Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:14 am

Spaceships: Engineering and Propulsion

4. Station keeping - supposedly a manoeuvre drive rated at thrust zero available at technological level seven; makes absolutely no sense unlessanti gravity thruster technology was available two technological levels than the accepted introduction, or it's an early prototype.
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby wbnc » Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:35 pm

Condottiere wrote:
Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:14 am
Spaceships: Engineering and Propulsion

4. Station keeping - supposedly a manoeuvre drive rated at thrust zero available at technological level seven; makes absolutely no sense unlessanti gravity thruster technology was available two technological levels than the accepted introduction, or it's an early prototype.
In theory, it could be te earliest for of the technology. not enough power to provide any real acceleration but works sufficiently to provide the sort of micro thrust needed to keep a ship in position.
bluekieran
Mongoose
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:42 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby bluekieran » Fri Mar 24, 2017 4:30 pm

EmDrive, perhaps, rather than grav-based?
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:48 am

Unless anti gravity is derived from that technology; otherwise, you need a third row.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:47 pm

Spaceships: Accommodations, and I guess, Engineering

Image
Image

You know all that supposed excess heat? You can funnel it to the onboard green house, a more tropicalized version of the biosphere.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:58 pm

Spaceships: Cockpits and Ejections

Image

Cockpits should be configured as life pods and ejectable.

Life support in this variant remains the same, which is twenty four hours total.
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby wbnc » Thu Mar 30, 2017 9:47 pm

Condottiere wrote:
Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:58 pm
Spaceships: Cockpits and Ejections

Image

Cockpits should be configured as life pods and ejectable.

Life support in this variant remains the same, which is twenty four hours total.
makes sense for small craft such as fighters. I know they have played around with the idea a few times IRL.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:23 pm

Spaceships: Hulls and Minimum Tonnage

It's basically ten tonnes.

This gives you one firmpoint; this would be the hard limit to get a firmpoint, as any volume lower than that would be limited to non spaceship sized weaponry. This is similar to the limitations imposed on ninety nine tonne vessels, as compared to hundred tonne ones.

Spaceships below ten tonnes would be minicraft, those below one tonne would be microcraft; for our purposes, anything below one hull point in value can't really be considered, though torpedoes would be microcraft, and if you pursue this further, canisters and missiles are nanocraft.

If we assume what makes a normal spacecraft is one hull point, the default volume would be two and a half tonnes, to a minimum two and a quarter if you reinforce it.

Image

So, how large is the Mercury capsule?

Or, is designing it as part of a breakaway hull the clear loophole?
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Apr 01, 2017 7:44 am

Spaceships: Hulls and Minimum Tonnage

Are re-entry capsules and pods spaceships?

If they can survive re-entry, yes, though with supposedly rudimentary controls. How do we know that? Assault capsules, like paratroopers, need to be placed within a certain circular error of probability to be effectively deployed, and a one tonne pod is a glider.

That means, a half tonne minicraft is a spaceship, even with no hull points.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:55 pm

Spaceships: Hulls and Minimum Tonnage

Re-entry Pod

A one tonne automated capsule with a gliding surface; apparently, if you are skilled in flying, presumably with level one, you can override the computer and take direct control, though I suspect you could do that at zero or no skill, though it might not be such a great idea. Or if you assume a smaller half tonne cockpit, there might be a penalty for the more squeezed conditions.

It could be, that you can use flyer skill to pilot spacecraft, or at least, while they're within a gravity well and/or atmosphere.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Apr 04, 2017 1:38 pm

Spaceships: Hulls and Minimum Tonnage

Even hull points may not be an ultimate indicator of what's feasibly a spacecraft or not.

A ten tonne light hulled dispersely structured configuration is three point two hull points.

Let's reciprolocate that, and we end up with eight tonnes.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Apr 05, 2017 8:24 pm

Spaceships: Hulls, Engineering, and Atmospheric Operations

Heat shielding protects the ship against the heat of re–entry or other heat sources such as proximity to a star. A ship without a functioning gravitic drive attempting re–entry without heat shielding will burn up.

A streamlined ship is designed to enter a planetary atmosphere, and can function like a conventional aircraft. Pilot checks are required in high winds and other extreme weather. Partial streamlining allows a ship to skim gas giants and enter Atmosphere codes of three or less, acting in the same way as streamlined ships. In other atmospheres, the ship will be ponderous and unresponsive, reliant on its thrusters to keep it aloft. All Pilot checks will be made with Dice Modifier of minus two.

So what are spaceship gravitic drives?
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:04 pm

I don't have the current copy of Vehicles, but I do know a default air/raft costs a cool quarter of a million schmuckers.

What are the odds there is a spaceship out there with a better performance whose off the shelf cost comes in at below this price tag?

Besides a hollowed out rock, since it does need to have some atmospheric capability.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:03 pm

Maybe not, but it still looks really attractive, especially if you apply the ten percent discount.

There are some constraints through minimum tonnage that might not apply if you increase the size.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Apr 08, 2017 6:45 pm

Spaceships: Terminology

flintstone - a ten tonne planetoid that functions as a spaceship; the Vilani don't get it

rockstar - a flintsone that has been optimized for speed

car/pet/rock - widely accepted term for a flintsone
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:51 pm

Spaceships: Air Resistance and car/pet/rock

As I like pointing out, I'm not an engineer.

The issue with non-streamlined objects, or even semi ones is air resistance; so you need to figure out exactly at what speed does control problems kick in, because before that, turbulence shouldn't effect it significantly.

It's not supersonic, I think even streamlined planes have problems at eighty percent mach, though less if they can become transonic; I assume it's sound waves interference, and leaving them behind once you break the barrier.

Even propeller planes encounter problems trying to even reach that speed, mostly due to the blades, and sort of stuck at a speed band below that, with powerful enough engines.

I don't think you can get a rock to fly smoothly at Great Patriotic War speeds, though you could streamline it by just melting off all those edges; if you did that, it's sort of semi-streamlined, and I don't see any restrictions on adding aerofins to a planetoid. This would be pretty much up in the air as to feasibility.

Current attack helicopters can reach three hundred kilometres per hour.

Great war biplanes hover at around one hundred fifty to two hundred fifty kilometres.

Zeppelins should be able to hit a hundred kilometres, so that should be viable for a floating rock.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:38 pm

Spaceships: Air Resistance and car/pet/rock

Now that I think about it, air resistance lessens the higher up you go, so heading for orbit means the car/pet/rock can accelerate, and if you're floating down, you have to decrease your terminal velocity to a hundred klicks per hour at sea level.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:59 am

Spaceships: Buoyancy and car/pet/rock

If a solid ten tonne nickel iron planetoid landed on water, it would sink down to the bottom.

But if it's eighty percent hollowed out, would it?
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:18 am

Spaceships: Range and car/pet\rock

As I recall, air/raft relies on batteries, though not when they need to be recharged.

A fusion motor would give a car/pet\rock practically indefinite range at a cost of an expensive engine and an unneeded tonne of fuel.
Condottiere
Chief Mongoose
Posts: 5164
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:11 am

Spaceships: Hull, Flooring and Gravitational Axis

Image

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ9BHGX58vQ

What you have is a double decker, but the gravity plates are embedded in the central divider, so that gravitation on both decks is one eighty degrees, or completely opposite from each other.

You won't need stairs, since going to the other deck just pivots you through the doorway, where the gravitational plates are angled at a right angle to the the decks.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jeraa and 14 guests