Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Aug 30, 2021 12:10 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

90. Life support/four has an endurance of four days, requires one space per twenty persons, and costs ten kilostarbux.

91. That would require a regular maintenance cost of every four days out of thirty, fifty starbux divided by thirty times four, 6.67 starbux per four days.

92. You can always stock up in advance the requisite chemicals and filters.

93. That's about eight and one third starcentime per person per day.

94. Compared to life support/seven 1.67 starbux per person per day.

95. Fresher takes two spaces, or half a tonne, and you get a toilet, sink and shower for fifteen hundred starbux.

96. For the full service fresher, I believe the bidet can be combined with the toilet (come to think of it, you can buy an attachable one for the barebones fresher), plus tub and vanity at six spaces (one and a half tonnes) for five kilostarbux.

97. The holding tank was rather a complete surprise.

98. You can recreate any environment, including supposedly Terran Mediterranean temperate climate, at five kilostarbux per space, with long term life support/seven thrown in for free.

99. That's twenty five starbux per space per month, or five sixths of a starbuck per space per day.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Aug 30, 2021 6:28 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

100. Assuming I calculated the above correctly, the cheapest life support available is vehicular life support/four, that's 6.67 starbux per four days, with an initial investment of ten kilostarbux.

101. Assuming a turnaround for most commercial jumps at around two weeks or less, life support needs to be (re)activated only four times.

102. That's about twenty six and two thirds starbux for twenty persons over sixteen days, wholesale.

103. Then we need to feed and water them.

104. I guess stillsuit is copyrighted.

105. However, I came across the hydro reclamation suit.

106. This complete coverage bodysuit is designed to recycle all of a body’s fluids and wastes back into usable materials in order to survive much longer in a desert or other arid environment. Like its predecessors, the suit is reflectorised to reduce the heating effect of the sun. It covers the entire body, covering all orifices and inserting several ‘replenishment’ tubes. Wearing an empty suit can effectively allow the Traveller to go up to thirty days without needing water, and fifteen days without food before needing to have its internal scrubbers and injectors cleaned.

107. That's within a two week window, and as a bonus, you don't need to install freshers.

108. Sure, the suits cost ten thousand each, and need to be, eh, flushed, after two weeks.

109. Also, there doesn't seem to be any type of maintenance costs for equipment.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:01 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

110. If you think about it, in the event of a spaceshipwreck, you might want to include hydro reclamation suit in the rescue bubble.

111. Or, as it turns out to be, ball.

112. Wait a second, four hours air only?

113. I guess this must be like the life vests under your airliner seat, in case you make a water "landing".

114. A lot of air bottles seem to be capped at six hours.

115. That's a set of two tanks, which would mean one is three hours.

116. A recharge per tank would appear to cost ten starbux.

117. No wonder you can't insure spaceships, and I'd add a caveat in life insurance policies, as well.

118. Small air bottles with four hour duration can be plugged in on onboard life support sockets, at apparently no cost.

119. You could wear the hydro reclamation suit under a vacuum suit.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:33 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

120. If you can't install vehicular components, outside of weapon systems, directly into the spacecraft, you could use a vehicular chassis, install them there, and then park it somewhere in the spacecraft.

121. An unpowered vehicle is capped at ten spaces, but you could place it in the accommodations compartment, install ten short term life support/four modules, and turn them on as required.

122. Of course, being unpowered does seem alike a fly in the ointment.

123. Optionally, they could be powered by thread mill or someone pumping away on a bicycle to produce electricity.

124. Perhaps, more realistically, you exchange one of the life support modules for an external power source access, which would cost two kilostarbux for a ground vehicle.

125. It's going to take up five tonnes of volume, with ten hull points, and cost ninety three kilostarbux.

126. As long as you keep feeding it coins every four days, that's one hundred and eighty persons, perfect for transporting a company of soldiers, or some rather tightfisted immigrants.

127. An unpowered boat isn't space capped, so you could transport a twenty thousand man division.

128. That requires one thousand spaces of life support/four modules, plus five percent external power, which should be rounded up to fifty three spaces.

129. One thousand fifty three spaces is one hundred five thousand, three hundred starbux, plus ten megastarbux, plus one hundred six kilostarbux; 20'211'300.00 starbux, 101,056.50 starbux per month; 5.05plus starbux per soldier per month life support.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Aug 31, 2021 1:25 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

130. You can vacuum proof your vehicle for ten kilobux per space.

131. That's about twenty kilobux per tonne, but actually forty kilobux per spacecraft tonne.

132. Which in my mind is a sheer waste of money, as you can get the real thing for about the same amount, if not cheaper.

133. Since we don't have cloaking technology, you could slather the spacecraft's hull with camouflage.

134. While I think there are diminishing returns for increasingly larger tonnages, you might get away with painting over a Scout.

135. Four hundred spaces is a hundred tonnes, and basic/one would be ten kilostarbux per coat.

136. Improved/four forty kilostarbux per coat.

137. Advanced/twelve you're a chameleon at four megastarbux.

138. If you could apply vehicular stealth to spacecraft, it would be a lot cheaper.

139. Or perhaps, like camouflage, it might be easier if it's not moving and you can cover it with whatever you consider a stealth net.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:28 pm

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

140. You can't reconcile spacecraft and vehicular power plants.

141. At minimum ten spaces, that's a two and a half tonne volume, leaving aside the presumable integral fuel tank.

142. We can construct power plants at minimum one tonne, which would be four spaces.

143. All spacecraft power plants have the capability to supply all spacecraft systems with the requisite power requirement.

144. That includes the fission reactor and the diesel engine.

145. Arguably, that would not include solar panelling, though that easily can be shunted through batteries and energy laundered.

146. Speaking of which, batteries are sort of mentioned in Vehicles, but no details are given.

147. It might be more practical to install spacecraft turret, spacecraft turret weapon system, and spacecraft energy source as one unit.

148. By my calculations, that would be four spaces for the turret, four spaces for the weapon system, and four spaces for the spacecraft power plant.

149. I quite willing concede that the fission reactor probably would need extra shielding.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:47 am

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

150. Minimum one tonne diesel/seven, budget increased size, four power points; 187.5 kilostarbux.

151. One tonne fuel tank.

152. Single cockpit, one and half tonnes; basic sensors; computer/five, technological level seven, thirty kilostarbux.

153. Three and a half tonnes.

154. Non gravitated streamlined hull; thirty kilostarbux per tonne, three hundred kilostarbux for ten tonnes or forty spaces.

155. Manoeuvre drive/ten, factor three, budgetted, orbital range, twenty five percent energy efficiency; three hundred kilogrammes, six hundred kilostarbux.

156. Two power points basic for ten tonnes; factor two and two thirds acceleration.

157. One power point basic for ten tonnes; factor four acceleration potential.

158. Three point eight tonnes, six point two tonnes cargo.

159. 1'117'500.00 starbux.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:58 am

Spaceships: Shipboard Systems and Coopting Dirtside Vehicles

160. Minimum one tonne diesel/seven, budget increased size, four power points; 187.5 kilostarbux.

161. One tonne fuel tank; ten percent hull volume.

162. Single cockpit, one and half tonnes; basic sensors; computer/five, technological level seven, thirty kilostarbux.

163. Three and a half tonnes.

164. Non gravitated streamlined hull; thirty kilostarbux per tonne, three hundred kilostarbux for ten tonnes or forty spaces.

155. Reactionary rockets/seven, factor three, six hundred kilogrammes, one hundred twenty kilostarbux; seven a half percent hull volume per hour.

156. Two power points basic for ten tonnes.

157. One power point basic for ten tonnes.

158. Four point one tonnes, five point nine tonnes cargo.

159. 637'500.00 starbux.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Sep 01, 2021 6:29 pm

Image

Starwarships: Best Star Fighters in Star Wars by Class /Role

We take a look at the best star ships in each star fighter category.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXOeeHUEe8U



1. Problem with a single weapon slot is that you usually can't carry a balanced weapons load.

2. I'm not so sure that mix and matching works, since you can snipe at a distance, whether with energy weapons or missiles.

3. Light interceptor or point defence fighter, probably not worth it, more a demonstration of intent; they can always get lucky or chase freighters.

4. I like space rocks, space rocks rock; they're also amazingly cheap.

5. Heavy fighter or light bomber.

6. Going by the Japanese experience, attrition kills, and lack of armour bites you in the end.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:37 am

Spaceships: Life Support

1. It seems kind of odd, when something you must have read at some time, probably several times, and is connected to a subject you have an interest in, becomes consigned to oblivion.

2. A spacecraft or self-contained, sealed structure with power can usually sustain life support for one person per stateroom for one month comfortably, and for six months at a stretch (number of staterooms time five thousand person/hours). Without power, this drops to two weeks at most. Various shelters will list the amount of air and life support available if they differ.

3. That's not a given, since barracks or brigs don't mention it, you have to assume they revert to default.

4. Five thousand person hours falls a tad short of seven months, so I'll assume it's comfortable for the first month, and really Himalayan once you reach month seven.

5. Staterooms, as with barracks, can have multiple occupancy.

6. After the first month, are you still paying for life support, or only the direct and overhead costs for the power plant?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Sep 05, 2021 11:13 am

Starships: Exogenous Cargo

1. External cargo mount - I tried to carefully reread this, and you could interpret this in two ways.

2. The external framework is permanent, and costs you a kilostarbux per tonne of cargo it was designed for.

3. The external framework is temporary, which is why you use explosive bolts for separation, and you pay a kilostarbux per tonne when stacking; maybe the framework is recyclable.

4. Tow cable - size of the towing mechanism is specific to the hull it's an integral part of, takes up one percent of the hull volume and costs five kilostarbux per tonne it occupies.

5. You'd want as small a towshipper as possible, so basically a tugship with very powerful engines.

6. Jump net - unless the cargo extends beyond the jump bubble, pointless.

7. However, if you're towing a largish spacecraft, as contrasted to being clamped together, viable.

8. Otherwise, the interplanetary net is three times cheaper.

9. As long as you can keep the interplanetary net within the jump bubble, the contents only effect the jump insofar how much volume they consume, which is added on to the total tonnage that has to be transitted.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Sep 05, 2021 11:42 am

Image

Starwarships: 10 Best Ship Boarding Sequences in Star Wars

There's nothing more action packed and dangerous than trying to board and take over an enemy ship in space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RtvLtxQ4Uw



1. Resisted arrest.

2. Manual release.

3. Which is why you have vacuum proof bulkheads.

4. Depends on whether telekinesis grabbing hold of target destination, or creating thrust.

5. Skill, timing and luck.

6. Magnetic, possibly gravitational, clamps.

7. Open hangars.

8. Breaching pods.

9. Change the locks?

10. Quarantine?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Sep 05, 2021 11:50 am

Image

Starwarships: TOP 10 Most Famous STAR DESTROYERS in Star Wars History (Legends)

On today's Star Wars Lore video, we look at the ten most famous Imperial Star Destroyers in Star Wars Legends history, keeping to an in-universe perspective. All that and more on today's Star Wars Legends Lore video!

Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
0:26 - Thanks Vite Ramen!
1:24 - Rules
2:24 - #10
3:20 - #9
4:29 - #8
5:13 - #7
5:55- #6
6:18 - #5
7:25 - #4
9:05 - #3
9:44 - #2
10:30 - #1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl3fugxcPks



1. Trying out coleslaw and potato soup; tends to neutralize the bitterness; also, cheap.

2. Having really large numbers of of the same class, or subclasses, or half sisters, you'd have economies of scale, whether in construction, maintenance, training, refit, or repair.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Sep 08, 2021 3:12 pm

Image

Inspiration: The Last Starfighter: Gunstar Analysis

Taking a look at and analysing the amazing Gunstar from the 1984 film, The Last Starfighter.

0:00
0:13 Overview
1:05 Weaponry
2:00 Arcade Cabinet
2:36 Death Blossom
3:44 Conclusion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvX6vaTlVKs



1. Hands on throttle and stick

2. Missiles don't need power points

3. Batteries, and/or emergency power

4. Tail lander


5. Battlestar Galactica, one of it's derivative games, used the term to describe a starwarship primarily armed with guns, compared to the supposdely more balanced battlestar concept, that was a hybrid carrier
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Sep 09, 2021 1:29 pm

Image

Inspiration: This Aircraft Carrier Could Go Underwater... IMPOSSIBLE Submarine Aircraft Carrier - An 1 + An 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1DUxM-FtZ8



1. More likely drones launched from missile or torpedo tubes.

2. For spaceships, flight decks on hull is attractive, but somewhat complex to design.

3. Problem with cranes is probably the time penalty for launch and recovery.

4. Ramps is an interesting alternative to elevators.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Sep 09, 2021 9:31 pm

Image

Spaceships: Accommodations and Starfleet Life-Support

Not every species in Star Trek comes from the same biome or even atmosphere. So how do these people work together in the same environment? Well, thankfully Starfleet and the Federation try to acclimatise as many different species as possible with the Standard M class environment.

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



1. Redundancy and backups.

2. One backup, two in rotation.

3. Every fifteen metres.

4. Gravitons.

5. Recycling.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Sep 09, 2021 9:38 pm

Image

Starwarships: Battlestar Galactica: Valkyrie Class Battlestar | Ship Breakdown

Spacedock breaks down the venerable Valkyrie Class Battlestars of the Colonial Fleet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt7oLIXcwUA



1. Reliable, efficient, cheaper.

2. Agility and adaptability in combat.

3. Cheap to repair and maintain.

4. Large enough to absorb refits.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Sep 11, 2021 12:22 pm

Shipshape: Mustering Out Benefits

1. Presumably, a ten megastarbux smallcraft is forty years old.

2. If you could arrange for a customized variant, you might be able to push volume to ninety nine tonnes.

3. Modular cutter a tad above ten megastarbux, so should qualify.

4. You could mortgage your fully owned cutter to buy a fifteen megastarbux ten tonne jump drive, and come up with the difference.

5. Then either get hold of a second (or more) fifty tonne hull, and install the jump drive, complete with bridge, fuel tanks, and power plant.

6. You could salvage the jump drive from a scrap yard, and refurbish it.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:13 pm

Shipshape: Mustering Out Benefits

7. A working century old jump drive shouldn't cost more than fifty percent of default new cost.

8. Out of ten possible quirks, it could be well maintained at half cost, has disturbing psionic echoes, and/or double maintenance cost.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 9970
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Sep 13, 2021 1:13 pm

Image

Inspiration: Best Ship Ramming Sequences in Star Wars

We take a look at the best uses of ship ramming in Star Wars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMRbuHi8NWk



1. Breakaway hull splits before contact, instead of abandoning ship; like a wasp sting.

2. Banzai!

3. That's why you have pickets.

4. Selective collision.

5. Optionally, nudging.

7. Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests