Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:18 pm

Starships: Financing and Have you heard the tragedy of the Haslab Razor Crest?

In this video I discuss the destruction of the Razor Crest in the latest episode of the Mandalorian TV show (season 2, episode 6) and how this effects Hasbro's latest crowd-funding toy project.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_0LkIl ... AnalogToys



Image


Image


Characters who are skilled in social media communications and one assumes have a high social standing, could have a go at crowdfunding their starship.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:37 pm

Starships: Hulls and Attaching Stuff to Planetoids

1. Since planetoids have become more interesting to me due to the rather low cost per drilled tonne, plus artificial gravity and presuming inertial compensation, I've considered the implications of alterations to the hull.

2. While it's never mentioned, breakaway option seems somewhat unlikely, since the extensive linkups would need to penetrate the twenty percent hull that provides a major part of it's structural integrity, though you could make that case with armour in general.

3. You could probably attach drop tanks, but separation during transition should increase the chances of damage to the tanks, since the hull by design due to it's rugged exterior wouldn't allow a smooth one.

4. Exception would be you took a larger than necessary planetoid, and laser polished the exterior to a more streamlined configuration.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:47 pm

Spaceships: Artificial Gravity, Inertial Compensation, and Kitten Left In A Fighter Jet Cockpit After Takeoff

The history of aviation is tightly related to that dream of man reaching the skies and beyond. But man was not always alone in these pursuits...

During the Great War, airplanes were used for the first time as reconnaissance and support assets. During the interwar years, aircraft science grew exponentially.

The once clunky and small WWI planes were replaced by all-metal fuselages and designs that could reach incredible speeds and altitudes in mere seconds.

At the end of World War 2, man's growing ambition of one day reaching beyond the sky and to the moon, however, found an obstacle. It was called gravity.

In a race to obtain first place in the Space Age, Americans and Russians began developing aircraft that could perform "zero gravity" maneuvers at great altitudes.

Scientists did not fully comprehend the notion and concept of weightlessness. It was believed that zero gravity could harm a person's body in unexpected ways.

To investigate potential damage to human bodies, NASA and the US Air Force conducted a series of tests with animals in fighters and other aircraft to simulate weightlessness. One such experiment involved analyzing the reactions of kittens in space…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01jkvrp ... arkFootage



Image


That should penalize Aslan in micro gravity environments.


Image
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:36 pm

Starwarships: Lo(w)rbital Combat Ship and LCS Independence - the ship from the future

The Independece is a littoral combat ship class developed by General Dynamics and Austal for the United States Navy.

The design of the large trimaran makes this ship very unusual, greatly expands its capabilities, capacity and speed. Coupled with a wide scale of weapons, artillery and missiles, the ship is capable of fully performing the tasks of protecting littoral zones and fighting small enemy ships.

Initially, within the framework of the US NAVY tender, companies produced 2 ships of this class. After adopting them and confirming their prospects, the fleet ordered an additional batch of ships, of which, by 2020, 11 units are already in service.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=330nm4W ... el=Horizon



Image


1. Pretty sure I can get three hulls with breakaways.

2. Probably does need a mix of weapon systems, to deal with various threats.

3. Modularity can be resolved with modular hull and/or podular add ons.

4. Seems missile heavy.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Dec 13, 2020 10:12 am

Spaceships: Engineering and (Im)pulsethrust Option


Image


1. If the panels are fitted to a ship without a power plant, then assume the (non–existent) power plant is sized to the ship’s basic systems and a Thrust one manoeuvre drive.

Basically, thirty percent of hull tonnage in power points.


2. A ship equipped with solar panels consumes power plant fuel at one quarter the normal rate so long as it is only engaged in minimal manoeuvring and does not fire any weapons.

In which case, donkey engine and/or batteries.


3. Minimal manoeuvring does not include long periods at full thrust, so solar power alone is useless for most commercial and military vessels.

Which is where pulsing comes in: the manoeuvre drive is activated on alternate six minute turns. Six minutes is enough for the crew and passengers to prepare themselves for the next thrust. Full thrust is rather ambiguous, but let's say between what's mentioned as default [Thrust one manoeuvre drive], and not wanting to rip off the solar panelling by excessive acceleration, whatever that would be.


