[FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

5 posts · Oct 26 1999 to Oct 31 1999

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:50:18 +1000

Subject: [FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

G'day guys,

Derek has been hammering away at this stuff for a while and thought it was
about time it saw the light of day in general. He knows a few of you other
guys have put some long hours into your OU stuff and isn't trying to get up
your nose, its just that he thought the figs were cool and got inspired
;)

Cheers

Beth

> [quoted text omitted]

> From: "Tom McCarthy" <tmcarth@fox.nstn.ca>

> In general, I agree with Brian. However, I would probably avoid >going

Oops I'm in trouble now, my OU 'Oceania' Dreadnought has 4 class 4-beam
batteries.

For those interested

Oceania class DREADNOUGHT.

TMF: 160 NPV: 548

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS:

Classification: Dreadnought Displacement: 16000 Tonnes
		[MASS Factor 160]
Hull Type: Average
			[Hull Integrity 48]
Crew: 140 Personal
			[Crew Factor 7]
Armament: 4 Class 4 batteries (2 arcs each, facing forward) 4 MT missiles.
Defences: 4 Point defence systems Level 1 screen Sensor suite: Standard
sensors
                        2 Fire-control systems
1 Area Defence Control System Drive systems: Main drive rating 4 FTL (Jump)
Drive.

SERVICE DETAILS:

First entered service: xxxxx Currently in OUDF Naval service: 4 Lost in
action: Nil
Decomissioned/scrapped: Nil
Relegated to reserve fleet: Nil Sold to other forces: Nil Under construction:
4 Procurement cost: 5480 MUcr

The Oceania class Dreadnought or Battledreadnought depending on whose
definition you subscribe is typical of the design concept of the new
construction program for the OUDF navy. Designed to fight at range the OUDF
Navy has opted to give the Oceania class an array of four class 4 beam
batteries supported by MT missiles. As with almost all designs of the new
construction program the Oceania is equipped with a large PDS suite and ADFC
system.

While on operations the main task of the Oceania class will be to keep the
enemy away from the new carriers, which are not designed close range combat.

The latest unit to have completed construction, the OUS Brisbane has just been
deployed to the fleet and is the 4th unit of the 10th Battlesquadron, the
other units being the first three units of the class, the OUS Oceania, OUS
Australia, and OUS New Zealand. The Battlesquadron it self is
homeported at Fleetbase XXXXXXX in the BD +35° 2270 star system.

A further four of the class is currently under construction.

SHIP NAMES: Oceania completed xxxxxx. Australia completed xxxxxx. New Zealand
completed xxxxxx. Brisbane completed xxxxxx. Adelaide under construction.
Canberra under construction. Perth under construction. Hobart under
construction. Moresby Name not used yet Suva Name not used yet Darwin Name not
used yet Wellington Name not used yet

Of course this is just my take on the OU Navy (part of a larger document I'm
working on).

OUDF Navy

The OUDF Navy is the space going arm of the Oceanic Union Defence Forces, it
is a professional volunteer force whose primary role is maintain the security
of the systems and territories which make up the Oceanic Union.

Because the Oceanic Union is a Multi system interstellar nation the OUDF Navy
has had to fully develop the capabilities required of a deep space navy,
capable of extended operations though not at the same force levels of say the
NAC or ESU.

New construction program.

Since it's inception the OUDF Navy has mostly either brought or built under
license foreign designs modified for use within the OUDF operational roles.
But with the outbreak of the 3rd Solar War in 2165 the government of the day
committed the Oceanic Union to further developing its domestic naval
construction program. Analysts had suggested that the outbreak of hostilities
between the NAC and the ESU and their immediate allies would tie up naval
construction programs for the foreseeable future. With the OUDF already
looking to replace their battleships the first of which was approaching the
end of its service life and was due for replacement a solution was required.

Previous defence reviews had recommended improving the Oceanic Union's ship
building capability but this had never been acted upon. Since expanding into
space the OU has managed to stay out any major armed conflict, there have been
numerous skirmishes with neighbouring nations but never a protracted war. But
the 3rd Solar War allowed factions of the government to gain support for a
stronger military supported by a larger domestic defence industry, the OU had
the required tech base to do this and within it's star systems it definitely
had the resources.

Overall design scheme.

The premier strike arm of the OUDF Navy are the carriers and their fighters,
fighter strikes are used in concert with large numbers of 'More Thrust'
missiles from the battleline and cruisers to destroy enemy vessels. The
battleline is used to protect the much more fragile carriers by interposing
themselves between the carriers and a potential threat.

Most of the OUDF Navy vessels have a thrust rating of 4. But there are
exceptions; the Collins class battlecruiser is one.

'More Thrust' missiles are the primary armament of the cruiser-sized
vessels.

Salvo missile racks are used on the carriers and destroyer sized vessels.

The OUDF navy makes extensive use of ADFC systems on all of its vessels to
help provide a formidable point defence network. OUDF navy doctrine is for
vessels to remain in a small compact formation so the ADFC systems can be used
to maximum advantage to protect each other and high value assets.

Of course this is a work in progress, tomorrow everything could change (not
that I'm saying it will mind you...).     ;-)

By the way just taken delivery of the NEW OU LIGHT CARRIER from Nic at Eureka
(I've got two sitting based and undercoated ready for painting at my work
desk). Similar in shape and layout to the previous OU ship miniatures (if you
haven't seen a example yet think 5th element Earth ships) with the addition of
a hangar space attached as a outrigger arrangement, looks very nice.

So far that makes 3 x DD, 2 x CL, 2 x CH and now 2 x CVL hulls in my OU fleet.

Derek

From: Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@w...>

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:11:57 +1000

Subject: Re: [FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

> Beth Fulton wrote:

> Derek has been hammering away at this stuff for a while and thought it

Actually they fit in rather well with the OU as I envisaged it.

> The Battlesquadron it self is

No, that's Fleetbase XXXX, pronounced Fourex.

> A further four of the class is currently under construction.

..if they can scrape up the money to build 'em...

> Overall design scheme.

Sounds good to me. A doctrine that makes sense. MTs to plink off

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:32:34 +1000

Subject: Re: [FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

G'day Alan,

> Actually they fit in rather well with the OU as I envisaged it.

Well even better then!;)

> A further four of the class is currently under construction.

Now, now!;)

> Sounds good to me. A doctrine that makes sense. MTs to plink off

Its only got to beat those you play against... hey wait a minute what does
that say about me?!;)

Thanks for your comments

Beth (for Derek)

From: Tony Wilkinson <twilko@o...>

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:48:31 +1000

Subject: Re: [FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

G'day Beth,

Had a couple of designs that might fit in with Dereks ideas (his fit with
mine)

"Sydney" class carrier

Mass 220 Cost 735 Hull Weak Armour 7 FTL Thrust 2 Screens 2
FC     2
ADFC   1
PDS    6
Beams 2 class 4 (both fs,f,fp) 4 class 1 Fighters 6 groups

"Protector" class Light carrier

Mass 140 Cost 466 Hull Weak Armour 6 FTL Thrust 2 Screens 1
FC     2
PDS    4
ADFC   1
Beams 2 class 4 (both fs,f,fp) 3 class 1 Fighters 4 groups

"Burnam-Burnam" dreadnaught

Mass   150
Cost   519
Hull   Strong
Armour 9 FTL Thrust 2 Screens 2
FC     3
PDS    4
Beams
7 Class 3 (3-fs,f,fp; 2-f,fs,as; 2-f,fp,ap)
2 class 2 (360) 2 class 1

I think that the numbers are right. None of designs has had a good combat test
yet but are based on my experiences. Any thoughts?

Wilko.

> At 09:50 27/10/99 +1000, you wrote:

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 08:38:41 +1000

Subject: Re: [FT] Dereks OU (was UN SDN stuff)

G'day Wilko,

> Had a couple of designs that might fit in with Dereks ideas (his fit

> I think that the numbers are right. None of designs has had a good

I'll pass them on for you.

Beth