400 ton J-2 design

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
sjmiller
Weasel
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 4:25 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby sjmiller » Mon Apr 22, 2013 6:39 pm

I imagine this is just me nit-picking, but I believe your spreadsheet rounds in such a way that while the totals might equal 400 tons in the background, on the sheet I can only count 399 tons.
Stephen J. Miller
Ancient Gamer and Curmudgeon
Traveller junkie since 1979
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby F33D » Mon Apr 22, 2013 6:57 pm

sjmiller wrote:I imagine this is just me nit-picking, but I believe your spreadsheet rounds in such a way that while the totals might equal 400 tons in the background, on the sheet I can only count 399 tons.

I forgot to assign 1 ton for the ship's locker
coldwar
Stoat
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:19 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby coldwar » Mon Apr 22, 2013 7:52 pm

TL 10 400 tons Streamlined MCr13.2 (8 structure and Hull points)
TL 10 Crystaliron Armour MCr2.4, -20 (4 Rating)

Tl 11 J drive D MCr32, -25 Jump-2
TL 10 M Dive D MCr12, -7 2-G
TL 10 Power Plant D MCr24, -13

J Fuel, -80 One jump
PP fuel, -8 2 weeks endurance

Bridge MCr2, -20
Model/2 MCr .112
Basic Civilian MCr .035, -1 (-2DM)

5 Staterooms MCr2.5, -20
20 TL10 Low Berths MCr .75, -10
Fuel Processors MCr .2 -4 (80 tons refined in 24 hours)
Cargo -188
4 tons left over for turrets to be installed

Programs
Library
Jump Control/2 .14
Manoeuvre

Cost MCr89.337
10% MCr8.9337
Standardised MCr80.4033
Maintenance MCr .006185
Life Support MCr .01

Benefits:
Slightly cheaper.
1G more of acceleration.
Slightly bigger cargo hold.
More low berths.
Streamlined, comes with scoops standard.
Fuel processors.

Drawbacks:
1 less Stateroom.
2 weeks less endurance.
Slightly less armour.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby F33D » Mon Apr 22, 2013 9:58 pm

Looks good. However, your TL 10 PP needs to be 16.25 tons per HG pg. 53.

We both made an error on our hull & structure points due to using < TL 12 hulls. (HG pg. 52)
coldwar
Stoat
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:19 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby coldwar » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:26 pm

I ignored it, assuming you was only considering using the first bit, just the 5% discount. If the rest was being used though, then both ships manoeuvre drives would also cost double but only have 75% of their stated normal tonnage.
DickTurpin
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby DickTurpin » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:39 pm

You don't get both the higher TL benefits and the discount for using older tech. If you want the latest improvments you are using a current TL product, not an old tech item manufactured using higher tech manufacturing methods.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby F33D » Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:04 am

coldwar wrote:If the rest was being used though, then both ships manoeuvre drives would also cost double but only have 75% of their stated normal tonnage.
Nope. You can buy a TL 15 drive (as you state) or, take a discount on a lower TL drive built at TL 15 world with same tonnage as the lower TL one. (see HG)
coldwar
Stoat
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:19 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby coldwar » Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:15 am

So following that, the hulls would remain the same by that logic if you get what I mean.
F33D
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1645
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: 400 ton J-2 design

Postby F33D » Tue Apr 23, 2013 1:12 am

coldwar wrote:So following that, the hulls would remain the same by that logic if you get what I mean.
No, they are weaker (in our ships for example) because they use less robust materials...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests