have it. I like the comparison to the littoral ships, especially the US ones which also tried to do everything and now are excellent at nothing.

[Zee]

19 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

26 minutes ago, Zarian said:

There's a turret on the top as well.

Yes but it's likely not possible to have a line of fire on a target with all six turrets. I suggested the nose up attitude since the bridge is on the bottom and the pilot may wish to see.

Gotcha! Now I see your point LoL