4. By overloading the manoeuvre drive, the engineer can lend the ship extra speed and manoeuvrability.

Assuming two gee acceleration doesn't rip off the solar panelling.


5. A favourite of engineers on action vids, the power plant can be overstressed on a temporary basis to provide the ship with more Power points.

It's virtual, but let's assume you can squeeze more juice out of sunlight, or more likely, the chemical or ionic interaction within the battery cells.


6. For starships, solar panelling is likely to be starved of sunlight while transitting, so you will need a donkey engine that can provide the minimum power for life support.


7. Jump drives can be kickstarted by diverting excess power generated by the solar panelling to batteries.


8. A primarily solar panelled powered spaceship is likely to remain in orbit; planetside landing is will need at least sufficient battery capacity and/or a donkey engine.


9. Low flight speed within atmosphere during daytime can be powered by the solar panelling.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Dec 14, 2020 7:34 pm

Spaceships: Engineering and (Im)pulsethrust Option

10. Minimal manoeuvring does not include long periods at full thrust, so solar power alone is useless for most commercial and military vessels.

On the other hand, if the issue is that the energy production of the solar panelling petered out due to the inherent power draw of the manoeuvre drive, than a second set of solar panelling can be installed, and activated alternatively to feed the manoeuvre drive.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Dec 14, 2020 7:40 pm

Inspiration: Warhammer 40,000: Darktide - Official Gameplay Trailer

From the developers of the best-selling and award-winning franchise Vermintide, Warhammer 40,000: Darktide is a visceral 4-player co-op action game set in hive Tertium. Fight together with your friends against hordes of enemies in this new Warhammer: 40,000 experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-UifdRoC8I



Image


Image

Looks like melee is back on the menu, boys!
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Dec 15, 2020 10:12 pm

Starships: Engineering and One Shot Jump Drives

1. Seven one shots cost the same as the same sized default jump drive, so that by my calculations, in the most optimal of circumstances, that's twenty one transitions, which could easily take place in a year.

2. So a one shot would statistically only be used once every ten years.

3. Ironically, you would want a one shot that can move the greatest distance, which means a lot of factors that would make it attractive, low technological base and cheap price, are compromised.

4. Once performance is above jump three, you'e going to need some means to refuel.

5. You could get around that with drop tanks.

6. I assume that the fourth jump is at a penalty of minus sixteen; it would be an expensive form of death sentence, or a great new extreme sport.

7. I don't really see it as that feasible for a Devil's Island or St. Helena's one way exile ride, unless it's over a ten or twelve parsec rift.

8. The only feasible employment I see for it, besides a long storage lifeboat, is when the chances that the jump drive will be seriously damaged, or that it's unlikely to be used again, as during a kamikaze mission.

9. Or possibly a bombing raid, though I suspect casualties would have to be above ten percent to make it worthwhile: Thousand Bombers Over Dingir.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Dec 15, 2020 10:22 pm

Spaceships: Tactics and Cold War Soviet Submarine Tactics

Explanation of the 4 most common Soviet Submarine tactics NATO observed during the Cold War. Ice Picking, Bottom Sitting, Laying on liquid sand (soil), and Station Keeping. Featuring Leroy's cousin, Ivan!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX9vwK4y3Ug



Image

1. Asteroid picking

2. Dirtside sitting

3. Floating on the atmosphere

4. Tidal locked?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:27 pm

Spaceships: Engineering and Fission Reactors


Fission: A fission plant requires radioactive elements as fuel. Fission drives only produce half as much power as a fusion drive of the same type – when calculating required power plant rating, work out the required rating for a fusion drive and then find the rating for a drive that produces twice as much power. For example, a 400 ton ship with manoeuvre and jump ratings of B requires a fusion plant with rating B. Cross-referencing B and 400 tons on the Performance by Hull Volume table gives ‘1’. A fission plant for that ship would have to be rating D or higher, as that is the minimum rating to get performance level ‘2’.

Fission drive fuel costs 1,000,000 Cr. per ton.

Power plants use the following table to determine how many tons of fuel they consume with a year of operation:

FISSION PLANT FUEL
Power Plant Power Plant A B C D E F G H J K L M N P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Tons of fuel per year 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48

Mongoose First Core



Fission power plants: Fission power plants: Page 109 of the core rule book (first printing) is now amended. Fission plants provide the same power as a fusion power plant and can provide any power performance level. However, they are twice the size and price of a fusion power plant. They are available at TL7.

POWER PLANT TABLE
Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6
% of displacement 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5
Chemical power plants are 40% larger.
Fission power plants are 100% larger.
TL 8 to 10 fusion plants are 25% larger.
TL 15+ fusion plants are 25% smaller but cost twice as much.
Antimatter plants are the same size and are only available from TL 17.

Cost per ton is as follows:
Chemical power plants MCr 1.25
Fission power plants MCr 1
TL8–10 Fusion MCr 2
TL11–14 Fusion MCr 2.5
TL15 Fusion MCr 5

Mongoose First High Guard


Power Plant
Type Power per Ton Cost per Ton
Fission (TL6) 8 MCr0.4
Chemical (TL7) 5 MCr0.25
Fusion (TL8) 10 MCr0.5
Fusion (TL12) 15 MCr1
Fusion (TL15) 20 MCr2
Antimatter (TL20) 100 MCr10

Mongoose Second High Guard



And that's all she wrote, as far as I can tell.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Dec 18, 2020 12:24 am

Spaceships: Engineering and Fission Reactors

Of course, there's the Vehicular design process, which if I understand it correctly takes a cut of the space allocation, and for all practical purposes, doesn't need refuelling.

I don't think you can distill that down to apply it to a spacecraft template.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Dec 18, 2020 12:27 am

Inspiration: The Expanse – Season 5 Official Trailer

The future of The Belt has begun as Marco Inaros wages Armageddon against the Inners for a lifetime of oppression and injustice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caLji74 ... PrimeVideo



Image
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Dec 18, 2020 11:49 pm

Spaceships: Triple Deck Planes - Where Are They? And What Are They Like?

Triple-decked aircraft - why don't airlines fly them, what would they be like if they existed, and why we will never see their like again! Let us jump into this never-built video!

I do have to stress that yes, there are technically triple-decked aircraft flying today in the form of the Boeing 747 and Airbus A380. As in, they have three levels, two for passengers and one for cargo on the lower deck.

What we are talking about is aircraft with three levels for passengers throughout the aircraft and then in addition, a cargo deck. Truly a gargantuan aircraft monstrosity.

This aircraft design would be able to accommodate well over 1000 passengers in three different classes, with the very best in first class having their own private suites for long haul flights. Other features may include rentable bunks like a Japanese pod hotel, an onboard spa for passengers looking to relax, a business center to keep working while in flight, bars and dining establishments for airlines to earn additional revenue, and even gyms.

Although as we have said in our future aircraft cabin concept video, the idea of a gym onboard is perhaps not the best idea with access to showers (and plus, would airlines really want to carry the extra weight of dumbbells.

although... knowing airlines they would more likely try to cram as many passengers onboard as possible to earn as much money as possible. Let me know in the comments if you would fly on a high-capacity version of the plane.

This plane would be long haul, making sense only for flights across the world from Asia to Europe and North America between major hubs like Singapore, Dubai, London, and New York. These planes carry so many passengers that it would require a high-density route - lighter routes would make no financial sense and domestic short-haul routes, even New York to LA, would be impossible.

So you likely are halfway through this video and wondering, hey nick, this is all well and good and I'm enjoying the animations but surely this doesn't exist.

The first is the AWWA Sky Whale - now this plane is totally bonkers and relies on technology that's beyond even the latest James Cameron. But we can admire the artist's vision for an aircraft that has an evolution beyond what we currently have today.

The plane is a different take of what is known as the Breguet Range equation - how to fly as efficiently as possible.

They are propulsive efficiency (how efficient are your engines?); aerodynamic efficiency (is lift maximized and drag minimized?); and structural efficiency (how much payload can you carry?). Airlines naturally want the best engine and aerodynamic efficiency but then want to carry as much cargo, be it post or passengers, as possible.

Second, we have the more conservative DECK III concept that can be built today with current technology. Seemly a marriage between a Boeing 747, Airbus A380 and an Antonov An-225 Mriya.

But what about if we brought the concept to the current market using the aircraft we have today - like the Boeing 747 and Airbus A380?

After all, that cargo deck could be re-purposed for passengers and has been done so in the past. For example, The Lockheed Martin L-1011 had an option to turn the forward cargo deck into a boarding lounge with its own features stairway.

Another example of using the cargo area for passenger services was the Airbus A340. This plane had not only bathrooms on the lower level of the plane but also a galley with room for several passengers.

There are some issues.

1st - flexibility. As mentioned at the start of this video, these aircraft require substantial routes to operate on a profit, such as flying halfway across the world. Outside of these routes, they will not earn a dime for an airline despite costing well over half a billion to buy and more to operate over its lifetime.

Speaking of service, airports will have trouble getting access to the plane in order to stock food and fuel, with no ground cars able to reach that high. Airports will also need bigger and longer runways to land the planes, impossible for airports like Heathrow and JFK which already have space problems - and significant redesigns for taxiways and parking ramps.

Lastly, being a passenger onboard you could expect long boarding and disembarking times, a serious evacuation risk if you were involved in an accident and don't even consider getting a meal while its hot.

Before we go, a special mention of the Boeing 314 had three decks and was the mainstay for travel around the world for many years. But we will do a video on this incredible aircraft and where it flew in another video - so you will just have subscribe and tune in next time for my next video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncE_4Dm6Bd4



Image
Image

Basically, infrastructure, one of the reasons we never got to hundred thousand tonne battleships, and why the Royal Navy sort of wanted to stay in the thirty five kay range, and force everyone else there as well.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Dec 20, 2020 4:18 am

Starships: Interstellar Navigation

Navigating the vast ocean of the galaxy to reach distant stars will be no easy matter, but future spaceships may find many new difficulties finding their way throughout space, and also throughout time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8u-rtH ... saacArthur



Image


1. You'll precipitate before you hit serious trouble.

2. Jumping transmit data faster, and with less noise.

3. And if time is less of a factor, you can do that one parsec at a time.

4. I guess there can be times when that astronavigation degree comes in useful.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Dec 21, 2020 12:51 am

Starships: Cockpitting and Sensor Stations

1. The extension to a cockpit costs a tonne and ten thousand starbux.

2. A sensor station is a tonne and worth a semimegastarbux.

3. The advantage to both is that they're one off costs, compared to that of a bridge, which is calculated on a default semimegastarbux per hundred tonnes.

4. Which sort of implies that tying any cockpit extension to a sensor like a station, shouldn't in theory have the same advantages or access.

5. Possibly you could overcome this with a computer programme.

6. At a minimum, additional cockpit extensions would have access and control of aerospace flight controls and onboard sensor suites.

7. It does leave open how this effects a station dedicated to astrogation, engineering, weapon systems, aerospace operations, and whatever else takes place onboard that I haven't thought of.

8. A barebones starship control system only needs flight controls, sensors, engineering, life support, security and astrogation.

9. That might pay off big for large freighters, since these would be one off costs, rather than per hundred tonnes.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Dec 21, 2020 12:58 am

Inspiration: The Complete Cyberpunk 2077 History & Lore! (Part 1!)

All Cyberpunk 2077 Lore, History & Events condensed into a two part series exploring everything from Night City and it's people, to Cyberware, Drugs, Bars, Public Transport, Trauma Team, Megacorps, the Corporate Wars, Combat Zones, Agriculture and Food in the US, Law Enforcement, Gangs, The Collapse, and other events and moments in the 2077 timeline that spawned in Cyberpunk 2013 and 2020.

Welcome to the Complete History & Lore of Cyberpunk 2077!

