Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:32 pm

Spaceships: Personnel Facilities

Image

The naval and lower class version of luxuries, these are only usually seen on larger cruise vessels and naval tenders. The facilities make up shops, parks and bars, all for the amusement and entertainment of visiting men and women. Each four tons of recreational facilities counts as one level of steward for the purposes of carrying middle passengers and costs MCr. 0.1.

I'm thinking sauna, hot tubs, jacuzzi, and water parks. And I'll bet that high passengers are going to be interested as well.
hiro

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby hiro » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:35 pm

Don't forget your shopping malls... I think therefore I shop...

All those weird franchises you only come into contact with when you're bored out of your skull waiting for your gate to be announced at the airport as you consider whether a 4th drink at 10am is really such a bad idea...
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:41 pm

Is it cheaper or worthwhile to shop onboard, as compared to the duty free stores in the terminal?

Though with large starships, it might make more sense if you're stuck for a week, and then plan to rush through customs at the starport.
hiro

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby hiro » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:45 pm

If your TU is a capitalist one then it will make sense that people will be trying to make money off others at every available opportunity. Stuck in jump space for a week with bugger all to do, the recreational facilities a passenger ship offers (and shopping is a recreation) will be the main selling point of why you should travel with easyJump
AndrewW
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4341
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:57 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby AndrewW » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:52 pm

Condottiere wrote:Each four tons of recreational facilities counts as one level of steward for the purposes of carrying middle passengers and costs MCr. 0.1.
Normal is per ton, not per four tons.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:59 pm

I kid you not, and I don't know if there is any errata on this.

To be fair, it's a little too vague, which is why we can imagine a hot tub where there could a discrete Tiffany's store.

As for easyJump, passage is cheaper, a bunk is allocated, and the fare includes air.
hiro

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby hiro » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:02 pm

Indeed, and the incidences of inter passenger violence significantly higher ;)

Shopping = pacifying

And you get to take more money from the buggers who are despoiling your lovely clean ship...
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:05 pm

Pacification could include game chairs or holographic play rooms.

This is really dependent on how large the ships are, since I don't see Free Traders allocating a great deal of space on it.

Except maybe the hot tub.
hiro

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby hiro » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:07 pm

And the holographic "exotic" dancers...

If passengers are to be a significant part of your income (which on the free trader circuit is really hard to do) then you'll want to be making cash off them in jump. What space/facilities you can devote to this is a good question, I agree it's space on a 200dT ship best used for speculative cargo along with your pet broker who maybe your only passenger and in your best interest to keep very happy...
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:11 pm

Cheaper and guaranteed disease free,

Unless it's a virtual experience directly beamed into your brain, than it could a be cybernetically transmitted disease. Or bug.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Jul 14, 2015 7:44 am

Spaceships: Provisions

Equipment designed to allow for underway replenishment, or the resupply of warships while in motion, is vital to the continuing function of squadrons in even the most unexplored environments. The equipment includes fuel hoses, cargo transfer tubes and other gear designed to move ordnance and freight between two ships. Each ton of UNREP equipment allows for the transfer of 20 tons of fuel, cargo or ordnance per hour and costs MCr. 0.05.

1. Remember those magazine ships that dock behind warships that for some strange reason don't have tonnage allocated for physical ordnance? The solution is UNREP.

2. The issue I see here is whether both ships need matching UNREP equipment to max out transfers.

3. It also seems like supplies transferred seem a one size fits all, whether wet or dry goods being involved, but I guess we'll just have to close an eye there.

4. Presumably, some docking is involved.

5. What I consider interesting is that it looks a very useful tool if I set up a catamaran carrier, since the smallcraft can be transferred between hulls, and since I did put a limit on hulls at two thousand tonnes, a forty tonne launch tube needs a thousand tonnes, and a fifty nine/sixty tonne tube would be around one thousand five hundred tonnes.

6. That means there wouldn't be much hangar room, so storage would have to be in one or two neighbouring hulls.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Jul 14, 2015 6:56 pm

Spaceships: Provisions

Or refuelling, in this case.

You may want to use a variant of the drop tank mounting instead of UNREP, since a two tonne mounting can suck a fifty tonne tank dry in seconds, instead a two tonne fixture being able to transfer forty tonnes of fuel in an hour.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Jul 15, 2015 9:15 pm

Starships: Planetary Express Design

Started as a joke, but once you look at it, you realize it could be a hundred tonne courier.

Aerofins, cylindrical hull, laser turret.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Plus, you get it free, as long as you deliver various packages from your patron, who might be a distant relative.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Jul 15, 2015 9:43 pm

Starships: Planetary Express Design

And found the blueprints.

Image
Image
Image
Image

Note the laundry.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Jul 16, 2015 7:51 am

Starships: Planetary Express Design

Also note the escape chute and emergency hatch, something I don't recall noticing in the cartoon, or that the crew ever mentioned or used them.

While I'm a little dubious on the value of an escape chute on a spaceship, unless it's for a fast transfer between decks to the escape pods, the emergency hatch makes sense, but I'd think that it would have to be heavily secured, and possibly hidden from detection from either outside or inside.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Jul 16, 2015 6:56 pm

Spaceships: Configurations

A small craft may have any of three configurations – standard (a wedge, cone, sphere or cylinder), streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), or distributed (made up of several sections, and incapable of entering an atmosphere or maintaining its shape under gravity). Streamlining a small craft increases the cost of the hull by 10%. A distributed small craft reduces the cost of its hull by 10%.
A standard–hull small craft may still enter atmosphere, but is very ungainly and ponderous, capable of only non–lift generating powered flight.

A ship may have any of three configurations – standard (a wedge, cone, sphere or cylinder), streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily) or distributed (made up of several sections, and incapable of entering an atmosphere or maintaining its shape under gravity). Streamlining a ship increases the cost of the hull by 10%... A distributed ship reduces the cost of its hull by 10%. It is completely non-aerodynamic and if it enters an atmosphere or strong gravity it runs the risk of falling to the surface of the planet. It cannot mount fuel scoops. A standard standard-hull ship may still enter atmosphere but is very ungainly and ponderous, capable only of making a controlled glide to the surface. Getting it back into space requires an elaborate launch setup and considerable expense. A standard-hull ship may have scoops for gathering fuel from a gas giant but the process will be much more difficult and less efficient.

Any station can have either a standard (cylinder, cone or sphere) configuration, or a distributed (multiple connected sections) 3configuration, however an NG hull using these configurations will have no gravity anywhere within its hull. A distributed station reduces the cost of its hull by 10%. It cannot mount any additional armour. A standard hull is of a very regular shape, without any serious breaks in its hull.

A capital ship may have any of several configurations.
. Streamlined
.. Needle/Wedge
... cost +20%
.. Cone
... cost +10%

. Partially streamlined
.. Standard (Cylinder)
... cost basic
.. Close Structure
... cost -10%
.. Sphere
... cost -20%

. No streamlining
.. Dispersed
... cost -50%


Seems a little inconsistent.
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1552
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby wbnc » Thu Jul 16, 2015 10:40 pm

Condottiere wrote:Spaceships: Configurations

A small craft may have any of three configurations – standard (a wedge, cone, sphere or cylinder), streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), or distributed (made up of several sections, and incapable of entering an atmosphere or maintaining its shape under gravity). Streamlining a small craft increases the cost of the hull by 10%. A distributed small craft reduces the cost of its hull by 10%.
A standard–hull small craft may still enter atmosphere, but is very ungainly and ponderous, capable of only non–lift generating powered flight.

A ship may have any of three configurations – standard (a wedge, cone, sphere or cylinder), streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily) or distributed (made up of several sections, and incapable of entering an atmosphere or maintaining its shape under gravity). Streamlining a ship increases the cost of the hull by 10%... A distributed ship reduces the cost of its hull by 10%. It is completely non-aerodynamic and if it enters an atmosphere or strong gravity it runs the risk of falling to the surface of the planet. It cannot mount fuel scoops. A standard standard-hull ship may still enter atmosphere but is very ungainly and ponderous, capable only of making a controlled glide to the surface. Getting it back into space requires an elaborate launch setup and considerable expense. A standard-hull ship may have scoops for gathering fuel from a gas giant but the process will be much more difficult and less efficient.

Any station can have either a standard (cylinder, cone or sphere) configuration, or a distributed (multiple connected sections) 3configuration, however an NG hull using these configurations will have no gravity anywhere within its hull. A distributed station reduces the cost of its hull by 10%. It cannot mount any additional armour. A standard hull is of a very regular shape, without any serious breaks in its hull.

A capital ship may have any of several configurations.
. Streamlined
.. Needle/Wedge
... cost +20%
.. Cone
... cost +10%

. Partially streamlined
.. Standard (Cylinder)
... cost basic
.. Close Structure
... cost -10%
.. Sphere
... cost -20%

. No streamlining
.. Dispersed
... cost -50%


Seems a little inconsistent.

I can see the cost for streamlining being more expensive for a capital ship. I would imagine the scale of the vessel makes it a bit tricky to reinforce the structure to handle the lift and drag forces generated by such a large object moving in atmosphere. Not being an aerospace engineer I cant say for sure, The larger the object the more surface area, winds, and friction have to work on....If anyone has any idea of how much difference the size of an object would aggravate the streamlining and structural loads on an object..PLEASE feel free to fill in the gaps.

As for the dispersed hull costs not lining up..yeah I think that should be a bit more across the board. As for it's effects on how much armor you can slap on a vessel.

I can see the argument that dispersed structures would hard to completely encase in an armored shell, that would make them basically a standard hull instead of dispersed. Armoring sections with internal bulkheads, reinforced hull/structure etc is still a plausible approach, giving the structure more hull and structure points to absorb incoming fire.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Jul 17, 2015 7:58 am

Spaceships: Configurations and Hulls

Which is where material science comes in, as spaceships are constructed using increasingly stronger metals, and more interesting stuff in Tee Five.

Dispersed structures' weakness would be at the joints, not necessarily the individual modules; though at least at two thousand tonnes or less, I prefer a catamaran configuration.

The definition of streamlining seems to alter at around two thousand tonnes.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:11 pm

Spaceships: Floors

Image

For spherical and cylindrical configurations, probably less so the others, spaceship designers might just embed the artificial gravity plates in the hull. You might wonder what's the difference between that and what we'd consider a floor, but the chances are that means the floors become curved into an endless horizon.

Image

While that looks a little tight, let's assume that the passage or even the hull is much broader.

Among the various things that you start considering, is if you set up work station and sleeping quarter wall dividers,
though you certainly would do that for areas such as engineering and the bridge.

A spine could run through the centre, which might hold the offices and the sleeping quarters, plus high speed people movers.

Whether this is a more efficient arrangement is hard to judge, though getting used to a curved floor could be disorientating. Maybe more suitable for smaller ships where space becomes a premium.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8124
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Jul 18, 2015 10:43 am

Spaceships: Armaments and Warheads

1. Mine drone has a 0.1 tonne high yield multi-warhead missile that costs MCr 0.1.

2. This seems to be a rounding error.

3. Even if you generously assume that a standard missile is one tonne divided by twelve, makes it weigh 0.0833 tonnes, while my estimate is 0.05 tonnes.

4. The warhead should be even smaller, deprived of it's own integral rocket motor.

5. While there appears to be no listed price for multi warhead missiles, they would cost more than the basic missile, Cr 1'250, yet less than a nuclear one, Cr 3'750.

6. The mine drone is probably way overpriced for what it's supposed to do, and what it actually does.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests