Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Nov 15, 2020 3:08 pm

Inspiration: Space Engineers - Missile Destroyer 5k Range

Type.S101 Missile Destroyer
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaQ94VaQYMY



Image


1. One assumes large torpedo bay.

2. Top down or down the throat or up the skirt, the actual concept is being able to target the most vulnerable and/or unprotected area of the spaceship.

3. I guess should do some research into what constitute a decoy in Traveller.

4. Makes sense, as any ship two kay tonnes and above has got to fear torpedoes.

5. Commerce raiders would launch highly destructive torpedoes against largish freighters, who are unlikely to have the speed to evade it, the defensive systems to shoot it down, nor the mass to be able to absorb the damage.

6. Seems to be a case why you keep freighters below two thousand tonnes.

7. Of course, at this point, you have fighter bombers to strafe them, or the guns roll out to put a couple of holes in them, because it would be cheaper than missiles.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Nov 16, 2020 6:51 pm

Inspiration: Revelation Assault Carrier - Space Engineers

Okay, it's the Revelation, so there is not much new stuff to talk about. Except there is!

You see, this is not just a retrofitted version of the ship. This is a completely new build
that uses the old exterior design. The inside and layout has changed completely.

But it keeps all the stuff you liked from the old ship.

To control the ship, you will need to use the remote control block either from the seat on
the bridge or from the seat in the CORE room.

The engines are still tiltable and can still be operated while moving. They are a new
configuration that gives more power at the same space requirement. That meant that I had
a lot more mass to play with when building the ship.
As you might expect, that lead to the ship being considerably heavier, than the old one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-QjMEC ... XA&index=2


Image

1. Holographic doors?

2. Landing gear, wheels.

3. Escape pods; Titanic lifeboats.

4. Shielding; a fleet carrier probably attracts an inordinate amount of ordnance.

5. Assault carrier probably needs more armour.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:40 pm

Inspiration: Space Engineers - Hatrius Hybrid Battleship

The main weaponry includes 26 rocket launchers (6 front, 20 broadside : 10 starboard, 10 portside), 18 missile turrets massed on the heavily armored top and 1 long range gravity cannon in the bow.

The battleship is able to execute long range operations, due to its good freight and hydrogen capacity, its 11 jump drives and its small hangar.
Also able to fly in almost all environments from space to alien planet, but with a preference for low gravity ones due to its weight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoOktOfSHyY



Image

1. First off, you probably could use reaction rockets, especially distributed, to hover in atmosphere, but that's pretty much a waste of fuel.

2. Mass driver bay.

3. External stairs, probably helps with maintenance.

4. I think there's an internal remote laser gun, an unpleasant surprise for boarders.

5. I'm a little sceptical on the placement for the hangars, but note that the hull is bulged in the centre, specifically to accommodate them.

6. Less battleship, more light bombardment or missile cruiser.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:27 pm

Inspiration: Space Engineers TC505 Makara Class Pleasure Cruise-liner

HELLO ESTEEMED CUSTOMER!

ON BEHALF OF TOUNKIESPACE CORPORATION, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SECONDHAND PURCHASE OF A BRAND NEW RETROFIT INTERPLANETARY CIVILIAN TRANSPORT VESSEL!

WARNING! PLEASE NOTE THAT WE HAVE DETECTED THAT THE SPACEFRAME HAS BEEN HEAVILY MODIFIED FROM FACTORY STANDARD, AND THUS YOUR WARRANTY HAS BEEN SEVERELY LIMITED AND/OR VOIDED!

PLEASE CONTINUE TO BUY TOUNKIECORP PRODUCTS, SUCH AS OUR FINE LINE OF COMPACT FORKLIFTS!

- Automated Sales Agent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbeb_hADttY



Image

1. Aesthetics failure.

2. Docking commonality.

3. Parachutes?

4. Sensors could require hardpoints.

5. Atmospheric floating, not flight.

6. Food court.

7. Spa.

8. Disability access?

9. Maintenance lift.

10. Coffee vending machine.

11. Frozen watch, easily accessible.

12. Close structure configuration.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:14 pm

Inspiration: Inside ILM: Creating the Razor Crest

Join us as we journey behind the scenes of the Emmy™ Award-winning visual effects behind the first season of The Mandalorian. We’ll pull back the curtain on one of our favorite bounty hunter’s ship, the infamous Razor Crest and look at the distinctive former military ship from its initial concept design in Doug Chiang’s Lucasfilm art department through to ILM artists building the ship in the digital realm and as a practical miniature for filming. We’ll also look at the parallel development of the custom motion control camera system created by ILM Visual Effects Supervisor, John Knoll to allow for the first motion control shots to film at ILM in 15 years. We hope you enjoy this look ‘Inside ILM’.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YuaIwVbEZo



Image


Problem is, smallcraft aren't large enough by themselves for stable transitions, and you're still stuck with a ten tonne jump drive.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Nov 21, 2020 4:07 am

Communications: Sound-powered telephone


Modern emergency telephone powered by sound alone
A sound-powered telephone is a communication device that allows users to talk to each other with the use of a handset, similar to a conventional telephone, but without the use of external power. This technology has been used since at least 1944[1] for both routine and emergency communication on ships to allow communication between key locations on a vessel if power is unavailable.[2] A sound-powered phone circuit can have two or more stations on the same circuit. The circuit is always live, thus a user begins speaking rather than dialing another station. Sound-powered telephones are not normally connected to a telephone exchange.

Operation
The microphone transducer converts sound pressure from a user's voice into an electric current, which is then converted back to sound by a transducer at the receiver nodes. The most significant distinction between ordinary telephones and sound-powered telephones is in the operation of the microphone. Since the microphones used in most telephones are designed to modulate a supplied electric current they cannot be used in sound-powered transducers. Most sound-powered telephones use a dynamic microphone. A common approach to transducer design is the balanced armature design because of its efficiency. The number of simultaneous listeners is limited because there is no amplification of the signal.

A sound-powered telephone circuit can be as simple as two handsets connected together with a pair of wires, which is defined as the "talk" portion of the circuit. Talk circuits can be realized over a pair of wires that are 50 km (30 miles) long. More complex circuits include magnetos, selector switches and bells to allow one user to select and call another, which is defined as the "calling" portion of the circuit. The voice communication ("talk") circuit is completely separate from the "call" circuit, allowing communication to take place without external power.

Usage
Sound-powered telephones are widely used on ships. A typical example on a U.S. Navy ship is the "JL" circuit which is used by the lookouts to report visual contacts to the pilot house and the Combat Information Center (CIC). In this case there would be five stations on the circuit (stern lookout, port lookout, starboard lookout, pilot house and CIC).

U.S. Coast Guard Regulations require this emergency communication capability in most vessels today and dictate where phones should be located. A dial telephone system with a battery backup will not meet the USCG Regulations as they currently exist.

Other uses for sound-powered telephone technology today include emergency communications systems for high-rise buildings, draw bridges, ski lifts, and temporary locations where reliable communication is necessary. These types of systems allow for two or more parties to be able to talk to one another in areas that experience loss-of-power or when radio communication is hampered by RF signal losses and/or limitations.

Ski lifts use sound-powered phones extensively. Because there are only two handsets (rarely three, where there is a mid station), sound-powered phones are ideal. They are used to confirm actions of the lift with the other operator, and abnormal operation of the lift machinery.

Many different types of equipment have attempted to replace sound-powered telephones on ships. Due to the rugged, reliable and power-free nature of this equipment, it remains in use on all US military vessels, commercial vessels and work boats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound-powered_telephone



Hardened?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:28 pm

Spaceships: Hulls, Registration, Crewing, and Why no US Flags on SuperYachts?

Since the 1920s there have not been any Yachts over 300GT registered in the US. Why is this? Also why are most SuperYachts registered in a British commonwealth country, such as the most popular, Cayman Islands? All will be disclosed in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adfTYg7Zpc4



Image


Well, flagging is probably more of an issue in the Confederation, since the preference is for a political entity which would bestow some form of advantage, whether in costs, regulations, or treatment by other jurisdictions.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Nov 25, 2020 12:23 am

Spaceships: Hulls and Celera 500L | Egg with wings or a revolution in aviation

The Celera 500L is a single-engine piston aircraft that is being built by Otto Aviation and is undergoing prototype testing. The aircraft is very unusual: its fuselage has a simple bullet-like shape, the wing is straight and very thin, and the propeller is located in the tail behind the empennage. All these unusual design solutions pursue special goals of the creators, among which are outstanding flight and economic characteristics of the aircraft. So outstanding that, if successful, the Celera can turn our understanding of air travel upside down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E38cc-4 ... kyshipsEng



Image


1. Egg or teardrop?

2. Flying submarine.

3. The Celera 500L is designed to have 59% less drag than conventional aircraft of a similar size. In laminar flow, the air flows smoothly across a surface and the streamlines move parallel to each other. A laminar-flow boundary layer is very thin - possibly only .02 inches thick. As you move up and away from a surface, the airflow's speed smoothly increases in a laminar flow boundary layer until it reaches free-stream speed. A laminar-flow boundary layer minimizes skin-friction drag, so engineers often optimize long, flat surfaces (like your wings) to preserve laminar flow. Any disturbances along the surface, even microscopic ones, can turn a laminar flow layer turbulent.

4. Eddies in the space-time continuum.

5. Gravitic motors don't create turbulence, as far as I know.

6. Glass cockpit.

7. Optimum for streamlined smallcraft connectors.

8. Or sufficient anti gravity buoyancy to neutralize local gravity, plus or minus, with secondary propulsion unit, whether jet or propeller; though this option probably more for grav vehicles, with an air/raft, the equivalent of an outboard motor.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Nov 25, 2020 7:50 pm

Spaceships: Hulls and Airbus Launches New Concept Aircraft

Airbus has launched a new concept aircraft titled 'ZEROe'. The world's first zero emission aircraft for the future. Today I take a look at the jet!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIBOhzS ... 7sAviation



Image


1. Hydrogen fueled.

2. Two conventional cylinders, and a lifting body.

3. You have to wonder if you can incorporate a propeller in a futuristic hull form, comparative to available gravitic motors, the price difference wouldn't be worth it; unless speed and altitude weren't really an issue, and it would be more for a more leisurely speed like sight seeing, or manoeuvring to keep a floating object anchored.

5. Hybrid ram/scramjet compromise; and as usual, likely gravitic motors are relatively cheaper.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Nov 26, 2020 10:07 pm

Spaceships: Armament and Missile Barbettes

1. On reflection, you could take two firmpoints and install a missile barbette for smallcrafts.

2. The benefit is that for five tonnes you have five launchers, and if only eight reloads, instead of twenty five for a hardpointed one.

3. However, this certainly would beat two missile launchers that by default could either be turret mounted for two tonnes, or for free fixedly mounted.

4. Next up would be a fifty tonne small bay, that has twelve launchers and one hundred forty four reloads, but would require an actual hardpoint, only available to hundred tonne plus hulls.

5. More or less equaled in three thirty five tonne smallcraft with fifteen launchers, and twenty four reloads, with another ten tonnes allocated for the remaining one hundred twenty reloads.

6. That's a total of twenty five tonnes, with an estimated three tonnes per barbette to be considered waste space.

7. Thus, this would be a fighter bomber.

8. Cost's the same at twelve megabux.

9. Small missiles bays have an energy requirement of five points, while missile barbettes have none.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:23 pm

Spaceships: Armament and Torpedo Barbettes

1. Something seemed off, so I had a closer look at available torpedo based weapon systems.

2. Basically speaking, a five tonne barbette had the same rate of fire as a fifty tonne small bay, being three each.

3. However, there seem to be two descriptive words involved with ordnance based weapon systems.

4. Hold, and launch.

5. With barbettes, only holding is mentioned, whether two for a firmpointed one, or three for a hard pointed one.

6. To be fair, there's about four tonnes of wasted space where launch cradles can easily fit in.

7. You can infer that rate of fire could be one, two or three torpedoes per turn.

8. However, a rate of fire of three per round would make a small torpedo bay redundant.

9. Thirty reloads equals ten tonnes, plus a barbette, totals fifteen tonnes.

10. Also, you can swing that barbette around, and deliver Parthian shots.

11. Interestingly enough, they cost the same and need the same amount of power.

12. However, barbettes are available two technological levels earlier.

13. How does this impact the Harrier fixedly mounted double launch cradles: going by the language and illustration, they can be launched in the same round.

14. In conclusion, torpedo barbette rate of fire is unclear.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8486
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Nov 28, 2020 1:14 pm

Planetary Defence: Hulls and Deep Site Meson Weapon Systems

1. I'm kinda inclined to believe that it's a triple hulled sphere.

2. The two extra hulls are required to move the meson gun on two axis required to aim at any particular target.

3. In theory, you could just hollow out a cave and use the hamster cage mechanism, again multiplied by two, but the fundamental rule in High Guard to prevent multiple instances of spinal mounts in the same hull assumes that spinal mounts have to be anchored in the hull, to compensate for recoil.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Galadrion and 34 guests