200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:28 am

Standard Hull - 200 tons - 10 MCr - (TL 15 Hull from Winters Corp, Glisten ship yards)

3 Points Armor - 4.8 tons - 2.4 MCr - (Bonded super dense armor)
Jump Drives (J3) - 14 Tons - 31.5 MCr - (TL 15 Drives, 3 advantages, 30% smaller drives, +50% cost)
Maneuver Drives (3G) - 4.2 Tons - 12.6 MCr - (TL 15 Drives, 3 advantages, 30% smaller, +50% cost)
Power Plant (120 points) - 6 Tons - 12 MCr - (TL 15 Power Plant, 20 points per ton)
Fuel Scoops - 0 tons - 1 MCr - (Takes no tonnage but adds cost to standard hull
Fuel Processor - 1 ton - .05 MCr - (purifies 20 tons of fuel per day)
Bridge - 10 tons - 1 MCr
Sensors - 1 ton - 3 MCr - Basic Civilian
Computer (Yet to be determined... cause I haven't fully read the new computer rules)
2 Triple Turrets - 2 tons - 2 MCr
Weapons added per direction of buyer
10 State Rooms - 40 tons - 5MCr - All double occupancy but can be modified per owners request
Common Space - 10 tons - 1 MCr
Cargo Bay - 40 tons
Cargo Belt - 1 ton - .001 MCr - (TL 15 cargo belt-gravic tech)
Vehicle Bay - 5 tons - .5 MCr (Also acts as a cargo lock)
Grav Sled Storage racik - .01 MCr (in grav bay near the ceiling)

Total without computer and weapons 82.07 MCr (sorry still have not reviewed the computer rules)

It is late, I'm am very tired.
I have not labeled many of the components, nor have I drawing the elevations or cut cross sections, but since I just finished, I'm posting the deck plans.

Deck 1 is Cargo Deck, 2 state rooms (for crew) lower lounge with exercise equipment and an auto-doc placed in a strategic location just inside the main air-lock (shoot outs happen)
The air-lock is what I call a multi-lock It can open up and dock as normal with another ship or high port, plus the floor also can descend as a ramp for wilderness landing, or simple tarmacs at smaller down ports. It still functions as an airlock if you want to lower the ramp. Twin fuel scoops and fuel processors flank either side of the lower lounge. A vehicle bay (Grav or wheel/track) is at the back and it doubles as the cargo lock. There is a Grav Sled rack in the vehicle bay that can be lowered to bring out a grav sled, which can be towed behind any vehicle.

Deck 2 is the main passenger deck, fuel deck, and engineering compartment with power and part of the M-Drive. Two triple turrets are located on opposite ends of the passenger section. There front portion of the Galley includes a bar, that passengers can enjoy.

Deck 3 is the command deck, with bridge, 2 crew stater rooms, Jump Drive and part the the M-Drive.

I'll try to finish the design later.
Right now I'm hitting the sack.

http://imgur.com/PaCyZkH
heron61
Mongoose
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:43 pm

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby heron61 » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:51 am

It's a lovely ship and I like the deckplans, but I can see a way to instantly save 3 tons with no extra cost. Instead of reducing the size of the jump drive (-30% to tonnage goes from 20 tons to 14 tons, saving 6 tons), reduce fuel usage, at -5% per reduction, that's -15%, which for 60 tons goes down to 51 tons, saving 9 tons rather than the 6 saved by reducing the size of the jump drive.
mancerbear
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 412
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 2:34 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby mancerbear » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:17 am

I like the plans. What software are you using?
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:45 pm

heron61 wrote:
Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:51 am
It's a lovely ship and I like the deckplans, but I can see a way to instantly save 3 tons with no extra cost. Instead of reducing the size of the jump drive (-30% to tonnage goes from 20 tons to 14 tons, saving 6 tons), reduce fuel usage, at -5% per reduction, that's -15%, which for 60 tons goes down to 51 tons, saving 9 tons rather than the 6 saved by reducing the size of the jump drive.
A bigger drive costs more. It would save some space, but cost a lot.
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:52 pm

Somehow I missed the fist line of advantages. I think I must have lumped it is was "take less energy" Also at the time I was using J2 as a baseline. I will probably redo the calculations for better fuel efficiency over size reduction. I'll also test mixing all 3 advantages to get the best combination in order to save the most space. Volume = profit through cargo or staterooms, or more capability through better armor or more amenities.
Thanks for your input.

I use AutoCADD as my software.
I appreciate the comments. :)

I'll also appreciate any constructive critiques as well.

This was based on an earlier design, and I had to shift and flip a lot of internal components around to make the deck plans functional while at the same time trying to get a little bit of "cool" factor. I took much longer to develop than I wanted. I'll have to tweak the plans a bit more with the changes from above, but at least it's now complete.

There are 2 other large variations of this basic shape I have half-finished, a 400 Ton Frontier Escort (to compete with the close escort) and an 800 ton Frontier Merchant Cruiser, to compete with the existing Mercenary Cruiser.
I have concept sketches for 1000+ ton designs to compete with the Leviathan class, but those are simple sketches on post-it notes. ;)

But in broad terms I simply call this the "hammer head" scheme, because the inspiration is from a hammer head shark.

More deck plans will be on the way, some looking completely different, but this is the first.
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 01, 2017 2:10 pm

Nice!

Certainly better than anything I have ever made.

The stairs to the top deck are a bit steep?

The ramp is good, but if you have a wheeled vehicle you need a ramp in the rear too?

How about a backup airlock? Perhaps a top iris valve in the engineering airlock?

Is there an iris valve on the stair to the top level? That would serve to separate the passengers from the bridge and engineering. I tend to be paranoid about hi-jacking.

Why the hammerhead design? Is it just aesthetic?
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Wed Mar 01, 2017 2:30 pm

To make the upper deck work, I did turn the stairs to the command deck into a traditional "ships ladder", http://stairs4u.com/code/ship_ladders.htm and yes, it's hard to see with the conversion from PDF to JPG, but there is an iris valve at the top and bottom of the stair to act as an airlock in case of emergency, and to keep the command deck secure.

The vehicle bay hatch IS on large ramp that rotates down, and it can extend/telescope for a gentler slope if needed. Plus, you can do the same trick with the back landing gear that is done with the Subsidized Merchant, and lower the entire back closer to the ground when possible.

The entire vertical shaft leads to a lock dorsal and ventral as maintenance hatches (and another way in and out). When I complete all six elevations, you'll be able to see them. Also, not shown, I may include a top hatch near the lift/stair.
Actually, I might remove the stair all together leading to the top and simply replace it with a traditional wall mounted ladder and "hole in the floor".

As far as the "why", this evolved 10 plus years ago when Mongoose first came out. I wanted to segregate the passengers from crew, and in one of the first designs, the crew corridor and state rooms were aligned with the spine of the ship and intersected at the "T" junction with the common space, then the passenger staterooms were oriented 90 degrees topping off the "T" shape. The swoop, body, weapons, and everything else fell into place. But it all started with the concept and function of separating staterooms.

Thanks for your input. :)
-Daniel-
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2317
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:20 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby -Daniel- » Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:03 pm

Ok, I can't figure out how to download the plans large enough to be able to read the labels etc. It is like all I can get are thumbnails. What am I missing? :(
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:27 pm

It might have to do with image size/clarity when it automatically converted from the original pdf to png.
I have uploaded each deck plan individually now, so hopefully each one is more clear.
Please note, each is 11x17 format.

Deck 1 http://imgur.com/coK7saH
Deck 2 http://imgur.com/ZhlsrAL
Deck 3 http://imgur.com/sU8CiCH

Also this is my first time every using a 3rd party website to display my images. There might be a setting that improves the quality... I'll double check later.
-Daniel-
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2317
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:20 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby -Daniel- » Wed Mar 01, 2017 6:40 pm

Much better images. Nice plan and I like the overall ship very much. :-)
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:33 pm

After crunching some numbers over lunch, I'm going to modify the J-Drive
Advantage 1, Reduced Size by 10%
Advantage 2&3, fuel efficiency by 10%

The result is 8 extra tons
I will add one more point of armor (total of 4 points)
Increase the M-Drive to thrust 4 from 3
Add one more ton of power plant to 7 tons
Add 2 more tons of cargo (1 ton each placed directly behind fire control at each turret for ammo storage, or simply more storage.. possibly concealed smuggling compartments)
Add 2 more tons of fuel processors so I can produce a full compliment of refined fuel in less than a day.

I'll recalculate the price later.
steve98052
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:13 am
Location: near Seattle

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby steve98052 » Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:24 pm

Very nice!

One minor point about the deck plan is component numbering. Any part that exists in multiples -- staterooms, doors, weaponry, drive modules, etc. -- is likely to be numbered. And there is a customary numbering system.

Odd numbers are used on the port side, even on the starboard.
Numbering is inboard to outboard, fore to aft, and dorsal to ventral -- except that components along the central axis are numbered last.

Single deck example:

11 01 21 02 12
13 03 22 04 14
15 05 23 06 16
17 07 24 08 18
19 09 25 10 20

If there is a gap in the pattern (such as replacing #13 above with a main entrance) that number would likely be skipped rather than making sure all numbers were used (such as changing 15, 17, and 19 above to 13, 15, and 17 and renumbering the central column).

This part isn't canon, but it's likely: In cases where there are many components of a type -- staterooms in a giant liner, for example -- numbering may be coded, such as indicating deck number with the first digit, column with the second, and sequence with the third.
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:23 am

Jak Nazryth wrote: After crunching some numbers over lunch, I'm going to modify the J-Drive
Advantage 1, Reduced Size by 10%
Advantage 2&3, fuel efficiency by 10%

The result is 8 extra tons.
You have base 60 dT jump fuel, -10% of that is +6 dT.
You have base 20 dT jump drive, 20% of that is -4dT.
You gain +2 dT at a cost of MCr 4 × 1.5 × 1.5 = 9. Doubtful bargain...


You could save almost MCr 10 by using a spherical configuration and a TL12 power plant (with reduced size), without losing any cargo space.
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:32 pm

yeah, I did that math in a rush at lunch using the gain in tonnage from the base formula without any tech advantages, and not the difference between the current and revised, I realized it after work when I double checked the math.
In an RPG with a pretend economy it's up to the players if a couple more tons are worth the price, but I may do just to get one more point of armor. That at least would bring it up to 4 points, which is what tramp freighters had in the original rules.
But you're point on adding cost to squeeze every ounce of tonnage has it's merits.
When you think of the real world, the price of a single F-35 fighter is over $100 MILLION dollars. And that's just a single seat fighter jet.
This pretend ship with pretend money will cost less in credits and can at least rip a hole in reality and fling itself several light years in 7 days. :)
I'm not concerned about the cost of a hulls configuration.
If that bottom line on hull configuration was the driving factor, every single ship in the Traveller universe would be a sphere.
Not happening IMTU.
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Mon Mar 06, 2017 4:32 am

Here is a longitudinal study section, right down the center of the ship, looking towards port.
The main airlock front hatch is closed, and the ramp is down. This is approximately what the ship looks like at normal landing mode. The back landing gear can lower a bit more to make the back vehicle ramp less not as steep
More sections and elevations to follow.

http://imgur.com/w9mvs3p

Starting work on a long range scout (200 ton) from Winters Ship Yards

Other designs in the works.

100 ton "Run-about"

300 ton Frontier "Fast Merchant"

400 Ton Frontier Cutter

400 Ton Frontier Escort

600 Ton Frontier Liner

600 Ton long range research vessel

800 Ton Frontier Merc

20/30 Ton Special Ops boat
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Mar 06, 2017 11:00 am

Jak Nazryth wrote: Here is a longitudinal study section, ...
Something that bothers me a bit is that the M-drive is unbalanced. Thrust must be applied through the centre of gravity of the ship or it will start to tumble. Since the mass of the cargo hold will vary wildly the ship will be difficult to balance. A few drives symmetrically around a cargo hold in the centre of the ship would make it easier to see the balance, like in the Free Trader, Far Trader, or Fat Trader.

Jak Nazryth wrote: Other designs in the works.
Looking forward to it!
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:10 pm

Luckily, this ship won't tumble, because this is a fantasy game where the technology manipulates gravity itself, and where even the smallest star ship has the power to fold space and create it's own pocket dimension, something even the mass and energy of the milky way galaxy cannot do.
I'm not changing my design for now until I create the rest of the sections and elevations.
While you bring up a good point in "real" physics, most every Traveller ship designed since 1977 never considered aligning the maneuver drives to coincide with the axis of center of mass. Look at the traditional deck plan for the Suliman class Scout. :) Also, the flat sheet of paper that we perceive as a deck plan doesn't indicate where they are located in a 3 dimensional craft. It might looked balanced on a flat sheet of paper, but the center of mass can vary dramatically.
Mass isn't a thing in MgT2 for star ships. If you start worrying about the mass of cargo, if its half full or even empty, then what about fuel tanks?
GURPS traveller took mass into consideration, but that only affected the acceleration of the ship, not placement of engines.
You can drive yourself crazy trying to locate maneuver drives so the forces all balance.
I take all honest critiques well, but only remember, this is a pretend ship with pretend physics. I'm not going to break my brain or gut a design based on the ever changing center of mass of cargo or fuel, especially in a ship that can manipulate gravity. ;) However I've already changed the ship (in spreadsheet form) from previous comments, so I'll consider your's as well.

Plus, the M-drive and the location of the thruster plates don't have to be located in the same place.
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2348
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Mar 06, 2017 6:09 pm

Jak Nazryth wrote: While you bring up a good point in "real" physics, most every Traveller ship designed since 1977 never considered aligning the maneuver drives to coincide with the axis of center of mass. Look at the traditional deck plan for the Suliman class Scout. :)
Most of the classic designs, including the Type S do have drives balanced symmetrically around the centre of the ship?
Image

But of course you do your ships as you like.

Jak Nazryth wrote: It might looked balanced on a flat sheet of paper, but the center of mass can vary dramatically.
Mass isn't a thing in MgT2 for star ships. If you start worrying about the mass of cargo, if its half full or even empty, then what about fuel tanks?
Agreed. Of course fuel tanks should be considered, but it is a very light fluid that can be pumped between tank to trim the balance. In your ship the fuel doesn't mass more than 60 tonnes, while the cargo can potentially mass 1000 tonnes or even more.

Jak Nazryth wrote: Plus, the M-drive and the location of the thruster plates don't have to be located in the same place.
Truster Plates is the M-drive. Thruster Plates is just MT terminology.
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:42 pm

rant on the way...
Last edited by Jak Nazryth on Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jak Nazryth
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 795
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 5:13 am

Re: 200 ton Frontier Trader with Deck Plan

Postby Jak Nazryth » Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:46 pm

WARNING... RANT ABOUT TO BEGIN... THIS IS MORE TONGUE-IN-CHEEK BUT IS STILL A SORE ISSUE FOR ME...

this is NOT directed solely at AnotherDilbert, but mostly the combined frustration of 40 years of "you cant to that because physics says you can't" directed to a space fantasy RPG.

Mass is not a factor for Star Ship designs, only displacement tons.
Scout courier simply says "drives" on the original CT "Traders and gunships" , not even a power plant, and it's been common since I've been playing 1980/81 that one of the "objects" drawn on the deck plan is the jump drive and one is the maneuver drive.
But ships that can manipulate gravity in a pretend universe doesn't have to follow, and should not follow, our current understanding of physics.
You do understand that at least, correct? This is not a real chemical rocket that has to be perfectly aligned with the axial center of mass. It's a pretend ship with pretend physics that can easily control pitch, yaw, and roll because it can manipulate natural and create it's own gravity.
Lets use one of your examples. If a subsidized merchant is making run with little or no cargo, then it will begin to tumble, because the engines are so low on the ship, the center of mass will be closer to the upper deck.
The forward trust of the M-Drives are now offset from the axial center of mass, and it will tumble by your reasoning.
Look at the engines on an A-10 Warthog. If you took that example, removed the wings, and turned it into a small craft, that too would tumble in space. Why? Because even though the engines appear perfectly balanced on a flat deck plan, they are in fact not centered on the hull of the craft, but set above.
None of that matters. Its a sci-fi game. Not reality.
You didn't object when you saw the 2-D flat deck plans, because that's what you're used to. Only when you saw the first study of a longitudinal section.
The drives in virtually every single Traveller ship is offset from the axial center of mass. Virtually all of them. Don't look at the flat deck plans and look for "balance", do the cross sections and elevations yourself. Show me, and prove mathematically if any Traveller cannon design has it's engines centered perfectly with the axial center of mass so that it "won't tumble" is space. Calculate the mass of the hull, fuel, components, cargo, figure out where the natural center of gravity is within the hull volume, and don't forget the live loads, and prove it. I'll give you a hint.... the closest cannon design that has a chance of meeting your reality is the 800 ton merc cruiser. Possibly the original design of the Lightning class cruiser.
A ship can hover easily 1 meter off the ground for at least a month, with no ill affect to the ground or people walking under and around the ship, no "down blast" and much longer if the power plant starts to use Jump fuel.
How is this possible with most engines at the back of the ship? Won't the mass be different? Won't the nose of the ship tip and strike the ground because it is so unbalanced and set so far away from the M-Drive? Can you preform a shear/moment diagram to calculate the stress on the hull, with the nose of the ship so far removed from the M-Drive? I can, but screw that, the calculations alone would take hours, with a lot of assumptions and guess work, and this isn't a real world cantilevered beam... its a game. A ship can hover, and not tumble, for as long as it has fuel. How is this even possible?
Because it can manipulate gravity. Because it can create it's own gravity.
Show me the mathematical equation for that please.
You are over thinking the rules and applying current reality/physics on imaginary ships and imaginary technology that can MANIPULATE GRAVITY!
This is a game for fun so we won't be so bored on weekends.
Please stop trying to suck the fun and creativity out of this pretend game.

(sorry, rant over) :)

Now I feel better. :)
Last edited by Jak Nazryth on Mon Mar 06, 2017 9:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests