PDA

View Full Version : Wet Navies in universe of space navies



Easy E
17-08-2008, 03:16
Okay, I don't want anyone saying how silly wet navies are in the 40K setting. I don't buy that theory at all. If your planet has a lot of water on it, you need something to provide security. So, if your argument is about how stupid of an idea it is, stow it. Now, on to the questions.

If you are the Imperial Governor of a largely water based planet, and by the Lex Imperialis it your duty to provide a military force to protect you planet from xeno andheretic menaces as well as protect your own powerbase, how are you going to do it?

What is your planetwide strategy?
What role does the Navy play in protecting your local intereest?
What role does it play in a potential invasion?
What are some of its battle doctrines going to be?
What types of ships would you build?

Discuss...

sydbridges
17-08-2008, 04:44
Okay, I don't want anyone saying how silly wet navies are in the 40K setting. I don't buy that theory at all. If your planet has a lot of water on it, you need something to provide security. So, if your argument is about how stupid of an idea it is, stow it. Now, on to the questions.

If you are the Imperial Governor of a largely water based planet, and by the Lex Imperialis it your duty to provide a military force to protect you planet from xeno andheretic menaces as well as protect your own powerbase, how are you going to do it?

What is your planetwide strategy?
What role does the Navy play in protecting your local intereest?
What role does it play in a potential invasion?
What are some of its battle doctrines going to be?
What types of ships would you build?

Discuss...

A Navy is only as good as the air support it receives - I point to the Yamato, which was the largest battleship that fought in WW2. Once the allies saw it, they sunk it with submarines and concentrated air-bombing. So while I could certainly imagine a planet with a Navy, they would need to have a suitable force of flying craft to protect it from air attacks, and possibly/probably also space attacks.

Here's what I see a water-based Navy doing in war:
Protecting shipping (assuming the planet uses water-based shipping)
Providing protection for aircraft carriers
Blockading enemy shipping
Protecting any off-shore sites such as drilling platforms or whatever.
Watching for below the surface threats such as submarines, horrible creatures of the deep, necrons who have discovered the ice planet they built their tomb world on has since thawed and now they're all stuck underwater and highly annoyed, etc...
In peace:
Dealing with pirates (destroyers, likely)
Enforcing taxes on various sea lanes (pretty much everything could do that)

To accomplish these roles, I'd want generally:
Ships to hunt submarines and similar threats, ideally be pretty fast (ie Destroyers)
Ships to fight ship-to-ship battles, ideally highly armored and with huge guns (ie Battleships)
Ships to act as mobile platforms for airpower (ie Aircraft Carriers)
Ships to harass enemy shipping (ie Subs/Destroyers)
Ships to watch for threats in the deep/fight them off (ie Subs)

...Not sure what you mean by Battle Doctrines. In general, the goal will be to use the carriers to fight for air superiority while the other ships protect the carriers. If a threat comes from underwater (sea-chaos-beasts, aforementioned angry wet necrons, etc) then the subs and destroyers will be doing most of the fighting, with the subs mostly acting to scout for enemies so the destroyers can drop a load of ordinance.

If an invasion comes from space, determine where they land, and if possible, blockade them from leaving their landing area. Battleships can be used to shell the enemy at their landing site while aircraft from the carriers harass the enemy (or keep the enemy's own space vessels away from the ships). If it comes from the depths, use the subs to locate threats/deal with ones that aren't likely to destroy the subs and the destroyers to roll out large amounts of ordinance onto it.

In times of peace, I imagine mostly using the navy to ensure tariffs for using the water for shipping are enforced and ensuring pirates and other forms of sea-borne brigands are unable to disrupt the economy.

Wolfblade670
17-08-2008, 05:25
I'm glad someone finally decided to ask this question. I've been rather curious about it myself. I always thought how awesome it would be for an Ork Waaagh to hit an Imperial world with large oceans, and the Warboss construcing fleets of Orky dreadnought battleships and duking it out with the local Imperial blue-water PDF fleet.

Brother Siccarius
17-08-2008, 05:36
Okay, I don't want anyone saying how silly wet navies are in the 40K setting. I don't buy that theory at all. If your planet has a lot of water on it, you need something to provide security. So, if your argument is about how stupid of an idea it is, stow it. Now, on to the questions.

If you are the Imperial Governor of a largely water based planet, and by the Lex Imperialis it your duty to provide a military force to protect you planet from xeno andheretic menaces as well as protect your own powerbase, how are you going to do it?

What is your planetwide strategy?
What role does the Navy play in protecting your local intereest?
What role does it play in a potential invasion?
What are some of its battle doctrines going to be?
What types of ships would you build?

Discuss...

If you're competent, your navy provides protection from more local threats, warfare isn't just for the alien or the insane after all. There'd probably be plenty of wars on planets where both sides are pro-imperial, but just warring over the planetary interests. Additionally, preventing local scavenger groups (scavvies/pirates/raiders) from becoming too powerful.

If you're good, your navies provide protection from air craft or transports landing on your shores, whether you're a fully oceanic world or not. They provide mobile long ranged or heavy ordinance fire. More than likely even possible of deterring space borne landings for several miles into the coast. On the off chance that the enemy does land, your navies provide fire from the coast to the land, forcing any attempted landing parties to face fire from the front and the back. You'll also have naval born aircraft to provide even further range and capabilities. Much like the modern navy, your naval forces are versatile enough to prove proof against becoming obsolete.

If you're really good, you additionally limit space craft to landing on stationary barges further out to sea by limiting open space or providing anti-aircraft capabilities throughout the mainland area. This leaves the navy and civilian craft as the only possible way of receiving and distributing goods which, while it may seem like a hassle, also near-fully prevents outside forces from safely attempting and landings inland.




It's not limited to defense either. Wet navies used by attackers provide effective landing opportunities and some stealth and selection as to where you want to deploy your armies (they can't be watching entire oceans at once with any detail, even with space capabilities). The Third war for Armageddon proved this point, as Ghazghkull was slightly limited as to where his massive army could land effectively, and leaving the orkish armada to lay waste to coastal infrastructure.

sydbridges
17-08-2008, 05:53
If you're competent,

True, I think I've come across all of one competent planetary governor so far in 40k novels? The recurring theme seems to be that planetary governors are either traitors or barely capable of emptying water from a boot when told there are instructions written on the bottom...

I think the biggest concern for any Navy dealing with an off-world threat is going to be the space-born forces that may come with such an invasion. The number of ships that currently exist that could deal with ships bombarding them from space are pretty slim. The biggest, most badass battleships in the world are virtually defenseless if their guns can't hit whatever it is that's dropping bombs on them. If you look at how the biggest ships in WW2 were destroyed, it generally involved a heavy dose of air superiority bombing the hell out of them.

Brother Siccarius
17-08-2008, 06:41
True, I think I've come across all of one competent planetary governor so far in 40k novels? The recurring theme seems to be that planetary governors are either traitors or barely capable of emptying water from a boot when told there are instructions written on the bottom...


To be fair, the only time anything interesting in 40k would happen on an imperial world would be if the Imperial Governor wasn't capable (for whatever reason) or interested in keeping order or doing their job.



I think the biggest concern for any Navy dealing with an off-world threat is going to be the space-born forces that may come with such an invasion. The number of ships that currently exist that could deal with ships bombarding them from space are pretty slim. The biggest, most badass battleships in the world are virtually defenseless if their guns can't hit whatever it is that's dropping bombs on them. If you look at how the biggest ships in WW2 were destroyed, it generally involved a heavy dose of air superiority bombing the hell out of them.*

The number of ships in space that could hit a ship in water are even slimmer than that. Any race's space born ships find it hard to strike the broad side of a hive with any accuracy, which is why space fleets are not the end all be all of the 40k universe. They would have to move closer to the planet, risking being detected and shot at by any planetary defensive weaponry.

As for dropping bombs on them, you definitely have to get much closer than the outer atmosphere to drop anything like a bomb with any sort of accuracy on a mobile target. Unless you plan on planting nukes in the ocean or something else suitably high yield. Which means attack craft, which means anti-aircraft fire from the ships is fully capable of both targeting and destroying the threat as well as defensive measures from aircraft that can be deployed from the (wet) naval ships.


While the Yamato may have been sunk entirely by the efforts of combined air strikes, those aircraft were launched from naval cruisers, which is the only way they could have reacted to, reached, and subsequently destroyed the Yamato still with the chance of returning. There would never have been the second or third set of attacks on the Yamato if they naval power wasn't there to back it up with a landing strip and resupply.

*I find it more than just odd that you're discussing based on what navies currently can or can't do to space threats, as we hardly have a real need for defending from that direction.

chaos0xomega
17-08-2008, 06:43
In a setting like 40k, I would imagine that 99.9% of all wet navies would be sub aquatic, riverine or amphibious in nature. I am of course looking this from a warfare perspective, and not a policing perspective. To me, large surface vessels have always struck me as being prime targets for orbital bombardment, meanwhile I see much merit in deployment of submarine's, as well as river patrol craft and the tactical advantages of launching an assault from the sea. This also keeps with, as far as I know, the established fluff. We have rules for an ork submersible, and I believe there has been mention to Imperial submarines in one or two novels. As far as I know, there is little in the way of mention of a surface fleet in any book.

To Brother Siccarius, I would check some of your fluff sources again, as that is clearly not the case. There are numerous instances in the fluff where spaceborn forces have eliminated larger targets on a planets surface. These, of course, are less common than the usual scenario (space marines drop pod assaulting planetside to blow them up with meltabombs), because that just aint as cool as putting the target 50km underneath bedrock so that a strike team has to do the job instead....
Yes, usually these instances are vs. stationary targets, but I don't doubt that the Imperium would be able to do the same to a moving target, especially one in the water. Seagoing vessels aren't exactly fast. With the advanced sensor systems onboard an Imperial Navy vessel, it shouldbn't be hard to locate the target, and since I would expect an orbital bombardment to occur with lance weaponry, which is said to have a power output equal to that of a star (read: high yield), being slightly off target shouldn't be a major issue(and considering thta it is a laser based weapon, the time to impact from the point of firing should be relatively small, due to the fact that the beam SHOULD be travelling at the speed of light...).

starlight
17-08-2008, 06:52
I'm glad someone finally decided to ask this question. I've been rather curious about it myself. I always thought how awesome it would be for an Ork Waaagh to hit an Imperial world with large oceans, and the Warboss construcing fleets of Orky dreadnought battleships and duking it out with the local Imperial blue-water PDF fleet.

Third War of Armageddon - Orks use submersibles converted from super-tankers as landing craft...

Brother Siccarius
17-08-2008, 07:00
To Brother Siccarius, I would check some of your fluff sources again, as that is clearly not the case. There are numerous instances in the fluff where spaceborn forces have eliminated larger targets on a planets surface. These, of course, are less common than the usual scenario (space marines drop pod assaulting planetside to blow them up with meltabombs), because that just aint as cool as putting the target 50km underneath bedrock so that a strike team has to do the job instead....
Yes, usually these instances are vs. stationary targets, but I don't doubt that the Imperium would be able to do the same to a moving target, especially one in the water. Seagoing vessels aren't exactly fast. With the advanced sensor systems onboard an Imperial Navy vessel, it shouldbn't be hard to locate the target, and since I would expect an orbital bombardment to occur with lance weaponry, which is said to have a power output equal to that of a star (read: high yield), being slightly off target shouldn't be a major issue(and considering thta it is a laser based weapon, the time to impact from the point of firing should be relatively small, due to the fact that the beam SHOULD be travelling at the speed of light...).

....and right through the transparent water, detonating somewhere along the continental shelf and possibly creating a seismic event that most likely won't do much to the naval vessel some ways above it at the water level. If a laser doesn't impact the ship itself, it's not an airbursting laser, it'll keep on going to the point that a miss isn't going to do much more than scorch a few retinas, rock the boat a little, and maybe give the guys on the deck a suntan for their trouble after a few misses. Also, remember, it's the power output of a star in a small area, this isn't a plasma reactor explosion happening in the atmosphere, it's an extremely large laser being pointed at a location. Though GW's lasers are always odd, doing things such as exploding on impact and all that.

The only thing from space that would have impact on the ship if it missed would be an air burst or a torpedo designed to explode after a certain amount of time rather than impact (something tells me they wouldn't have actual depth charges, but this might be just as good). I also doubt many space ships have appropriate bombs for planetary bombardment, instead relying on what they usually use for (space) naval fights (IE. Lance weapons, and torpedoes), though there is the occasional Virus bomb, but then that's just pulling the Deus ex Machina on the whole discussion.

Gorbad Ironclaw
17-08-2008, 11:39
Here is the thing, for the majority of the tasks a wet navy would have on a planet, orbital cover just isn't a concern.
If the pirates you are hunting have enough space power to give them orbital coverage you are already in trouble. Despite how it might seem, not every single skirmish is backed up by battle cruisers in orbit blowing huge chunks out of planets.
Think about what present day naval forces do, because that is exactly the kind of tasks they would have in 40k as well.

You have a great example in Necropolis of internal warfare. While the war presented in it is chaos inspired, the previous one leading up to it isn't, and would have been a perfect theatre for a wet navy, assuming there had been any water around.

Saying space crafts makes a wet navy obsolete is IMO overlooking the fact that very few planets will see full scale planetary invasions, or any sort of space born combat.

Lockjaw
17-08-2008, 13:37
I don't see any reason why a planet with enough water wouldn't have a wet navy, didn't some of the orks in the 3rd armeggedon war attack in subs?
so you get a planet that's at least as wet as earth, some orks end up there, I'm pretty sure they'd be building a fleet, and if the imperials on that world didn't have anything to counter that, they'd be screwed


edit: missed the post where that was already pointed out, sorry

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 13:54
The Brokenback in the Soul Drinkers novels provides close air support to the troops on the ground, hitting as close as a few dozen metres away from Soul Drinkers, and doing so accurately.

Killgore
17-08-2008, 15:01
The Brokenback in the Soul Drinkers novels provides close air support to the troops on the ground, hitting as close as a few dozen metres away from Soul Drinkers, and doing so accurately.

not every ship has Spacemarine grade space- ground weaponry :/

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 15:03
No, but space to ground missiles will be just as accurate.

bosstroll
17-08-2008, 17:21
In my opinion, the more technicaloly advanced a planet is, the smaller its wet-navy will be. Orbital defense platforms can perform many of the goals of a wet-navy. So a hive-world will have a small navy, with nothing bigger then destroyers and submarines, while a low tech world, like Aexe Cardinal, will have a navy that could blow ours out of the water.

Ships will be used in pretty much the same way as they are now, with anti pirate etc duties being the most common. During a planetary invasion, the use of the navy will largely be determined by the attackers, since they can choose whether or not they want to commit forces anywhere near bodies of water.

sydbridges
17-08-2008, 17:37
not every ship has Spacemarine grade space- ground weaponry :/

I'm not sure the Brokenback has space marine grade space to ground weaponry... it is a hideous mess of space hulks, not a battle barge.

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 18:02
The Howling Griffons (I think it was them) were shocked at how accurate the Brokenback was, as it used pre-imperial technology to aim it's lasers.

Ranger S2H
17-08-2008, 18:15
if the wet planet is important enough to invade, I suppose it will have a space fleet of its own, which means the attacker will have a hard time landing troops.
because of this they'll probably land troops in one continent, and from there the troops will try to take over the rest.
in this situation a wet navy can be used to keep the enemy on that continent, or harass them as they try to cross.

I'm actually considiring building a wet battleship (WWII style)
something with 9 earth shakers, 4 battle cannons, and numerous flak autocannon turrets and heavy bolter turrets. and some landing boats

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 18:18
How does a navy stop people crossing from one continent to another? Troops are not moved by sea these days, let alone in the far future.

starlight
17-08-2008, 18:25
*These* days has no translation to how they do things in 40K.:p

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 18:27
Give me one good reason why troops would be transport by sea when they have much faster and safer air assets?

Brother Siccarius
17-08-2008, 18:37
In my opinion, the more technicaloly advanced a planet is, the smaller its wet-navy will be. Orbital defense platforms can perform many of the goals of a wet-navy. So a hive-world will have a small navy, with nothing bigger then destroyers and submarines, while a low tech world, like Aexe Cardinal, will have a navy that could blow ours out of the water.

Ships will be used in pretty much the same way as they are now, with anti pirate etc duties being the most common. During a planetary invasion, the use of the navy will largely be determined by the attackers, since they can choose whether or not they want to commit forces anywhere near bodies of water.

The size of the navy would be determined by the size of the bodies of water and the locations of heavy population centers, not so much tech level. There were navies present on Armageddon, a world which is quite technologically advanced, because there were several hive worlds right on the coast line of a large sea.

The idea presented in the post was of a world that is mainly water, and possibly even entirely oceanic, just a world with a couple of bodies of water. However, the idea that the navy would be under the command of the Planetary Defense Force of the planet seems to have slipped from some people's grasps...


Here is the thing, for the majority of the tasks a wet navy would have on a planet, orbital cover just isn't a concern.
If the pirates you are hunting have enough space power to give them orbital coverage you are already in trouble. Despite how it might seem, not every single skirmish is backed up by battle cruisers in orbit blowing huge chunks out of planets.
Think about what present day naval forces do, because that is exactly the kind of tasks they would have in 40k as well.


The PDF of a oceanic or mainly ocean planet would be in control of the navy, which means that their primary purpose would be for planetary defense, and fighting smugglers and pirates wouldn't even be a secondary purpose, more like a tertiary. The only reason I mentioned it was because I was going through the different levels of how a navy could be used, and hunting pirates was only if the commander was only barely competent. Generally that course would be left to the adeptus arbites or their local equivalent, with backup from the navy only when necessary.

A PDF force's main goal is Planetary Defense from invasions, hence the navy under their command would be equipped to prevent just that. Think along the lines of mobile sea-space missile platforms, seaborne anti-orbital weapons, anti-aircraft cannons/missiles/ect.


Give me one good reason why troops would be transport by sea when they have much faster and safer air assets?

Think hive city that's built on top of an island. No room to land an aircraft or space transport. Alternatively, what if they are determined to have enough anti-orbital or anti-aircraft weaponry to prevent or deter a landing? What if it's on an Oceanic world where either the cities are covering the entire landmass (which is small to begin with), they're on top of derricks or barges, or they're under water?

Wolf Scout Ewan
17-08-2008, 19:00
What is your planetwide strategy?
Rhidins being more than 80% water. Surface shipping is considerably cheaper than using sub orbital craft. Flight capable craft is used for transporting personnel and lightweight cargo, however bulk cargo is transported using surface shipping
Rhidins does not have the materials or knowledge to support anything other than the shuttles required to trasnport personnel to orbitting craft or array'.
What role does the Navy play in protecting your local intereest?Like any world there are heretics/pirates/rebels and surface shipping is armed to take on those that might attack them. Rhidins is home to small numbers of Orks. These Orks inhabit a number of small rocky islands to the west and east of the main land masses. Surface shipping patrols and bombards these islands occasionally. On the rare occasion that Ork numbers increase to the point where they build vessels and start attacking they are put down using surface naval assets.
What role does it play in a potential invasion? Planetary PDF keep numerous submersibles mounting anti orbital weaponry (ground to orbit torpedos). Surface shipping mount defense lasers and torpedos. Benefits of these units are they are mobile.
What are some of its battle doctrines going to be?
Huh?
What types of ships would you build?
A large number of patrol vessels armed with surface to surface missiles, medium bore battlecannon and antipersonnel weapons.
50+ Medium vessels with large bore battlecannons in turrets. Single shot surface to orbit torpedos, anti aircraft and anti submersible weapons.
10+ Large vessels with twin defense lasers, large bore battlecannon in turrets, anti aircraft, anti submersible weapons. Single flight of vulture aircraft.
10+ Large vessels "aircraft carriers".

Ddraiglais
17-08-2008, 19:50
Here are a few of my thoughts about wet navies. First of all, there are plenty of uses for them. They could be used in anti-smuggling operations. River patrol would be a great way to secure large areas of land. They could be used to keep the local populace in fear. Secondly, one thing you guys seem to be overlooking is cost. I'd imagine that it would be much cheaper to build water borne navies than to build starships. Lastly, what kind of threats are you trying to deal with? A planetary governor's biggest threat is most likely from rebellion. Navies would probably make sense on most worlds as part of a PDF.

Khaeron Baoth
17-08-2008, 20:27
I think that 40k style navies would be quite "illogical". Large fleets with heavy ships. There would also be large "anti drop pod"-ships. Useless if you think logically, but so Imperial and Grand in 40k style.

Fire In The Hole
17-08-2008, 21:01
If a planet had a large percentage of it's surface covered in water (similar to or more than our own) a global navy is logical. The ships would be bigger than those of nowadays but would be very similar is function and design. It would be the most practical means of on planet defence. Capable of operating almost independantly, running a whole war on its own, unlike aircraft which are dependant on the air bases. They could transport huge amounts of infantry and vechiles to enemy beachheads quickly and support with its own mobile airforce and impressive amount of heavy long range fire power.
I would like to see a whole PDF fleet sculpted, battle ships with battery strength earthshakers and quake cannons! Aircraft carriers with maurader bombers and lightning fighters. Troops transports with vast holds, few weapons-only anti air and perhaps some missile capability.

Goruax
17-08-2008, 21:52
....and right through the transparent water, detonating somewhere along the continental shelf and possibly creating a seismic event that most likely won't do much to the naval vessel some ways above it at the water level. If a laser doesn't impact the ship itself, it's not an airbursting laser, it'll keep on going to the point that a miss isn't going to do much more than scorch a few retinas, rock the boat a little, and maybe give the guys on the deck a suntan for their trouble after a few misses. Also, remember, it's the power output of a star in a small area, this isn't a plasma reactor explosion happening in the atmosphere, it's an extremely large laser being pointed at a location. Though GW's lasers are always odd, doing things such as exploding on impact and all that.

And if it is a laser (ie, light) then unless it's blue, it'll not reach the continental shelf, unless it's exceedingly shallow.
Presuming Terra-'grade' (lolsgrade that is) water, then the 'light' will be absorbed by the water as it goes.
That's why water appears 'blue'.[/useless SCUBA diving knowledge]

Brother Siccarius
17-08-2008, 21:57
And if it is a laser (ie, light) then unless it's blue, it'll not reach the continental shelf, unless it's exceedingly shallow.
Presuming Terra-'grade' (lolsgrade that is) water, then the 'light' will be absorbed by the water as it goes.
That's why water appears 'blue'.[/useless SCUBA diving knowledge]

hm, very interesting, so the lance's power might just be absorbed by the water?

Goruax
17-08-2008, 22:05
hm, very interesting, so the lance's power might just be absorbed by the water?

Based on the assumption that a laser is simply light.
Although going from that, light = heat = power.
Regardless of the third step, the heat from a Lance battery may well be enough to evaporate the water, although it could be eventually absorbed as it is cooled.

IIRC, water requires 20x as much heat energy to be warmed by 1 degree celsius than it does for the same space of air (ie, 1 cubic litre of air needs 1 heat energiez, and 1 cubic litre of water requires 20 heat energiez)

So, without actual statistics for power/heat and so on, we can't see how far it'd get, but it is possible it would be absorbed.

Joe Kutz
17-08-2008, 22:17
hm, very interesting, so the lance's power might just be absorbed by the water?

Sort of - there are actually a lot of reasons that most energy weapons would be ineffective against submerged targets. Light rays also get refracted and bent by water, and changing temperatures/densities of the water cause this to occur as well. If a base or ship is submerged it would be hard to hit with a laser. If there was a high concentration of silt in the water...that would also prove problematic, causing the laser to disperse. Other energy weapons will have similar problems.

Kinetic weapons (to include big guns, missiles and the like) would also suffer from a variety of problems attacking. Everything from issues relating to targeting and speed issues (hitting water at high speeds is very bad).

Anywho - there is significant fluff which coincides with wet navies in 40K (most the fluff deals with PDF navies)...and there is good justification for why it would exist. Remember, it wouldn't just be worlds which are mostly water - some of the worlds are described as being entirely covered with water. No place to park your Baneblades...so you will want to have something that allows you to apply force when and where it is needed. Even worlds which have significant land masses would want to have a navy of some form. Without it, the water difficult to protect. Orks or other creatures (tyranid from the black lagoon) would be able to make a water landing safely and move in from there. Regular patrols and vessels to deal with the problem would help to alleviate the issue.

Along the same lines, the IG armies would likely have a few specialized aquatic regiments. If a water world were to rebel - they would need to bring it back into the fold. I don't think the Death Korps or Cadians would be suited for making aquatic landings and assaults. Some form of specialized troops would be required to deal with them. Especially since one of the hives mentions briefly in a BL book was completely submerged.

Gazak Blacktoof
17-08-2008, 23:21
Give me one good reason why troops would be transport by sea when they have much faster and safer air assets?

Because surface vessels can carry much greater weight and therefore man power than aerial craft. They are also useful for crossing short distances like large rivers or skipping between islands.

Modern wars tend to be fought country to country using the staging grounds of a neighbour adjacent to the war zone because it is logistically difficult to land troops by air and keep them supplied. It is certainly possible in 40K to land massed invasions via air however this might not be the case for local forces. Additionally it might be preferable to assault across the waves if your enemy has significant air/ orbital defences leaving a strike by land or water a preferable option.

Attacking across the water also gives you another card up your sleeve.

Lastly the rule of cool applies- We've all seen beach landings in films and they're exactly the sort of brutal affairs that belong in the 40K setting.

Goruax
17-08-2008, 23:25
Also, your heavy water-based transports could potentially sport self-defence systems, depending on how they're built.

If, for example, they're 3 times the size of the Titanic with huge transport decks, they could more than easily convert some of the decks to be ammo/extra fuel, etc and mount weaponry for self-defence vs air/water

As well as the support their escorts give.
As has been said, there are plenty of reasons air-insertion/deployment may not be preferable/possibly, and that water-based transportation has the fore.

sydbridges
18-08-2008, 02:55
Give me one good reason why troops would be transport by sea when they have much faster and safer air assets?

I can give you the next best thing: proof that they do use boats to move in 40k. You mentioned the SD novel with the Howling Griffins. In it, the Orks are moving to the harbor with the goal of boating towards more murder. Other posters have mentioned Armageddon. In the third Cain novel, Chaos cultists sneak onto a freight ship to take over some sort of floating drilling platform.

So it doesn't have to be shown that there's a good reason for it to be done, because it can be shown that it is done, regardless of whether it makes sense to do so.

Firaxin
18-08-2008, 04:12
I believe there are wet imperial battleships described briefly in the third Last Chancers novel on Armageddon. Not sure on the specifics since I haven't read that omnibus in so long, but dang it was good. :D

Oh, and they were weaponless but there were freighters at Vervun Hive in the tanith series.

Sai-Lauren
18-08-2008, 09:29
Well, a water planet's maritime PDF forces (and Maritime Guard Regiments) will potentially have any type of vessel you can imagine - from small river patrol boats through transports and freighters, landing craft, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, minelayers/sweepers, subs (missile boats, hunter killers, transports and covert insertion), escort carriers, cruisers, battleships, monitors (for bombardment), aircraft carriers and dreadnoughts, all the way up to oceanborne command centres/dockyards/defence stations (think of the city in Stargate-Atlantis, just smaller (maybe 1 km across) and with an imperial architect ;)).

The bigger stuff is more likely to be found in the Guard, but an important world may have some.

There's probably also things like the US Aegis-class cruisers, but with orbital interception capability.

Also, there would likely be submerged defence platforms, although they would be equipped with missiles and torpedoes, rather than energy weapons.

What they would do in peacetime - coastguard roles (protect shipping, prevent smuggling - including from orbit), anti-insurgency roles and so on.

I think there's an old thread around where we came up with some specs for vessels - I remember doing one for a patrol boat.



Give me one good reason why troops would be transport by sea when they have much faster and safer air assets?

Air transport's not available or is unable to land at their destination (think the Pacific Campaign in WW2), air superiority isn't assured, troops being moved up slowly to ease congestion at the forward deployment zones and minimise casualties from artillery etc, the fact that to move a guard regiment by air means that you would need a lot of transport aircraft, but maybe only a single troop ship - especially if you're moving armoured vehicles, artillery and so on.

Simon Sez
18-08-2008, 11:39
You also have to remember when dreaming up Wet navies that the comparison to modern warfare isn't a direct one; space ships are delivering 18th century broadsides coupled with the ramming techniques of the Athenians. On land the gruelling torment of trench warfare has reinstated itself so firmly that an entire planet has adopted it as their main strategy. We're wearing armour and swinging swords about again!

A more open mind than that of 21st century hunter Subs and Aircraft Carriers should be kept IMO.

Sai-Lauren
19-08-2008, 09:15
You also have to remember when dreaming up Wet navies that the comparison to modern warfare isn't a direct one; space ships are delivering 18th century broadsides coupled with the ramming techniques of the Athenians. On land the gruelling torment of trench warfare has reinstated itself so firmly that an entire planet has adopted it as their main strategy. We're wearing armour and swinging swords about again!

A more open mind than that of 21st century hunter Subs and Aircraft Carriers should be kept IMO.

True, I can certainly see something the size of the Nimitz, with multiple broadside gun decks. However, I can also see something like a modern frigate, with a rack of HK missiles, and hydrofoil torpedo boats, and missile subs for strategic bombardment, and so on and so forth.

Work out what missions the maritime guard/pdf will have to perform, then work out what they'll need to be able to perform those missions (including defensive measures) - and you've probably already gone two steps beyond what the GW designers have ever done. :p

Arkturas
19-08-2008, 11:46
If the space fleet was the deciding factor in a war then there wouldn't be much use for tanks and men on the ground. So where normally on land the war is conducted with masses of infantry, tanks and titans, on water you need a navy. The problem with air forces and by extension space fleets is that of taking and holding battlefield objectives. It's why infantry and tanks are sent in, so if the objective is water based then some waterborne vehicle is needed. Anti-aircraft fire seems to be quite capable of taking out the largest aircraft and that includes space faring versions (Thunderhawk, Manta? etc). Due to air/spacecraft limitations a ship would be much better armoured and armed. All the better for taking and holding water objectives.

Jellicoe
19-08-2008, 12:18
I think that the likely ships would be either

large and submersible with torps/equivalent for shipping and a large battery of heavy weaponry for shore bombardment/orbital - atmospheric interdiction

Think of a cross between this

http://www.stpierreetmiquelon.com/Cartes%20NB%20recentes/Divers/Surcouf1000.jpg

or this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/archaeology/excavations_techniques/images/marine_wreck_submarine.jpg

and this

http://images.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.nationalgeographic.com/k19/images/sov5_large.jpg&usg=AFQjCNGvzGJouuSFr_1CbfqIaELaFsh9lg

but bigger

I would have thought that these would be supplemented by fast hydrofoil type interceptors and transports which may or may not also be submersible

There may also be seabed undersea forts/silos with interceptor missiles for near orbit defence. These bases also act as hubs/ports for submersible fleet

Oh and Yamato and her sister Musashi were never hit by subs only a horrendous amount of air launched ordinance. Hence the need to go subsurface to get better protection (albeit still not invulnerable but harder to find)

Master Stark
19-08-2008, 12:28
Depends on the lay-out of the planet. A wet navy would have it's uses, but if the planet only had one continent with assets worth defending, then those uses are limited.

If the planetary export isn't terribly valuable, then it might not pay to invest in a wet navy at all.

Sai-Lauren
19-08-2008, 13:46
Depends on the lay-out of the planet. A wet navy would have it's uses, but if the planet only had one continent with assets worth defending, then those uses are limited.

If the planetary export isn't terribly valuable, then it might not pay to invest in a wet navy at all.

So when the first wave of half a million amphibious tyrannids, or a dark eldar raiding force on Raiders and Jetbikes, suddenly make land fall having come from over the horizon, the coastal defences will be enough to stop them? ;)

Quite the reverse of what you suggest in fact, a world with a super continent like that would need a massive maritime force to guard the tracts of water over the horizon, where the land based defence installations can't reach - especially if there's islands, atolls etc where an invading force can get a foothold, and which are difficult to reinforce. If it's only a few rivers and lakes, then they could likely get away with only a few river boats.

Probably the only worlds without a maritime force will, unsurprisingly, be those worlds where there are no bodies of liquid (not necessarily water - a world similar to Titan would be processed for the hydrocarbon lakes and seas) that need to be controlled and protected.

Besides which, such a world would almost certainly be in the process of being drained dry for potable water, or farmed for aquatic foodstocks etc, along with deep sea mining operations, hidden research facilities and so on, and such resources would need protection.

chaos0xomega
19-08-2008, 19:15
Considering that we have next to no mention of Imperial Wet Navies at all in the fluff, I'd say they are pretty rare. After all, the Imps on Armageddon WERE surprised to see the Ork submersibles, and I believe in one of the novels set on Armageddon there was a comment made in passing about how such vehicles are rare enough within the Imperium

Brother Siccarius
19-08-2008, 23:16
Considering that we have next to no mention of Imperial Wet Navies at all in the fluff, I'd say they are pretty rare. After all, the Imps on Armageddon WERE surprised to see the Ork submersibles, and I believe in one of the novels set on Armageddon there was a comment made in passing about how such vehicles are rare enough within the Imperium

Ciaphas Cain: The Traitor's Hand
Space Wolf
Codex: Armageddon
and Chapter Approved: Tyranid Seeding Swarms I believe is the one with a brief blurb about a naval ship on a planet in the middle of a tyranid attack, and even describes it as somewhat effective.

chaos0xomega
20-08-2008, 00:50
You do realize there is a difference between a naval vessel and a freighter? The seeding swarm talks specifically about an ocean-going superfreighter. This is an unarmed ship that carries cargo, most of us, I think, have known of the existence of this for quite some time. What we're talking about are ARMED naval vessels.

I don't have access to the other 3 sources you listed, but I'm fairly certain that they'll be limited to the same type of cargo vessel.

legio mortis
20-08-2008, 01:06
You do realize there is a difference between a naval vessel and a freighter? The seeding swarm talks specifically about an ocean-going superfreighter. This is an unarmed ship that carries cargo, most of us, I think, have known of the existence of this for quite some time. What we're talking about are ARMED naval vessels.

I don't have access to the other 3 sources you listed, but I'm fairly certain that they'll be limited to the same type of cargo vessel.
It's fairly ridiculous to think that a planetary government charged with defending the entire planet would fail to create some sort of water based armed force if there was any reasonable amount of water on it. They would run the gamut of small forces of riverboats to large aircraft carriers to submersibles to floating anti-orbital weapons platforms. If you can think of it, it can exist.

Firaxin
20-08-2008, 01:12
Well, are we going to examine possible ship configurations (not rules, just weapon etc layouts) or just ruminate on whether or not its possible?

For example, the common battleship classes would look like the Bismark, with earthshaker emplacements and void shields. Or do we think their basic weapons would be more powerful than earthshakers?

On the other hand, older* designs on the other hand would look like modern destroyers with perhaps a single turbo-laser destructor and a payload of vortex missiles. Being older, it would be much rarer than the battleships, of course.

I'm interested on people's ideas concerning the super-ships/floating cities, since we don't really have those in our world. I'm picturing everything from bubble-encased cities hovering across the waters on anti-grav to

*Since everything is backwards in 40k and older tech is better...

legio mortis
20-08-2008, 03:00
Well, are we going to examine possible ship configurations (not rules, just weapon etc layouts) or just ruminate on whether or not its possible?

For example, the common battleship classes would look like the Bismark, with earthshaker emplacements and void shields. Or do we think their basic weapons would be more powerful than earthshakers?

On the other hand, older* designs on the other hand would look like modern destroyers with perhaps a single turbo-laser destructor and a payload of vortex missiles. Being older, it would be much rarer than the battleships, of course.

I'm interested on people's ideas concerning the super-ships/floating cities, since we don't really have those in our world. I'm picturing everything from bubble-encased cities hovering across the waters on anti-grav to

*Since everything is backwards in 40k and older tech is better...
There isn't going to be any sort of common naval vehicle. Each planet/nation's PDF is going to have created their own water craft.

Icarus
20-08-2008, 03:10
I seem to remember reading a nice piece of fan-fluff on the Space Sharks Space Marine Chapter that described them as being recruited from a low-tech island-faring people and as such excelled at amphibious combat. They did daring things like launching attacks on undersea military bases and the like. Actually sounded quite cool, and a bit different for a 40k setting.

malika
20-08-2008, 03:31
Maybe this little piece (http://anargo-sector.net/community/index.php/topic,325.0.html) of artwork by CELS will motivate you into believing in something like an Aquanautica Imperialis!!! :evilgrin:

Brother Siccarius
20-08-2008, 06:04
You do realize there is a difference between a naval vessel and a freighter? The seeding swarm talks specifically about an ocean-going superfreighter. This is an unarmed ship that carries cargo, most of us, I think, have known of the existence of this for quite some time. What we're talking about are ARMED naval vessels.

I don't have access to the other 3 sources you listed, but I'm fairly certain that they'll be limited to the same type of cargo vessel.

Actually, Space Wolf has several, armed, naval vessels guarding the "island of the Iron Masters". Specifically mentioning them as armed.

The Cain novel mentioned both freighters and that the PDF/"Arbites" have patrols at sea, specifically in the case that they were unable at the time to deal with certain matters.

Codex Armageddon has the orks attacking coastal complexes and hives via submersible, giving the standpoint of navies from an attacker's side.
[/LIST]

chaos0xomega
20-08-2008, 06:32
Ignore the one regarding the Orks. That was xenos-tech(and if it's the same quote I'm thinking of, it mentions that the Imperial Commanders were taken entirely by surprise, as subaquatic craft were rare, even within the Imperium.

Legio Mortis - There are several problems with your theory. Firstly, large bodies of water are much better surveyed from air/space. As most imperial worlds are bound to have satellites and orbital stations, I am sure that any smuggling/illicit activities would be monitored from there, and then Imperial Navy aircraft would be called in to handle it.

Secondly, if there are armed surface vessels, they are bound to be riverine/littoral in nature. Why would you bother patrolling a large body of water, out in the middle of nowhere, when your primary concern is the coastline and the stability/safety of that region? Any smuggling activity would be intercepted there. The protection of freighters with armed vessels is hardly necessary. First off, because I highly doubt that pirates would have access to a vessel capable of posing a threat to an Imperial Superfreighter, and secondly, the primary concern is the cargo on said ship. Pirates don't sink ships for ***** and giggles, they sink ships for their cargo, and only AFTER the cargo has been removed. I am positive that instead of an armed ship, they would rather post PDF-marines (not space marine marines, but USMC style marines) on these ships to ensure that any attempt at a boarding action can be put down.

Also, in the event of an invasion, fighting over water is not a concern. In todays modern world, it is, because the ocean continues to be an efficient means of transporting large quantities of war materiel over large distances, although even that is slowly being replaced by airpower. In 40k, supply routes would be from space/offworld, delivered by air to the front lines or rear-ground staging areas. Why would you fight over control of the ocean, when your primary concern is the land and what is on it?

There is also the fact that generally, the invaders aren't going to be bringing along sea-going vessels when they make planetfall. Tau, Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Necrons all make use of skimmer-tech, Orks, barring Ghazkull, usually make planetfall by crashing whatever spacecraft they happen to be in at the time into the ground (or using Roks to land), if these were to land in water... well, then you don't have an invasion, so what's the point?

Tyranids are the only currently playable race (and therefore actual threat IMO), that would warrant the use of naval power, as they have been shown to have sub-aquatic beasts, BUT, given that they are a relatively new threat to the galaxy, and that a good portion of the Imperium, in fact I'd say most of it, is entirely unaware of what exactly a Tyranid IS... I don't see too many PDF's preparing for just such an event.

Basically, what I'm trying to say, is that wet navies are the exception rather than the rule.

legio mortis
20-08-2008, 06:59
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is that wet navies are the exception rather than the rule.
But there really is no way to prove it. Wet navies would have to form somehow if said planet as any reasonably large bodies of water. Drilling rigs, fishing boats, even surface shipping needs to be protected somehow. Aircraft have only so big of an operational range, and surface shipping is relatively cheaper than aircraft. Keep in mind that I'm not talking about the Imperium as a whole, but individual planets and their PDFs. It also pays to remember that not every Imperial planet is entirely united under one ruler. Some have various factions vying for control, whether they be different countries or merchant cartels.

Master Stark
20-08-2008, 07:02
So when the first wave of half a million amphibious tyrannids, or a dark eldar raiding force on Raiders and Jetbikes, suddenly make land fall having come from over the horizon, the coastal defences will be enough to stop them? ;)

Erm, yes?

I'd prefer to invest my resources into coastal and air defences, rather than a wet navy.

And I'd rather have my enemies land on the water, where the coastline presents a natural easily defended barrier, rather than deep striking straight onto my continent/s.

Sai-Lauren
20-08-2008, 12:35
I'd prefer to invest my resources into coastal and air defences, rather than a wet navy.

Hmm, that philosophy was successful on the Normandy coast, wasn't it? ;)



And I'd rather have my enemies land on the water, where the coastline presents a natural easily defended barrier, rather than deep striking straight onto my continent/s.

But then you're going to have to keep defending from attacks for a long, long time, which is a constant drain on your resources. And you're setting yourself up for enemy infiltrators, fifth columnists and so on, not to mention that any transport of raw materials is under threat, even if you fly it (which is actually one of the two reasons why navies were created - commerce protection and power projection).

Defending also means that you're giving the initiative over to the enemy, you can't go out and disrupt their plans so easily, but they can come and disrupt yours. And orbital satellites are useless if you've got nothing that can reach the landing zone quickly enough to prevent them getting a foothold (or even reach it at all).

And I think certain people might start asking why you let an enemy force gain landfall on The Emperors soil (even if they've only got a floating base somewhere in the middle of the ocean, rather than an island), and what you're going to do about getting them back off it again.

But I think everyone is forgetting the main reason why there would be maritime forces - we have them now. The year 40998 (or whatever it's supposed to be) didn't just pop into existance, before it there were the years 40997, 40996, 31421, 8184, 2525, 2008...

There will be maritime forces on Earth for as long as there is water, they would certainly have fought in the wars that led to the Emperor becoming Emperor, and when his generals started going out to reconquer the galaxy (long before the recovery of the primarchs), they would not only have taken maritime forces with them, they would have encountered such forces on the worlds they came across - the idea of the need for them being taken by the colonists leaving earth, and as they were brought under compliance, those forces would have been recruited into the Imperial Army and deployed on other worlds.

It seems strange that some people can easily accept "impossibilities" like daemons, titans and so on - simply because they're in the books and we've got figures for them - but not mundane things like maritime forces, which just havn't so far been covered anywhere. :eyebrows:

Master Stark
20-08-2008, 13:03
Hmm, that philosophy was successful on the Normandy coast, wasn't it? ;)

I knew someone would use that as an example!

Way I figure it, if the enemy has the choice of making planetfall pretty mucu anywhere they want, why wouldn't they just choose to land on land and render all those resources poured into shipyards and ships and crews and munitions useless? I'd prefer them to land at sea. At least it gives my land and air based defences time to mobilise while coastal defences slow them down.

Sure, you'd have problems eventually removing those forces. But unless they can eat water, they are going to have just as many problems trying to establish a foothold on an ocean, and if I haven't managed to drive off whatever form of space craft brought them to my planet in the first place I'm going to have to pull back into my heavily defended cities in a very short time anyway, before the inevitable orbital bombardments start levelling anything without a heavy duty voidshield.

Wet navies would no doubt still exist, but many of the reasons we have them today would no longer apply.

malika
20-08-2008, 13:28
We are talking about 40k here, a place where we have aircraft designed as flying bricks, men still fighting with sticks and stones and still being able to conquer worlds with it. They use giant humanoid warmachines where aerial or orbital methods would be more effective. And so on and so on...

So with all this in mind, how "impossible" would aquatic combat be?

Killgore
20-08-2008, 14:18
We are talking about 40k here, a place where we have aircraft designed as flying bricks, men still fighting with sticks and stones and still being able to conquer worlds with it. They use giant humanoid warmachines where aerial or orbital methods would be more effective. And so on and so on...

So with all this in mind, how "impossible" would aquatic combat be?

only to the small minded amongst the warseer community that cant grasp just how large and open the 40k universe really is, where guard regiments armed with the most high tech weaponry possible share space transports with feral world savages armed with rusty axes and bad breath



In fact just for kicks id love someone to design an Imperial water Navy composed of Steam Powered Megabattleships several miles long, with wooden decking and gigantic titan sized weaponry.... thats the 40k i know and love ;)

Easy E
20-08-2008, 16:08
Well, are we going to examine possible ship configurations (not rules, just weapon etc layouts) or just ruminate on whether or not its possible?

I think macro-cannons would be the cannon of choice on most warships. The Macro-Cannon is larger than an Earthshaker, and hence doesn't get mentioned much in the 40K fluff anymore. It was mentioned in BFG and Epic on occasion. I also imagine large Las Batteries being a popular choice for main armaments, just oversized Las Cannons. I also think Missile Launchers of various sizes would be pretty popular.

However, some ships may even mount Defense Lasers to create a mobile anti-orbital deterent. I'm not sure about the Void Shields, however, I can see the largetst ships having them. I'm almost positive that MOST PDF forces would not have the capabilities to mount a Defense Laser and a Void Shield on the same warship. However, that doesn't mean it can't exist.

I can also see ships being armed with auto-cannons, Heavy Bolters, and the like for point defense systems against aircraft and missiles.

Mr Carrot
20-08-2008, 17:39
Glad people have started mentioning void shields, which are the 40k mcguffin to justify huge ponderous war machines that have no right to exist in the modern world.

If PDF bases can have void shields I see no reason why a 100k tonne + super battleship cant have voidshields of such power that it makes it immune to air assault AND most orbital attacks - completely upsetting the modern analysis of sea power.

So yes there is plenty of scope for sea power, sea being the best way to move incredably heavy objects. Which means a PDF can park an invincible super fortress with 100 mile range weapon systems off the coast of whatever they want to attack.

Also as malika suggests I do wish people would always consider this when they are thinking about 40k:

http://www.demotivateus.com/posters/drive-sword-demotivational-poster.jpg

chaos0xomega
20-08-2008, 19:08
But there really is no way to prove it. Wet navies would have to form somehow if said planet as any reasonably large bodies of water. Drilling rigs, fishing boats, even surface shipping needs to be protected somehow. Aircraft have only so big of an operational range, and surface shipping is relatively cheaper than aircraft. Keep in mind that I'm not talking about the Imperium as a whole, but individual planets and their PDFs. It also pays to remember that not every Imperial planet is entirely united under one ruler. Some have various factions vying for control, whether they be different countries or merchant cartels.

Drilling Rigs, fishing boats, and surface shipping could all be defended from onboard those respective craft via armed PDF-troopers. Like I said before, I imagine that pirates wouldn't exactly have an easy time getting ahold of ships capable of actually posing a threat. A planet that is seriously threatened by such armed activity, would probably adopt an armed merchantmen approach with convoy shipping, rather than putting funds into escorts. Most threats could probably be handled by simply attaching a smaller gun mount or two to a superfreighter. If there is a bigger threat, just call in the aircraft. Their "limited" range isn't an issue, as Imperial aircraft have been shown to have a considerably larger range than modern day aircraft, and if based in orbit, it's a short flight to the surface.


Hmm, that philosophy was successful on the Normandy coast, wasn't it?

Considering that the defenses in Normandy weren't complete, and that the main reason that the forces weren't repelled was that Hitler insisted that it was a diversionary attack and didn't allow for the transfer of rear-echelon units to the front line, like they were intended to be used, yes, they were actually pretty effective.

Also, remember that those maritime forces were launched from another body of land. If you're landing in the ocean, you don't have the ability to land troops...


But then you're going to have to keep defending from attacks for a long, long time, which is a constant drain on your resources. And you're setting yourself up for enemy infiltrators, fifth columnists and so on, not to mention that any transport of raw materials is under threat, even if you fly it (which is actually one of the two reasons why navies were created - commerce protection and power projection).


Most commerce in the Imperium is extra-solar, so that's not an issue. And power projection is also done from orbit.

As for defending from attacks, I don't think that would be an issue anyway, as you would be defending against attacks regardless of where they landed ANYWAY. Not only that, but half of the currently known potential enemies of the Imperium use skimmer tech. The rest, with the rare exception of the Orks under Ghazhkull's lead and the Tyranid sub-aquatic organisms, haven't been shown to possess any such craft anyway, and need I remind you that the Orks required dry-land in order to even launch those submersibles? Although, yes there is the potential of a large dropship bringing a boat in from obit and dropping it into the water, and as cool as that might sound, there is nothing in the fluff whatsoever to support a thought like that, leading me to believe that if a proper wet navy is ever used in an invasion, a port is required to use them first...


But I think everyone is forgetting the main reason why there would be maritime forces - we have them now. The year 40998 (or whatever it's supposed to be) didn't just pop into existance, before it there were the years 40997, 40996, 31421, 8184, 2525, 2008...

We used to have horse mounted cavalry. Don't see to much of that anymore. Yes, we did use them in the opening days of Afghanistan, but you know what, earthbound soldiers also used to use swords, halberds, spears, pikes, chainmail, plate armor, blunderbusses, catapults, trebuchets, cauldrons of hot oil, triremes, biremes, etc. The year 2008 didn't just pop into existance, before it there were the years 2007, 2006, 1901, 1525, 1300, 600, 25, 1000 B.C....


There will be maritime forces on Earth for as long as there is water, they would certainly have fought in the wars that led to the Emperor becoming Emperor, and when his generals started going out to reconquer the galaxy (long before the recovery of the primarchs), they would not only have taken maritime forces with them, they would have encountered such forces on the worlds they came across - the idea of the need for them being taken by the colonists leaving earth, and as they were brought under compliance, those forces would have been recruited into the Imperial Army and deployed on other worlds.

Considering there is absolutely no mention of a maritime force in any of the HH books... as well as the fact that there are no longer oceans on Terra post Horus Heresy...

And the fact that the spaceborne Imperial Navy is called the NAVY, I think it's a pretty clear indicator that the Holy Fleet was intended to be the successor to the traditional maritime forces. Yes there are questions of efficiency etc. but when has the Imperium EVER been shown to be efficient?

Killgore
20-08-2008, 21:43
chaos0xomega you are so close minded its unbelievable

not every imperial planet has oodles of spaceships for every whim or purpose, rather surprisingly to you there are hundreds of thousands of backwater planets that have to use 'primitive' tech for planetary commerce. For example in numerous books such as GG Necropolis trading is mentioned to happen between hive states, and in the rather splendid Dark Heresy rule book there mentions imperial planets with seperate states and countrys that all have to trade with each other for the planetary commerse to work......

Now what is the best method for transport bulk goods across a planet that has lots of water...... A NAVY! oh gosh yes.

Right so wouldnt it make sence for the PDF to have a rather large fleet to look after this navy, not only to protect shipping from local menaces such as captain jack and pals, but also annoying aliens and disputes between different countrys and states on the same planet, as mentioned earlier in this thread, even in our modern age there is a need to keep a navy even when a ship can be destroyed by a single missile thats launched hundreds of miles away



now i can imagine an imperial invasion of a water dominate planet that somewhere in a storage port of Battlefleet-wherever there is a few special transport ships specialy designed to land in water and pick up an Imperial Water Navy to take to a hostile planet to achieve sea dominace

madd0ct0r
20-08-2008, 21:49
My SoB force is going to mounted in a giant icebreaker that patrols both the icecap and the seas, searching for the Chaos taint that allos this planet to have multiple terrain types...

Think this: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/r/russian-cathedral-487905-sw.jpg

on this: http://www.shipmodels.co.uk/l.aspx?k=2048020

with these: http://patentpending.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/capture1221200671305_pm.jpg

I was mostly going to use it as a mobile support base and AA cover.

chaos0xomega
21-08-2008, 00:15
chaos0xomega you are so close minded its unbelievable

not every imperial planet has oodles of spaceships for every whim or purpose, rather surprisingly to you there are hundreds of thousands of backwater planets that have to use 'primitive' tech for planetary commerce. For example in numerous books such as GG Necropolis trading is mentioned to happen between hive states, and in the rather splendid Dark Heresy rule book there mentions imperial planets with seperate states and countrys that all have to trade with each other for the planetary commerse to work......

Now what is the best method for transport bulk goods across a planet that has lots of water...... A NAVY! oh gosh yes.

Right so wouldnt it make sence for the PDF to have a rather large fleet to look after this navy, not only to protect shipping from local menaces such as captain jack and pals, but also annoying aliens and disputes between different countrys and states on the same planet, as mentioned earlier in this thread, even in our modern age there is a need to keep a navy even when a ship can be destroyed by a single missile thats launched hundreds of miles away



now i can imagine an imperial invasion of a water dominate planet that somewhere in a storage port of Battlefleet-wherever there is a few special transport ships specialy designed to land in water and pick up an Imperial Water Navy to take to a hostile planet to achieve sea dominace

Cease thy personal attacks before though incur the wrath of the warseer inquisition....

Anyway, in a setting like 40k it is impossible to generalize, I am therefore speaking on what I see to be the norm. Yes, there are going to be exceptions as you say. I'm not arguing that there isn't any room at all in 40k for wet navies, just that I think they would be so incredibly rare that it would be impossible to classify them by any sort of rule.

Koryphaus
21-08-2008, 02:27
In Annihilation Squad, there is the barge-cruiser that the Last Chancers travel on. Granted, it is patrolling a canal, but it is evidence that there are heavily armed military vessels on various worlds of the Imperium.

Sai-Lauren
21-08-2008, 08:27
Way I figure it, if the enemy has the choice of making planetfall pretty mucu anywhere they want, why wouldn't they just choose to land on land and render all those resources poured into shipyards and ships and crews and munitions useless? I'd prefer them to land at sea. At least it gives my land and air based defences time to mobilise while coastal defences slow them down.

Why make planetfall at sea? It's more difficult to defend the skies, so you can get your transports down more easily. And a coastline is extremely difficult to defend, especially if you're sneaking in a small group, or even contraband.

And by the time the defence forces have mobilised, they could easily have significant forces deployed to the planet, which could take a foothold on your mainland, and overpower anything that is sent against them.



Sure, you'd have problems eventually removing those forces. But unless they can eat water, they are going to have just as many problems trying to establish a foothold on an ocean, and if I haven't managed to drive off whatever form of space craft brought them to my planet in the first place I'm going to have to pull back into my heavily defended cities in a very short time anyway, before the inevitable orbital bombardments start levelling anything without a heavy duty voidshield.

If orbital space is anything less than 100% controlled (and it nearly always will be - Terra's possibly the only exception, and I bet you could still sneak in and out if you really wanted to), then blockade runners will be able to get in and out, carrying supplies. Also, time to Tyrannids or Orks plays somewhat into their hands, but all races will be able to dig in and start scavenging/piracy etc, especially if they can get an island or offshore platform to operate from.

All the major cities, manufacturing areas and so on will not only have shields, but also defence turrets, and they're probably more powerful than anything a space going vessel has.
Also, if they're after taking those targets, then they may not want to level them from orbit



Wet navies would no doubt still exist, but many of the reasons we have them today would no longer apply.
Why would they no longer apply?

Commerce protection - protecting shipments of goods from mines/farms to refineries/processing plants to manufacturing plants to space ports, from everyone from insurrectionists to black marketeers and pirates.
Power projection - making sure that all the citizens of the planet obey imperial law and observe the imperial faith.
Revenue/customs - making sure no one goes anywhere they shouldn't be, that all seafood farming is correctly reported and so on.
Defence - protecting coastlines from invaders, offshore platforms and islands from pirates, crop seafoods from predators and so on.
Environmental control - making sure chemical spills etc don't harm crop seafoods, which would affect the tithes.
Disaster relief - supplying aid to islands that have been hit by hurricanes/cyclones, evacuating volcanic islands during eruptions and so on.



Most commerce in the Imperium is extra-solar, so that's not an issue. And power projection is also done from orbit.

Sorry, that's complete rubbish. Commerce isn't just buying and selling, it's the movement of goods from one place to another. Moving ores from a mine to a processing plant, oil to a refinery, food to a packing plant and so on is commerce, as is shipping finished products off world, or even to a local trader.

As for power projection from orbit - please look here (http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7127) for an essay I wrote on why or-tillery isn't the be all and end all, and why the common foot soldier (or indeed, the common able-seaman) is still required in 40k (post #12).



We used to have horse mounted cavalry. Don't see to much of that anymore. Yes, we did use them in the opening days of Afghanistan, but you know what, earthbound soldiers also used to use swords, halberds, spears, pikes, chainmail, plate armor, blunderbusses, catapults, trebuchets, cauldrons of hot oil, triremes, biremes, etc. The year 2008 didn't just pop into existance, before it there were the years 2007, 2006, 1901, 1525, 1300, 600, 25, 1000 B.C....

But we still have infantry men - the longbow gave way to the crossbow, then to the flintlock, the musket, the rifle, the submachine gun.
Banded plate armour (roman legionaries) became chainmail, then plate, then went out of favour, and came back with Kevlar and ceramic armour.
Trebuchets, balista and catapults turned into cannon, then artillery pieces, and finally the V-1 and it's descendant, the Tomahawk.
Cavalry - they may use APCs and helicopters rather than horses, but there are still Cavalry regiments, filling the same kinds of roles.

The principles don't change, only the tools used do.



Considering there is absolutely no mention of a maritime force in any of the HH books... as well as the fact that there are no longer oceans on Terra post Horus Heresy...

There's no mention of anyone cutting their hair either, so are they all bald, or does eveyone just look like Neil from the Young Ones? ;)

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and all that...

Master Stark
21-08-2008, 12:53
Why make planetfall at sea? It's more difficult to defend the skies, so you can get your transports down more easily. And a coastline is extremely difficult to defend, especially if you're sneaking in a small group, or even contraband.

And by the time the defence forces have mobilised, they could easily have significant forces deployed to the planet, which could take a foothold on your mainland, and overpower anything that is sent against them.

If it takes that long to mobilise my ground and air based forces, then it's going to take just as long to mobilise my wet navy. And if my enemies land at sea, at least I have a chance of intercepting them at the coast, which they will have to pass over in order to reach any meaningful targets.


Why would they no longer apply?

When you have weapons and air/space craft of the type available in 40K, you don't need to mount things (like guns or aircraft) on ocean going ships to bring them into range of their targets. I'm imagining here that as planetary governor, I have a system ship or two at my disposal, capable of handling the threats of smugglers or raiders just as easily as an ocean going navy, as well as an orbital defense platform or two

Sai-Lauren
21-08-2008, 13:38
If it takes that long to mobilise my ground and air based forces, then it's going to take just as long to mobilise my wet navy. And if my enemies land at sea, at least I have a chance of intercepting them at the coast, which they will have to pass over in order to reach any meaningful targets.

But it's likely that you've got maritime assets at sea already, maybe the big stuff will be in dock, but you'll at least have some subs, frigates and destroyers around on patrol, possibly even a decent sized battlegroup.

Aircraft, especially fighters, don't have anything like that kind of endurance, aside from the larger early-warning aircraft, they're mostly going to be sat in a hanger somewhere.

And as I said earlier, you sit behind your defences, you've handed the initiative to the enemy. So, when your power plants get shutdown, taking your shields and defence turrets off line, when the munition and fuel dumps get blown up, rendering your guns silent and your vehicles immobile, and your generals get slaughtered in their command bunkers, leaving your troops leaderless and disorganised, by infiltrators and commandos who've snuck in through the holes in your coastal defences (and there will be some, you've not got infinite resources to be able to throw at them, and if you try it, chances are the population will rebel because there's no health care, police, roads etc), then maybe you'll have wished you had built a couple of vessels.



When you have weapons and air/space craft of the type available in 40K, you don't need to mount things (like guns or aircraft) on ocean going ships to bring them into range of their targets. I'm imagining here that as planetary governor, I have a system ship or two at my disposal, capable of handling the threats of smugglers or raiders just as easily as an ocean going navy, as well as an orbital defense platform or two

Yes, you do need to mount them on maritime vessels - the guns on HMS Belfast can hit Scratchwood services from it's berth at Tower Bridge (and indeed A Turret would do that if you shoved a shell into one of the guns ;)), which is about 20 miles, and battleship guns of that era could easily get beyond the horizon, meaning they needed spotter planes to aim for them.

But if the enemy are several hundred miles away (or even thousands of miles), you're into strategic weapons to get that kind of range, and they're very difficult to aim at moving targets. They're also very slow to get there, by the time they've hit, the enemy has probably moved on from the point you were aiming at (or it just impacts on any defensive systems they've got, or has been interecepted or otherwise nullified). So you're expending a lot of ordanance for little or no effect.
Remember the Earthshaker can get about 100 miles range with the extra two charges, but it shortens the life of the breech and barrel - they can only fire about 15 rounds like that before they have to be overhauled.

As for system ships and orbital defences, they're probably already destroyed, captured, or scattered before any enemy gets into orbit - a system defence boat getting into a fleet making a drop would make a hell of a mess, so any competent enemy (and even Orks are competent) will make sure there's nothing around to stop that.

Master Stark
21-08-2008, 14:10
As for system ships and orbital defences, they're probably already destroyed, captured, or scattered before any enemy gets into orbit - a system defence boat getting into a fleet making a drop would make a hell of a mess, so any competent enemy (and even Orks are competent) will make sure there's nothing around to stop that.

Then I'm boned either way. Time to pull back under the shielded strong-points and hope the cavalry gets here in time!

BLZBOB
21-08-2008, 15:49
Has anyone thought that those big imperial navy ships might actually land in the water? That would be a sight to behold roiling clouds of steam as it settles ponderously to the ocean swell then ramps coming down and disgorging hundreds of ACVs all thrumming along to strike their targets or land troops and armour. If you think about the subject a landing, well on land will put you at the mercy of rapid response units and tanks rolling up to pummel your drop ship/cruiser. At sea though if there is not wet navy the threat is blunted, sure they can send out fighters but against a IN ship? & Likely packing enough AA to make them think twice.

The traditional wet navy may not be mentioned but even in an age of jet travel surface ship transport is still the most economical means of bulk transport and should pirates come a raiding (which happens in this day and age) an on board force is only an effective deterrent if the cargo is spoiled by water. Most PDF would likely maintain some naval element even if only for some training.

Has anyone read the prelude to Dune books? Where the wet navy comes in useful even if its only a diversion?

chaos0xomega
22-08-2008, 20:11
But we still have infantry men - the longbow gave way to the crossbow, then to the flintlock, the musket, the rifle, the submachine gun.
Banded plate armour (roman legionaries) became chainmail, then plate, then went out of favour, and came back with Kevlar and ceramic armour.
Trebuchets, balista and catapults turned into cannon, then artillery pieces, and finally the V-1 and it's descendant, the Tomahawk.
Cavalry - they may use APCs and helicopters rather than horses, but there are still Cavalry regiments, filling the same kinds of roles.



And naval vessels evolved into airborne naval vessels(read: large aircraft) and then into spaceborne naval vessels. We still have naval vessels, they're just not in the water anymore. It fulfills the same roll, just in an expanded theater.

See, I can use that same logic and apply it here.

BLZBOB - I have often considered that myself. I think it would work, as long as there were some sort of anti-gravitic drives on the thing to keep it from sinking. Really, I see it hovering a couple of feet off the ocean surface instead...

Hrw-Amen
23-08-2008, 16:19
Having waded my way through all of the previous posts I have to say that my opinion is that most planets be they advanced tech wise or other as long as they have seas will have 'wet' naval vessels. They may not have many or particulaly big ones. It is possibly ironic but my view is that the more advanced a system is the smaller its 'wet' force would be. As has been said an orbital and atmospheric force would be just as capable if not more capable of having the desired effects with bombardments, defence, troop deployments etc. Whereas a less technically advanced world that had limited or no space born vehicles of their own would have to rely heavily on the 'wet' navy.

Just imagine Terra nowadays if we could have space born Supercarriers! How much more of a statement would it make to park a couple of carrier battlegroups in orbit above an offending country, than simply having them off the coast.

But even technological worlds would need a certain level of 'wet' craft to deal with small local threats like pirate raids and the like. I just imagine that they would probably use ships similar to modern coastguard vessels. Afterall if they needed air support they'd get that from the orbital platforms whether it be in the form of orbital lance batteries or fighter aircraft or whatever.

Sai-Lauren
27-08-2008, 08:47
And naval vessels evolved into airborne naval vessels(read: large aircraft) and then into spaceborne naval vessels. We still have naval vessels, they're just not in the water anymore. It fulfills the same roll, just in an expanded theater.

See, I can use that same logic and apply it here.

Except your use of the logic is flawed in this instance.

Aircraft evolved from observation hot-air balloons, they were originally used solely for reconnaissance and artillery fire correction (the RAF was originally the Royal Engineers Flying Corps, which evolved into the Royal Flying Corps and then eventually into the RAF).

Then someone decided to shoot at an enemy pilot with his service revolver, and someone else decided carrying a couple of grenades to drop on the enemy on their way back would a good idea, and we wound up with, amongst other things, the Tornado and the B-52...



Having waded my way through all of the previous posts I have to say that my opinion is that most planets be they advanced tech wise or other as long as they have seas will have 'wet' naval vessels. They may not have many or particulaly big ones. It is possibly ironic but my view is that the more advanced a system is the smaller its 'wet' force would be. As has been said an orbital and atmospheric force would be just as capable if not more capable of having the desired effects with bombardments, defence, troop deployments etc. Whereas a less technically advanced world that had limited or no space born vehicles of their own would have to rely heavily on the 'wet' navy.

Just imagine Terra nowadays if we could have space born Supercarriers! How much more of a statement would it make to park a couple of carrier battlegroups in orbit above an offending country, than simply having them off the coast.

But even technological worlds would need a certain level of 'wet' craft to deal with small local threats like pirate raids and the like. I just imagine that they would probably use ships similar to modern coastguard vessels. Afterall if they needed air support they'd get that from the orbital platforms whether it be in the form of orbital lance batteries or fighter aircraft or whatever.

The problem there is endurance - like the Luftwaffe pilots over southern England in the Battle of Britain, you need to maintain a minimum fuel level to return home, and any pilots that get shot down are effectively lost to you. Wheras planetary aircraft will have to burn fuel to come up and meet you, but not as much as you'll have to expend to initially de-orbit and then return to an orbiting carrier, whilst they can shutdown to minimum power and almost coast home once they're out of the combat zone.

And it also pre-supposes you have complete orbital superiority, when you're actually unlikely to have that until after you've secured at least the planet and more likely the whole system, and have therefore denied support to interface-capable aircraft and system defence boats.

BLZBOB
28-08-2008, 10:02
...

BLZBOB - I have often considered that myself. I think it would work, as long as there were some sort of anti-gravitic drives on the thing to keep it from sinking. Really, I see it hovering a couple of feet off the ocean surface instead...

Nothing so technologically minded is required and hovering would be a huge power expense, simply splash down and from various points on the hull large bladders are released that fill with a low density foam. Instant buoyancy, and incidentally a good torpedo defence ;)

As for take off apply some main thrust and get some forward movement first, I mean if they are going to have ships bows on them anyway...

To my mind having them land in water makes more sense than on land aside from anything else the hull stress is reduced as it is equally supported and you shouldn't have to worry about infantry attacks.

Dominus_Serui
28-08-2008, 10:52
I'm somewhat confused chaos0xomega, as to why you seem to think that the creation of a Space Navy denies the existance of a Wet Navy...after all...the Gundam Franchise, the Star Wars Franchise and several other Sci-Fi's operate along the same lines.

Also, you invoked the existance of the Ork Submersibles on Armageddon as 'Xenos and therefore not counting'. The Orks are known to posess rediculously large battleships as well (please refer to Deff Squadron) and not to belittle Ork fans, the Orks are not the most intelligent of races out there - it wouldn't take much for an Imperial force to decide to construct aquatic combat craft, should needs be necissary.

The glory of the Imperium as defined in all sources is that its worlds are SO varied that somewere out there there is bound to be a world with naval forces - after all we have worlds that have entirely airborne PDF's because of the nature of their planets, I'm sure one could find good reason for worlds that have entirely water-based PDF's or lesser degrees of such.

Clockwork-Knight
28-08-2008, 13:07
the Orks are not the most intelligent of races out thereI wonder how you deem imperial humans then - Braindead? Mentaly retarded? Brain deficient? Utterly stupid?
After all, Orks can build powerful tractor beams that no imperial humans have, nor do Eldar, and they also have more reliable teleporters, even even warp-weapons to teleport small attack troops into the innards of an enemy. :p
Just because Orks can do it doesn't mean that the Imperial Humans are capable of the same feat, especially in the ridicoulus Wh40k-universe. :D

Sai-Lauren
28-08-2008, 14:59
I wonder how you deem imperial humans then - Braindead? Mentaly retarded? Brain deficient? Utterly stupid?
After all, Orks can build powerful tractor beams that no imperial humans have, nor do Eldar, and they also have more reliable teleporters, even even warp-weapons to teleport small attack troops into the innards of an enemy.

Only because the Ork physiology allows them to get away with doing things that would kill a human or eldar stone dead, instantly. They've also never heard of health and safety regulations. ;)

And if a warlords' rival happens to die in a transporter "malfunction", then that's one less rival to worry about.



Just because Orks can do it doesn't mean that the Imperial Humans are capable of the same feat, especially in the ridicoulus Wh40k-universe.

I'd actually say that because Orks can do it, it means that Imperials and the other races do it as well - they're tremendous mimics remember - gargants came from some mekboy seeing an Imperial titan for example, and it wouldn't surprise me to see ork versions of eldar equipment ('Eavy boyz dressed up like Dark Reapers?), mega-armour styled after Tau Broadside/Crisis suits, maybe even an assault dreadnought or something based around some mek seeing a Carnifex, basically anything they've seen that's been successful in battle.

And for those thinking about how they'd deliver vessels from orbit - they manage to get things like Baneblades, Titans and Leviathans down. By comparison, a frigate, or even a Nimitz sized carrier isn't difficult, although they would probably need some specialised transports, or at the very least specialised lifting and support equipment on board.

Jellicoe
28-08-2008, 19:34
The one primary example that comes to mind of water borne PDF/Imperial forces is the use of aircraft carriers in Double Eagle. I think I am right in recalling that the final air offensive won via use of floating airfields and island bases to fight off the encroaching chaos airfleets

I still prefer the idea of subsurface missile and monitor platforms operating a surface and near space interdiction role

Gazak Blacktoof
28-08-2008, 19:46
You might be right. Are the floating airfields actually in the water? I've got the book kicking about but I can't remember if they were carriers in the traditional sense or an airborne version like in sky captain.

Easy E
29-08-2008, 05:12
No the moving airfields were more incredible. They were essentially giant tanks/leviathans with airfields on the back. The Imperials were launching from island bases later in the book.

However, the do mention evacuating on huge hover type transports across the ocean, and those convoys had to be protected from aerial attack.

laudarkul
04-02-2009, 13:04
Is there a 40k "Wet Navy" model (beside the ork's submersible) done by somebody?

Firaxin
04-02-2009, 14:13
6 months man...

Yes. There was an IG landing craft (like the ones in Saving Private Ryan) on the GW website before they fraked it up. Dunno if it's still on there.

Nurglitch_PS
04-02-2009, 14:48
How does a navy stop people crossing from one continent to another? Troops are not moved by sea these days, let alone in the far future.

What? Of course they are moved by sea these days. Moving a light QRF infantry division takes dozens of flights and that's not counting their hardware. You can airlift only light infantry divisions this way. Airlifting a single armoured division would be a nightmare. Yes, the troops are transported by sea. Please check what "Tarawa" is for example.

tomgore
04-02-2009, 15:18
ok the idea of a wet navy in 40K is killin me. and i'll cover the reasons why... please disagree with me at your leisure, thats why we're here.
1. SM power armor works in space and the warp it'll work underwater(the emporer protects) so that includes all thunderhawks, vlkeries and the like.
2. the vulnerabilty of being only to dwell or travel by water(as our traditional and contemporary forces do)would easily be exploited by any advesary. (fish in a barrel anyone?)
3. the ork submersible(apokalypse) is easily explained by it being an ork drop crraft that missed its mark(imagine that) and the orks found away to get it to move to the battle...which any ork would do anyway.
4. making a wet navy is too limiting only able to fight in one dimension with limited access to the other 4(land, air, space, and warp) where flyers and speeders and their cousins can perform all their same roles and duties without such limitations.
so my point in all this rambling is that your planetary governer is going to want options to contain his problems that may arise....wasting resources on a 1 dimensional asset is a waste no matter how many interns he can impress with his city sized yahct. he'll still have skimmers and sealed air movers that can travel through the water if needed..
remember physics people air resistance is just like water resistance only a little less stressful on the vessel. it can be compensated for on both ends.so when the dark dark future does exist a wet navy won't even be a story for scaring kids at bedtime.

what returns when you send 100 sailors to sea? 50 couples

happy gaming

tomgore
04-02-2009, 15:29
[QUOTE=BLZBOB;2884241] & Likely packing enough AA to make them think twice.[QUOTE]
remember AA in 40K is not like now...we have sensors and tracking and smart munitions and we are before the dark age of technology...in 40K its more big sky lotsa dakka theory.

Nurglitch_PS
04-02-2009, 15:33
1. SM power armor works in space and the warp it'll work underwater(the emporer protects) so that includes all thunderhawks, vlkeries and the like.

1. Most conflicts are not graced by the presence of even one Space Marine.
2. In space the power armour has to deal with internal overpressure of 1ATM. In the water it has to deal with external overpressure of 1ATM per 10m of depth. Space Marines trying to fight at a depth of 100m would face 10ATM of overpressure. Not mentioning the fact that power armour would be just swallowed by the mudy or sandy sea bottom.



2. the vulnerabilty of being only to dwell or travel by water(as our traditional and contemporary forces do)would easily be exploited by any advesary. (fish in a barrel anyone?)

The vulnerabilty of being only to dwell or travel by land(as our traditional and contemporary forces do)would easily be exploited by any advesary. (fish in a frying pan anyone?)

Equaly absurd argument. A tank is as vulnerable as a gunboat.



4. making a wet navy is too limiting only able to fight in one dimension with limited access to the other 4(land, air, space, and warp) where flyers and speeders and their cousins can perform all their same roles and duties without such limitations.

1. Making a land army is too limiting only able to fight in one dimension with limited access to the other 4(water, air, space, and warp) where flyers and speeders and their cousins can perform all their same roles and duties without such limitations.
2. Flyers, speeders and their cousing have a very limited range and time in the air. A single missile cruiser controls the entire sea beyond the horizon range and it can do so for years on end. An aircraft carrier can deliver its strike aircraft to the target within an hour, which can seldom be said about craft launching from land bases. And speeders and their cousing cannot do jack **** about missile submarines bombing the snot out of land bases.



so my point in all this rambling is that your planetary governer is going to want options to contain his problems that may arise....wasting resources on a 1 dimensional asset is a waste no matter how many interns he can impress with his city sized yahct.

Supposedly the enemy delivers 10 subs somwhere in the very middle of the ocean, where this governor has no air coverage (he does
not have carriers, his speeders will not reach this point, his planes are some 4h away and close to bingo fuel). A month later 20 square racks pop out of the water and suddenly 400 missiles are in flight aimed at the main trade port. Fun? When he has absolutely no means of doing anything at all about it?



he'll still have skimmers and sealed air movers that can travel through the water if needed.. remember physics people air resistance is just like water resistance only a little less stressful on the vessel

And where will they get the oxygen for their jets from, pray tell? And do you imagine just gluing huge jets to a submarine will make it fly? Sorry, but there's not a lot of physics knowledge in what you just said.

Sai-Lauren
04-02-2009, 16:24
Originally Posted by tomgore
1. SM power armor works in space and the warp it'll work underwater(the emporer protects) so that includes all thunderhawks, vlkeries and the like.
1. Most conflicts are not graced by the presence of even one Space Marine.
2. In space the power armour has to deal with internal overpressure of 1ATM. In the water it has to deal with external overpressure of 1ATM per 10m of depth. Space Marines trying to fight at a depth of 100m would face 10ATM of overpressure. Not mentioning the fact that power armour would be just swallowed by the mudy or sandy sea bottom.

It won't necessarily work under water, the suit may be essentially sealed to hard vac and toxins as far as the wearer is concerned, but what about the heat sinks and vents on the backpack that are now flooded with water, the water density meaning the marine has to push the power up to get the same movement, both overheating the suit and reducing it's endurance and so on.



Originally Posted by tomgore
2. the vulnerabilty of being only to dwell or travel by water(as our traditional and contemporary forces do)would easily be exploited by any advesary. (fish in a barrel anyone?)
The vulnerabilty of being only to dwell or travel by land(as our traditional and contemporary forces do)would easily be exploited by any advesary. (fish in a frying pan anyone?)

Equaly absurd argument. A tank is as vulnerable as a gunboat.

A plane is as vulnerable as well, especially a transport carrying infantry. And if they're on a boat, they've at least got a chance of being able to find a lifeboat - there won't be enough time to get everyone out of a transport plane by parachute, even if everyone's been trained in how to use them.

In fact, a plane is possibly even more vulnerable, as a boat can potentially sit underneath radar or other sensors a lot better than a plane can.

Originally Posted by tomgore
4. making a wet navy is too limiting only able to fight in one dimension with limited access to the other 4(land, air, space, and warp) where flyers and speeders and their cousins can perform all their same roles and duties without such limitations.
1. Making a land army is too limiting only able to fight in one dimension with limited access to the other 4(water, air, space, and warp) where flyers and speeders and their cousins can perform all their same roles and duties without such limitations.
2. Flyers, speeders and their cousing have a very limited range and time in the air. A single missile cruiser controls the entire sea beyond the horizon range and it can do so for years on end. An aircraft carrier can deliver its strike aircraft to the target within an hour, which can seldom be said about craft launching from land bases. And speeders and their cousing cannot do jack **** about missile submarines bombing the snot out of land bases.

Originally Posted by tomgore
so my point in all this rambling is that your planetary governer is going to want options to contain his problems that may arise....wasting resources on a 1 dimensional asset is a waste no matter how many interns he can impress with his city sized yahct.
Supposedly the enemy delivers 10 subs somwhere in the very middle of the ocean, where this governor has no air coverage (he does
not have carriers, his speeders will not reach this point, his planes are some 4h away and close to bingo fuel). A month later 20 square racks pop out of the water and suddenly 400 missiles are in flight aimed at the main trade port. Fun? When he has absolutely no means of doing anything at all about it?
[/QUOTE]
Think Nurglitch said it better than I can, but a couple more points.

If the governor wants to protect his planet, then he needs as close to global surface coverage as possible, and orbital stations are expensive to build and run, whilst ground stations need, well, ground to stand on, and are limited to fire arcs of the horizon (not to mention being stationary targets if you can get something into orbit to bombard them).

If you were defending Earth with ground stations, just how would you cover the Pacific ocean? :eyebrows: Because the moment you say submerged bases, you're into having a Navy to ensure they're supplied, the convoys to them are protected and so on.



Originally Posted by tomgore
he'll still have skimmers and sealed air movers that can travel through the water if needed.. remember physics people air resistance is just like water resistance only a little less stressful on the vessel
And where will they get the oxygen for their jets from, pray tell? And do you imagine just gluing huge jets to a submarine will make it fly? Sorry, but there's not a lot of physics knowledge in what you just said.

Firstly, skimmer tech is supposedly rare.

Secondly, Eldar tech can allow their vehicles to submerge (think a Scorpion does to ambush an Imperial convoy in one of the IA bits of fluff), but I doubt even theirs would allow them to move under it, certainly not very quickly if they can (and I'd put Necron tech at a similar level). Tau and the Imperium would have no chance.

And you could build a flying submarine - you could even throw tracks on it as well if you wanted and have a flying submersible tank, but have you considered how much it would cost to design, build and run per unit?
The imperium may be considered to be rich, but it is certainly not infinitely so. Guard only get lasguns and flak armour, not because they're expendable, but because the cost to give them all bolters and power armour would bankrupt the Imperium, and for most threats they would face, it's good enough (it's only GW's virtual marine fetish that puts so many suits of power armour on the tables).

carldooley
04-02-2009, 16:27
the ideal force for this would be an agri-world, one that is 90%+ water. this way, the imperial forces live in underwater habitats, and leave the ground barren but totally mapped. that way, when an invading force lands on bare soil, your navy can blow them to hell.

there are icbm submarines that would be great for this purpose, and then you could drop troops in modified icbms to wipe out the remainders

try these doctrines:
Drop Troops
Chem-inhalers
Light infantry
Cameoline

think spetsnaz or seals.

as for fighting in the depths - I hope that you have a SM chapter within hailing distance, as you would need power or terminator armor to survive fighting at crush depths.

Firaxin
04-02-2009, 16:27
I find it hard that you people find it hard to believe that there are planets out there with an atmosphere thick/polluted/etc enough that it obscures the sensors of orbiting warships.

Darkhorse
04-02-2009, 16:49
Assuming we have a competant level of technology and that Imperial Governor translates into "the dominant power" then I would have a number of task forces (= to 1 per major ocean and at least one in reserve) based around a Carrier with a Heavy Cruiser plus 6-8 destroyers.
Smaller patrol groups could be based around a single Heavy or Light Cruiser with 3 or 4 destroyers. with smaller groups of 2 Frigates operating on commerce protection.
Submarines would be largely unneccessary for a dominant power, except for covert ops.
Armament would be for the Heavy Cruisers something like Deathstike missiles.
Carriers would have a wing of Thunderbolt fighters.
Light Cruisers would be armed with long range artillery in twin gun turrets and something akin to a Manticore launcher.
Destroyers and Frigates would make do with either the manticore or the gun turret, plus 2/4 depthcharge racks and a torpedo launcher.

Strategy must be to remain the dominant power through intimidation of potential rivals, flag waving for the general population, and displays of strength. Other groups would have to be limited in what they were allowed to build, with the threat of action if they build anything which could rival my forces.
Battle doctrine would be a series of red lines, which anyone can approach without incurring any action, but to cross invites the full force of the fleet.

legio mortis
04-02-2009, 16:58
remember AA in 40K is not like now...we have sensors and tracking and smart munitions and we are before the dark age of technology...in 40K its more big sky lotsa dakka theory.
Actually, yes, Imperial AA weapons are like those we have today. Even the Hydra is mainly computer operated.

ironcurtin117
04-02-2009, 19:27
I see a mix of fighting platforms. On one hand I envision "tower ships" like those used by the ancient/ medieval chinese; massive floating castles that would pull alongside each other and pour boarders across. They will have void shields and turbolasers and the like. On the same side of the coin I can see modern-dayish destroyers and frigates taking part in this, operating much like their space-borne counterparts. It'd be sweet

Marshal Argos
04-02-2009, 20:48
[QUOTE=Nurglitch_PS;3260652]What? Of course they are moved by sea these days. Moving a light QRF infantry division takes dozens of flights and that's not counting their hardware. You can airlift only light infantry divisions this way. Airlifting a single armoured division would be a nightmare. Yes, the troops are transported by sea. Please check what "Tarawa" is for example.[/QUOUTE]

Sure the navy has few boats sitting around carring 2000+ marines, that's less than modern infantry regiment. But lets look at the last 2 wars that US fought, both in mideast... Guess how many of the hundreds of thousands of troops were moved by sea? Less than 10%. The armored divisions all put their equipment on boats, and then went over to the airfield and got on planes. They than sat around in kuwait with their thumbs up their 4th point of contact for weeks waiting for the rest of the equipment to get there.

Lame Duck
04-02-2009, 22:16
Considering the rule of cool and impracticality in 40k you would just have mega uber titans doing laps across the oceans.

Killgore
04-02-2009, 22:35
Sure the navy has few boats sitting around carring 2000+ marines, that's less than modern infantry regiment. But lets look at the last 2 wars that US fought, both in mideast... Guess how many of the hundreds of thousands of troops were moved by sea? Less than 10%. The armored divisions all put their equipment on boats, and then went over to the airfield and got on planes. They than sat around in kuwait with their thumbs up their 4th point of contact for weeks waiting for the rest of the equipment to get there.


who cares about just transporting the troops, its logistics and supply lines that win wars... just read the Imperial Armour 3: Taros book to see how the Imperials can get screwed by poor logistics


now heres a intersting link concerning the importance of boats and far away conflicts

http://www.msc.navy.mil/N00p/pressrel/press04/press07.htm


bottom line is the use of navys in the 41st millenium can not be under-estimated, seas and oceans are a incredable useful resource that any imperial commander would be foolish to ignore

genestealer_baldric
05-02-2009, 12:26
A large scale battle would be a great sight and fun to play, i would love to make a orky battleship, the orks dress as pilots try to teleport onto oposing ships. I love the idea of POP an ork appreas 50 ft above the waves just left of the ship and him plumting towards te sea to gobbled up by sharks. While other make it and start singing sea shanty whilst fighting hand to hand with Ig :)

tomgore
05-02-2009, 20:31
Nurglitch_PS you're awesome. i mean it seriously!
ok for my counter debate on certain things....you didn't address the power armor in the warp...not all planets are "class M" heretics, xenos, and tainted live on all planets. some atmospheres may be thicker than our water and their oceans thinner than our air(possible). i know not everyone has a suit of power armor...but they should get one! there are great credit companies that will lend you the money for one.
tanks are not nearly as vulnerable as a gun boat...no cover or concealment on the open seas. when you dismount either vehicle what do you do...swim or run? i'd run...swimming makes me tired.
battery and engine/fuel tech has been solved in the 41st millenium so no bingo fuel or station time worries...only crew rest.
and finally ork physics is stil physics...which means yes take a ork rock with treads and a cannon on it, weld the seals (submersible), strap on a couple rockets ..for propulsion, and its an all-purpose ork assault vehicle....space sea and land and warp. imperium has the same ability just more athstetically pleasing....
and you SRI-Lauren i'll get to later.....cause you are well worthy of drinking a beer with too!

tomgore
05-02-2009, 20:35
PS this has been one of the best threads i've been in in a long time..thanks for all the great input!

madd0ct0r
05-02-2009, 21:19
Nurglitch_PS you're awesome. i mean it seriously!
ok for my counter debate on certain things....you didn't address the power armor in the warp...not all planets are "class M" heretics, xenos, and tainted live on all planets. some atmospheres may be thicker than our water and their oceans thinner than our air(possible).
tanks are not nearly as vulnerable as a gun boat...no cover or concealment on the open seas.

atmospehere thicker (ie denser) then the ocean? they'd swap places.


submarines still count as wet navy...wetter really.

massey
06-02-2009, 05:09
I'm going to assume a planet like modern Earth. Multiple important continents, large navigable oceans.

I would have a seperate navy for each ocean. They will each be independently supplied by various coastal bases. They will have the capacity to transport troops and equipment, patrol for pirates, and make assaults on the beach (in this case, presumably a counter-assault to take back any part of land an enemy might seize).

I would also have a moderate number of submarines that carry sub-surface to orbit anti-ship missiles. A large sub with a defense laser is lethal, especially if 4 of them surface in the same location, fire on an unwary battleship above, and then submerge and move away again. Likewise a sub would not even have to surface to fire twenty anti-ship missiles at a careless battleship. As has been said, wet navies would not be standardized, so most space navy commanders (not all, but most) would not think to be threatened by a "primitive" force of submarines, particularly if they aren't picked up by traditional scanning technology.

Finally, I would have aircraft carriers, shore bombardment, and anti-aircraft ships. These give you a mobile base, extreme firepower, and good protection all at once.

It would cost far, far, FAR more to fortify every inch of coastline or to build one space cruiser than it would to build a modern effective navy.

WLBjork
06-02-2009, 08:15
Remember the Earthshaker can get about 100 miles range with the extra two charges, but it shortens the life of the breech and barrel - they can only fire about 15 rounds like that before they have to be overhauled.

100km maybe - charge five has a theoretical range of 41 miles (66km), at a 45-degree angle on a planet with an acceleration due to gravity of 10 ms^-2 when firing over flat ground.




I have to laugh at people who think there is no need for a maritime force in the 41st millenium.

Given the effective state of technology in the 41st millenium, I would consider a maritime naval force to be desirable on many planets. Sure, they won't be much use on say Tallarn or Birmingham (or whatever the planet is called where 1 day = 1 year), but on an Earth-like planet? Essential.

madd0ct0r
06-02-2009, 11:37
100km maybe - charge five has a theoretical range of 41 miles (66km), at a 45-degree angle on a planet with an acceleration due to gravity of 10 ms^-2 when firing over flat ground.



Did you take planetry curvature into account? that'd get you a fair bit further

WLBjork
06-02-2009, 18:29
Did you take planetry curvature into account? that'd get you a fair bit further

For all intents and purposes, that is a straight line. Earth is a small planet, and has a curvature of 1 in 7920.

marv335
06-02-2009, 19:00
I'm not a fan of the wet navy idea.
Air power is key. orbital satellites can track surface ships easily, the wake gives you away and cannot be made stealthy as a ship can.
As soon as an enemy knows where your ships are, air assets can be dispatched.
If the air assets in question are being deployed from orbit (as many Imperial aircraft can) then you can reach out to anywhere at any time.
Sea power is all about projecting power and defence in depth. you can only protect up to a radius from the outermost ship in the formation. Attacking from orbit removes much of the warning advantage from the aegis ships and most of the defensive depth.
Control the skies, control the battlefield.
In an age of orbital defence, wet navies are seriously compromised.

Killgore
06-02-2009, 19:46
I'm not a fan of the wet navy idea.
Air power is key. orbital satellites can track surface ships easily, the wake gives you away and cannot be made stealthy as a ship can.
As soon as an enemy knows where your ships are, air assets can be dispatched.
If the air assets in question are being deployed from orbit (as many Imperial aircraft can) then you can reach out to anywhere at any time.
Sea power is all about projecting power and defence in depth. you can only protect up to a radius from the outermost ship in the formation. Attacking from orbit removes much of the warning advantage from the aegis ships and most of the defensive depth.
Control the skies, control the battlefield.
In an age of orbital defence, wet navies are seriously compromised.


It all comes down to logistics, in a battle against a major world fuel requirements for a large invading force would be very demanding

you cant initiate large airstrikes against naval fleets if your running out of fuel for the invasion and new supplys could be hard to come by, and especialy if the navy could be hard to track due to some form of water to space camouflage and if theres more important targets in the ground war


So just by saying i have a large space/ air fleet i win doesnt really cut it when other factors are taken into account.

Easy E
07-02-2009, 00:11
Plus, what makes you think the guys in orbit won't be busy themselves dealing with anti-orbital weapons (some ship and sub based, others mobile ground launchers, and others hardened bunkers), system defense ships, mines, and low orbit fighter strikes.

Plus, what makes you think orbital assets can just loiter around for days and weeks on end and leave the spacelanes unprotected?

massey
07-02-2009, 03:46
What makes you think every attack on a planet comes fully equipped with its own starfleet?

Awilla the Hun
07-02-2009, 15:29
This may have been stated before, but I always thought that most governors maintained some form of water (or equivalent) sailing navy on their worlds. Most have had ten thousand years to build it, after all.

My views? Probably some sort of strike force kept in subs to attack an enemy by surprise, or...

Giant Anti Space/big enemy target lasers or cannons kept in submarines that are unveiled when the enemy least expects it (their lone flagship suddenly gets blasted out of space by a hidden lance strike coming from a sub; the chaos ritual gets nuked from a distance; and so on.)

Simon Sez
07-02-2009, 17:27
In an age of orbital defence, wet navies are seriously compromised.In an age of guns, knives are seriously compromised. Yet they are still an integral part of military gear.

So long as there are substantial bodies of water, trade shall traverse them. So long as there is trade on the high seas there will be pirates/privateers looking to raid them. As long as nations trade routes are threatened by such raids, navies shall exist to prevent and pursue them to destruction.

That has been the defining and primary purpose of navies since their inception; in the grand scheme of things the Trafalgar's Jutlands and Midways of history are marks on a tradition of trade escorts, border patrols and threats of action.


some sort of strike force kept in subs to attack an enemy by surpriseThis is very likely to be the next and most exciting development in naval warfare for some years, combining the increased pay load of short range fighter-bombers with the stealth and defence-piercing abilities of submarines will reshape warfare. Something that likely would be a part of any 40k planet sharing our technology level.

Strike Anywhere
08-02-2009, 11:42
Funny that this should be brought up.

My next black library novel (already commissioned), revolves heavily around riverine combat, as well as a blue water Nautical fleet.

Lots of interesting ideas here that I just might implement.

madd0ct0r
08-02-2009, 21:14
as long as it's got Orks with hovercraft, I'll buy it.

Random Integer
08-02-2009, 21:18
as long as it's got Orks with hovercraft, I'll buy it.

Bovvercrafts?

Killgore
09-02-2009, 10:31
Funny that this should be brought up.

My next black library novel (already commissioned), revolves heavily around riverine combat, as well as a blue water Nautical fleet.

Lots of interesting ideas here that I just might implement.

oh really? this got something to do with the Imperial Guard book you mentioned in a earlier thread?

I look forward to reading about the Imperiums water assets in the 41st millenium

Strike Anywhere
10-02-2009, 12:03
Orks and hovercrafts? I just might make a mention of those as a warseer easter egg.

As for the other thread. I can only assume yes although I don't recall the thread. In this case, a combined blue water navy and littoral combat force is required due to terrain. The rainforests of a certain archipelagos is far too dense to allow for safe aerial deployment.

Easy E
11-02-2009, 16:04
I'm looking forward to it. Put this nonsense about no wet navies to rest once and for all. :)

tomgore
11-03-2009, 18:48
ok just adding a few more nuggets to this madness...
in our earth history the battleship was the strength of a navy at sea. direct sea conflict...until WW2 and there was a quick transition and the power projection of a navy was all enveloped in the aircraft carrier and carrier groups. it improved the attack range and angle of attack against the enemy...created a bubble of battlespace centered around the command of the carrier. the greater the range of the ship + fuel of aircraft + range of weapon = the greater the bubble. now taking those 3 factors in mind lets put some 40k into it. imperium weapons except orbital or basilisk all have a max range (48") which by scale translates to standard weapon effects of today(someone else can do the math, i'm too lazy:)) now fuels cell tech in 40k has been solved making the aircrafts range global even on a large(jupiter sized)hive world. which leaves "the range of the ship" again fuel cell tech makes it a global response too...(we have nuclear powered A/C carriers now that won't need refuelling for a few more decades). so now most of you will agree that the carrier group now has a global response profile and bubble. now some of you may ask, what about subsurface threats? subs, topedoes and the everpresent blue(aquatic) ork? now that instantly looks at the other half of the fight, vulnerability. how do we reduce it? just like your momma said the best way to not be in a fight is not be there...which eludes to take the ships outta the sea... but wait that goes against wet navies!!!! we've already discussed that the A/C have a global range and response which means they are responsible for maintaining the battlespace(removing wasted fed jobs and making a smaller government). but still not adressing subsurface threats tom!!!!well we've defeated the subsurface threats by not giving them a target...and arm the A/C with subsurface munitions( a tremor shell in water is a sonic weapon capable of crippling any xenos sub)think physics. so this is a more vivid picture of why wet navies in the imperium are debunked.

Cane
11-03-2009, 22:13
Advanced submarines seem like a good war machine to have.

Can you imagine a submarine that could launch devastating Death Strike missiles and function as a mini aircraft carrier? I can and that would be awesome for a 40k commander to have if he has to deal with large bodies of water.

Ishmael
12-03-2009, 18:57
If the Imperium were to assault a hive world that was made up of: 1.) land masses totally covered in hive structure, and 2.) Oceans, where the hell are you going to drop your 200,000 guardsmen? You're going to need to put them on a smooth surface. Here, the only option is the water. From there you will need to get them to the hives. Here, the only option is to hit the beach.

That, in my opinion, is one role for wet craft in 40k.

archont
12-03-2009, 19:06
Simply for pointing it out:

That's what Ghaskhull did on Armageddon, he landed some of his boys off the main continent and they later assaulted some hives through giant submarines! xD

Ddraiglais
13-03-2009, 06:19
Tomgore, I don't think you are looking at the big picture. True CVs overtook the BB as the dominant capital ships, but BBs remained in service until the mid/late 90s. Cruise missiles also added to the BBs demise (although they could have saved the BB if the Navy went ahead with their plan to put VLS on the BBs). Even though the CV is king today, there are still other ships in service. CCs, DDs, and FFGs are all needed in the carrier battle groups. Being stationed in NC, I'll assume you are a Marine. One of the biggest force projections the US has outside of a CV is an ARG. There are many other ships/boats that are used today. Special forces would be severly handicapped without RHIBs and coastal patrol ships. The USMC wouldn't function without LHDs, LSDs, LHAs, LPDs, LCACs, LCUs, etc.

You have to think outside of the box. I've mentioned planetary governors. They could spend all of their money on space capable craft, or they could save a little and protect their seas with wet navies. Not to mention the fear/pride factor those ships would have on the local population to keep them in line. Others have mentioned amphibious landings. IIRC the gorgon, chimera, and other vehicles are amphibious. Is it that unfeasable that there might be a larger ship to transport them over blue water? Wouldn't those amphibs need shooters (DD, CC, FFG types) to protect them? What about a force like Gaunt's Ghosts or other light specialised infantry using RHIB-like boats to land for covert operations?

Oh, and while you're debunking, do a search for Ork subs. I'm not sure if it was GW or BoLS, but I swear I've seen a data sheet for them.

In a universe where swords and axes are common, trains with guns still exist (or did until recently), cavalry is still used, boxy tanks are common, AA is primarily gun based (and not missiles), etc, etc; how is that wet navies are so far fetched?

Arkondak
13-03-2009, 07:58
In a universe with titans, which are simply walking land battleships, floating watter battleships don't seem unreasonable. Any argument against a navy can be used against a titan, and we see alot of titans in 40k.

You could fit a great deal of titan grade weaponry on a battleship chassis. something on the order of 9 quake cannons plus 20 earthshakers or manticore missiles in turrets with an assortment of heavy bolters and autocannons for close in defense. Slap on a void shield and you're good to go. That would be awesome.

Plus the sea based anti orbital defenses seem to be a good argument for a navy in 40k. Submersibles could remain hidden during the initial fire exchange between the planet and the invasion fleet. they could hide in an area the enemy commander thought had no orbital defenses and launch their anti orbital missiles when the vulnerable enemy troop transports moved into low orbit to launch their dropships.

Sai-Lauren
13-03-2009, 11:46
In a universe with titans, which are simply walking land battleships, floating watter battleships don't seem unreasonable. Any argument against a navy can be used against a titan, and we see alot of titans in 40k.

You could fit a great deal of titan grade weaponry on a battleship chassis. something on the order of 9 quake cannons plus 20 earthshakers or manticore missiles in turrets with an assortment of heavy bolters and autocannons for close in defense. Slap on a void shield and you're good to go. That would be awesome.

Plus the sea based anti orbital defenses seem to be a good argument for a navy in 40k. Submersibles could remain hidden during the initial fire exchange between the planet and the invasion fleet. they could hide in an area the enemy commander thought had no orbital defenses and launch their anti orbital missiles when the vulnerable enemy troop transports moved into low orbit to launch their dropships.

Long barrelled, Titan killer Battle Cannon maybe, possibly LBTK Vanquisher Cannon, but not Earthshakers or Quake cannon. I would say anything like that would be on bigger hulls than even a Battleship (Heavy Battleships, Dreadnoughts, Super-Dreadnoughts and command bases), or vessels designed for coastal bombardment (Monitors).
Maybe Whirlwinds Multi-Launcher turrets as well, but again, Manticores for the bigger/bombardment ships.

Voids? Can't see them playing nicely with water, so there might have to be an unshielded/heavily armoured belt above the water line that smaller ships and air launched stand off Anti-Ship HK missiles could possibly exploit, meaning you'd also need a picket of air defence vessels to help protect them.

Here's a thought - for the Imperium, would they have specialised Aircraft Carriers or basically mount a through deck "tube" in a Heavy Battleship or bigger hull (kind of like a centre-line version of Galactica's flight decks - launch tubes out the front, and a recovery bay at the rear) - with the normal turrets and superstructure on the deck above? Or both, with the carriers ranging from small escort carriers to massive Super-Dreadnoughts, with a normal flight deck/tower and a Galactica "tube" one underneath, whilst the CV/HB acts alone or in a small battlegroup as a surface raider?

Or is the combination CV/HB more in line with the Orks?

Arkondak
14-03-2009, 05:11
An earthshaker really isn't that big. According to GW it's a 132mm cannon/howitzer. by comparison an Iowa class battleship, which is fairly standard for a late wwII battleship, mounted 9 16 inch (roughly 400mm) cannon in 3 turrets. The reason i picked quake cannon is that i was trying to approximate an iowa class battleship in 40k, and a Quake cannon is the weapon i could think of in 40k that was most similar to a 16 inch naval gun.
132mm is close to 5 inches, and the Iowas mounted a number of 5 inch guns as a secondary armament, hence the earthshakers.

obviously no modern battleship has void shields, but i figured anything that big in 40k can probably mount them.

I like that idea about the void shields not reacting well with water though. I honestly never thought of that.

WLBjork
14-03-2009, 08:49
I don't think Voids would be a problem in the water - it seems like they can be driven/walked through without any real problem.

Sai-Lauren
16-03-2009, 13:22
I don't think Voids would be a problem in the water - it seems like they can be driven/walked through without any real problem.
Sorry, just don't really like the idea of that much power and an EM field that big in close proximity with water ;), especially if you want to use the water's surface as the "ground" (IMO, Voids need emitters, they don't just appear around the object that's being shielded, so they'd have to come back to the hull at some point).

I certainly don't seem them extending below the water, so torpedoes wouldn't have to get through them. They'd need other counter-measures for them, and the belt armour would be as thick as possible.

AndrewGPaul
16-03-2009, 13:45
I don't think they've ever defined how void shields work (or, indeed, what they are*, so it's probably a bit premature to say that they can or can't be used in, on or under water. They certainly stand out from the surface of the thing being shielded, as evidenced by Titans in close combat being inside each others' shields, and torpedoes in space exploding inside them. Also, void shields in close proximity overlap - two titans in "base contact" can share shields, which can be useful if one Titan's shield generators are damaged/overloaded.

*Unless there's something in Rogue Trader.

Sai-Lauren
16-03-2009, 14:32
I don't think they've ever defined how void shields work (or, indeed, what they are*, so it's probably a bit premature to say that they can or can't be used in, on or under water. They certainly stand out from the surface of the thing being shielded, as evidenced by Titans in close combat being inside each others' shields, and torpedoes in space exploding inside them. Also, void shields in close proximity overlap - two titans in "base contact" can share shields, which can be useful if one Titan's shield generators are damaged/overloaded.

*Unless there's something in Rogue Trader.
Voids are post-RT. Until Forge World produced the Warhound (later 3rd edition?), they never officially featured in 40k at all.

I don't think they can come from a central point outwards, because when they are powered on, they would interfere with the internal structure of whatever they're fitted to, so, IMO, it's likely they have external emitters spotted around the body of whatever they're protecting, and produce the field that way. (IIRC, this is also how the Hive's shields in Necropolis work - just on a different scale, plus the defensive voids in Guns of Tanith seem to come from emitters).

Sharing shields? How about some kind of field inductance, so that the field from one emitter gets carried by another emitter that's in range (IIRC, if they're in melee, titans share shields as well, so it's not just a friendly, please give me your frequencies so I can protect myself thing) - and the emitters that are closer to the other object automatically turn themselves off, so that they save power (which then increases the shield strength, allowing it to wrap around the other side of the object) and don't burn out through energy feedback?

Harwammer
16-03-2009, 15:32
I think everyone is missing the obvious; considering how many land lubber aliens there are in the galaxy I imagine there are also plenty of aliens that live in water instead of air. Super dolphins or whatever.

The imperium surely needs ways to make war with these? I can't imagine the imperium allowing aliens to exist on one of their planets purely because those aliens happen to live in water instead of air.

Col. Tartleton
16-03-2009, 15:49
I've always been afraid of dolphins rising up and killing us all like in an episode of the Simpsons. Plus they'd feel totally justified as we've polluted the ocean.:)

Bahir
16-03-2009, 16:07
Just off the top of my head with out reading all the other posts here is my 2 cents.

As an Imperial Governor I'd use my wet navy as a mobile planetary defense system. I'm thinking huge submersibles with capabilities of knocking out capital ships in orbit. Perhaps some others adept at shooting down missile barrages and incoming craft.

One of the weaknesses of a land bases defense Laser is it pretty much stays put. The enemy may even know ahead of time where it is. They can send in a few squads of marines to take it out or attempt to knock it out in the primary barrage. A mobile system can pop up, fire a few rounds, dive and move to another location. Hopefully it can use the liquid (water, or whatever the liquid substance of the planet) to help obscure it's self (as well as ECM, shields, etc)

WLBjork
17-03-2009, 08:03
Voids are post-RT. Until Forge World produced the Warhound (later 3rd edition?), they never officially featured in 40k at all.

Apart from all the times they appeared on a titan in Epic :p

CBFASI
21-03-2009, 11:43
A few thoughts on large ship design

yes many have stated that the concept of Battleship in 21st centruy has gone...

Hold on a minute... the Russian BCGN Kirov!!

This would theortical start for what a 40k version might just be capable of.

You got Ship to Ship missiles, well these would be maybe be Deathstrike's!

You got Surface to Air missiles, say Manitcore

The small 'Flak' batteries, say Hydra

If you then need actual gun styled weapons...
Volcano Cannons for main...
Earthshakers for secondaries

In fact pretty much any Titan weapon could be consided (except close combat weapons)

Say you build one in Epic scale!, its still likely to be 90-120cm long, width 19-20cm, this just based on current dimensions, coudl actually be much bigger, want a carrier, well its going to be wider!

Void sheilds, depends on who designed the craft, if Mechinum then likely, else just the heaviest armour as they can put on, imperial worlds do not just make stuff to STC standards.

Marines are unlikely to need a wet navy but imperials, well just look at the variations on other kit used on different worlds settings, we just don't have many wet world settings.

Expect patrol craft, transports, in fact just look at all navies today. Just cos its current styled does not mean it wont be in 40k Univers, just think TANK, ANTI-TANK MISSLE, ARTILLERY, FLAK, AIRCRAFT, UNGUIDED BOMBS, they all there !!

Just happens 2 days ago I was looking at this.
http://www.oldcrowmodels.co.uk/6watercraft.htm