Timestamps:
0:00 - Intro & Housekeeping
1:13 - Samurai & Johnny Silverhand -
2:45 - Cyberpunk TTRPG Roots (2013, 2020)
4:34 - An Intro To Night City
7:40 - The People Of Night City
8:15 - Trauma Team
12:28 - Cyberware & Its History
17:00 - Drugs & Its History
21:30 - Bars In Night City
23:53 - Public Transport In NC
25:25 - Megacorps
27:20 - Corporate Wars
29:44 - Combat Zones
32:50 - The Rockerboy Movement
35:42 - Agriculture & Food In The US
38:41 - The Weapons Of 2020
42:52 - Gangs & Gang Types
48:10 - Obscure Cyberweapons
50:23 - Law Enforcement & The NCPD
53:53 - The Collapse Part 1
57:54 - The Net

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


The Complete Cyberpunk 2077 History & Lore! (Part 2!)

Timestamps:
0:00 - Housekeeping, Check Out Part 1
1:04 - Vehicles & CHOOH2
2:27 - Up & Coming Megacorporations
4:49 - Nomads, Nomad Nations & Their History
12:20 - Bioware
15:13 - The Eurodollar & Methods Of Payment
17:43 - Alt Cunningham & The Soulkiller
20:26 - The 4th Corporate War (Arasaka VS Militech)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Kr49KE9t9w



Image

If the Imperium was seriously cyberpunked, it would explain the lack of resources devoted to interstellar Travelling.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Dec 22, 2020 3:12 pm

Starships: Star Wars: KSE Firespray-31 (Slave I) | Ship Breakdown

Spacedock breaks down the iconic pursuit craft of Jango and Boba Fett, the KSE Firespray (Slave I).

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


Image


I doubt the ship has enough hardpoints, or firmpoints.

Looks like an elephant's head.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:26 pm

Inspiration: A Plane Without Wings: The Story of The C.450 Coléoptère

Throughout the 1950s, aircraft designers around the world began developing a unique aircraft configuration, called a tail-sitter. Unlike conventional airplanes, tail sitting planes rested on their tails and used engine power alone to lift off the ground before transitioning to vertical flight, and returning to land vertically once again on their tail. The configuration, although technically challenging to develop, would allow aircraft to operate without runways, fundamentally changing how and where air forces could use their aircraft.

In the early 1950s French aerospace firm SNECMA (Société nationale d'études et de construction de moteurs d'aviation) began developing wingless test rigs to prove the viability of the tail sitting concept. At the time, American firms were also developing tail sitting prototypes of their own, But SNECMA would take it a step further by developing a tail sitting aircraft with a highly unconventional annular (cylindrical) wing. The cylindrical wing promised greater efficiency over a conventional wing by eliminating wing-tip vortices. It would also be more compact, further reducing the space needed for vertical take-off and landings. French designers also theorised that a cylindrical wing could eventually be engineered to function as a ramjet engine, propelling the aircraft to supersonic speeds.

The C.450 Coleoptere was constructed in 1958, with tethered flight testing beginning in early 1959. By May, the unconventional plane had achieved its first successful unassisted hover, even reaching altitudes of 800 meters. Despite early successes during flight tests, flaws soon emerged in the aircraft’s design. The Coleoptere proved extremely difficult to pilot. An innovative pilot seat could swivel 90 degrees, but pilots still struggled to judge the aircraft’s distance from the ground while landing. Without a conventional wing to provide resistance, the Coleoptere also had a tendency to slowly spin on its axis.

On July 25, 1959, the Coleoptere performed it’s 9th test flight. This time, the pilot was to transition the aircraft from vertical to horizontal flight, a challenging procedure that would mark a huge milestone for the program. The Coleoptere lifted off successfully, but during its transition, it suddenly became too inclined and slow-moving to maintain altitude. The aircraft started tumbling back to earth as the pilot struggled to regain control, barely managing to eject at the very last minute. The Coleoptere was destroyed.

A second prototype of the Coleoptere would never be built. By the 1960’s it was clear that the tail sitting configuration was a dead-end. It was simply too much of a compromise when it came to payload and range, and far too difficult to pilot. It was clear that vectoring thrust, allowing the aircraft to remain horizontal, was a more practical and safer solution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unz6mfj ... el=Mustard



Image

1. Probably solved with fly by wire.

2. Seems more likely mated with reactionary rockets.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Fri Dec 25, 2020 1:22 am

Image
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 8619
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Dec 26, 2020 1:15 am

Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests