Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
baithammer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby baithammer » Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:36 pm

As mentioned earlier, the combined drives, weapons and power plants can be combined when connected.

But, the hull points are portioned across both units. ( Its big advantage is the ability to retain features such as streamlining.)
steve98052
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:13 am
Location: near Seattle

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby steve98052 » Sat Nov 17, 2018 5:55 pm

Another advantage of this design is that it's true to the classic design, where both the bridge-spine-engineering part and the module were able to operate independently, though for some modules the independent operation might be limited to "lie there and keep the cargo safe" for simpler modules.
baithammer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby baithammer » Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:59 am

After a little experimenting had to go for a total of 65t, with 30t Command and 35t Cargo module.

The cockpit in the cargo area represents an operator booth.

Image
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:10 pm

baithammer wrote: After a little experimenting had to go for a total of 65t, with 30t Command and 35t Cargo module.
Why the huge staterooms? You could save significant space with standard 4 Dt staterooms.

Why staterooms at all as standard on small-craft?

You probably want some fuel tankage on the Module, otherwise the power plant isn't much use. (And a small computer and sensor package, at insignificant space and cost.)

Column error on cost and power of Module? (And total cost of Module.)
baithammer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby baithammer » Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:56 pm

The Staterooms were to be Double Occupancy Staterooms x2, and its there for the loading / unloading crew / occasional guest.

Had to add fuel and computer /5, skipping sensors as this is a storage module with life support capability.

Should be corrected.

Image
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 6509
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby Condottiere » Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:06 pm

It's a single entity when combined.

Damage might be restricted to a single sub hull, leaving the rest in tact.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Nov 18, 2018 6:38 pm

baithammer wrote: Should be corrected.
Sorry if I was not clear:
Image

A should be 0?
B should be 2.1?
C should be MCr 3.895?
Cargo should be 31.5?

Moving all of the breakaway connectors to the main hull should make the Modules even cheaper and since we probably have more Modules than Cutters that should save us some money?


Note Thrust 9 can't be made at TL-12 without Prototype tech disadvantage. An oversized Thrust 7 drive can of course be made.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:27 pm

I would be sorely tempted to make it something like:

Command (17 Dt):
Image
Note Thrust 7 alone, some extra Power for a laser or Module.

Module (33 Dt, 30 Dt payload):
Image
Note payload 30 Dt even, some extra Power e.g. for a Laser.


Keeping the total craft at 50 Dt saves on the bridge and allows use with Imperial standard boat bays. The Module is very cheap. The Command section is less capable, but that is acceptable, the Module is the payload?
AndrewW
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4162
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:57 pm

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AndrewW » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:05 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Sun Nov 18, 2018 6:38 pm
Moving all of the breakaway connectors to the main hull should make the Modules even cheaper and since we probably have more Modules than Cutters that should save us some money?
But the bulkheads and connections will need to be on both parts.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:20 pm

AndrewW wrote:
AnotherDilbert wrote: Moving all of the breakaway connectors to the main hull should make the Modules even cheaper and since we probably have more Modules than Cutters that should save us some money?
But the bulkheads and connections will need to be on both parts.
Is that so?

The rules only say:
This whole process consumes 2% of the combined hull tonnage for the extra bulkheads and connections needed, and costs an additional MCr2 per ton consumed.
I thought the "combined hull tonnage" meant they could be placed anywhere.

Should this be understood as 2% of every section?
AndrewW
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4162
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:57 pm

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AndrewW » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:34 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:20 pm
The rules only say:
This whole process consumes 2% of the combined hull tonnage for the extra bulkheads and connections needed, and costs an additional MCr2 per ton consumed.
I thought the "combined hull tonnage" meant they could be placed anywhere.

Should this be understood as 2% of every section?
Just thinking logically, I know they don't specify that. You are free to do it whichever way you want for your games of course.
NOLATrav
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby NOLATrav » Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:38 pm

1% per section?
baithammer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby baithammer » Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:02 am

Given the multiple sections can be of different sizes and if considering the link needs to be sized to that, then proportional would be a better guess.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Classic (breakaway) Cutter

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Nov 19, 2018 1:02 pm

AndrewW wrote: Just thinking logically, I know they don't specify that.
Depends on the craft?

On Trekkie saucers I agree that it sounds reasonable to divide the connectors.

On a Cutter I'm comfortable with all the connectors in the spine/main section since the Payload Module is just a passive pod with a complete hull that could just as easily be carried in a Clamp.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests