5 ton fighter
- Thread starter Mithras
- Start date
With only a few minutes time, and High Guard, I got the following. Something better can probably be done with a bit more effort (and especially if the high tech rules that allow for smaller equipment are used):
Size: 5 tons [hull cost MCr ?]
Gravitic Maneuver Drive: sA (2G performance?) [MCr 1, 0.5 tons]
Fusion power plant: sA [1.2 tons, MCr 3]
Cockpit: [1.5 tons, MCr 0.025]
Space for 1 (non-energy only) weapon [1 ton]
That totals up to 4.2 tons, an MCr 4.025 (not counting the hull cost). Fuel space, however, is not accounted for. Such would require (with no cabin space, I would expect the fighter to be in use for any longer then this):
1 day duration - 0.1 tons
12 hour operation - 0.05 tons
6 hour operation - 0.02 tons
No armor, no computer, Standard electronics. Its only option for a weapon seems to be a missile rack. (Its simply too small for the sG-sized power plant necessary for a small craft to mount an energy weapons. That alone is 3 tons.).
Size: 5 tons [hull cost MCr ?]
Gravitic Maneuver Drive: sA (2G performance?) [MCr 1, 0.5 tons]
Fusion power plant: sA [1.2 tons, MCr 3]
Cockpit: [1.5 tons, MCr 0.025]
Space for 1 (non-energy only) weapon [1 ton]
That totals up to 4.2 tons, an MCr 4.025 (not counting the hull cost). Fuel space, however, is not accounted for. Such would require (with no cabin space, I would expect the fighter to be in use for any longer then this):
1 day duration - 0.1 tons
12 hour operation - 0.05 tons
6 hour operation - 0.02 tons
No armor, no computer, Standard electronics. Its only option for a weapon seems to be a missile rack. (Its simply too small for the sG-sized power plant necessary for a small craft to mount an energy weapons. That alone is 3 tons.).
Mithras
Banded Mongoose
Jersa, thanks for running the maths, I couldnt fit in a sB either.
sA gives a 4G drive. Spare space gives me 8 missiles, and I guess I count 3 missiles in the missile rack too, just like in Classic Traveller??
Total cost, with a streamlined and reflec coated hull is MCr6.53.
sA gives a 4G drive. Spare space gives me 8 missiles, and I guess I count 3 missiles in the missile rack too, just like in Classic Traveller??
Total cost, with a streamlined and reflec coated hull is MCr6.53.
In theory the missiles should/would be carried externally, like fighters do today. That wouldn't technically, take up displacement, but to be fair and stay within the spirit of the rules you should account for their tonnage somehow.
I would suspect your tiny fighter was meant for very short runs, and therefore would not need fuel more than say a 36hr mission. The unfortunate pilot would have to just tough it out for the duration.
I would suspect your tiny fighter was meant for very short runs, and therefore would not need fuel more than say a 36hr mission. The unfortunate pilot would have to just tough it out for the duration.
phavoc said:
I suggest that in this case, the displacement might be considered to be the wings and pylons to hold the missiles.
If you don't mind basically designing 2 ships, you could design what amounts to a 6 ton fighter with 1 ton of externally-stored missiles. When it's empty, it has a 5 ton fighter's performance. Like an ammunition version of drop tanks.
Wil Mireu said:
Can vehicles carry starship-grade weapons? As far as I know, they can't. And with the "divide personal and vehicle weapon by 50 against starship" rules, as well as the very short range, designing a starfighter as a vehicle makes it nearly useless for space combat (not to mention starship-grade weaponry gets a x50 multiplier on damage when attacking it).
Wil Mireu said:
You can design a fighter as a spacecraft. Its just that the 5 ton limit required by the OP makes it rather hard. Thats half the size of the standard fighter.
With the standard 10 tons, you can get:
Size: 10 tons [MCr1]
Maneuver Drive: sF (12-G performance) [3 tons, MCr 6]
Power Plant: sG [3 tons, MCr 6]
24 hours fuel [0.15 tons]
Space for 1 weapon (missile rack, beam laser, or pulse laser) [1 ton]
Cockpit [1.5 tons, MCr 0.05]
Total of 8.65 tons used, at a cost of MCr 13.05. Add a layers of Titanium Steel requires 1 ton of space to give an armor rating of 2, which costs MCr 0.05. That brings us up to a total tonnage usage of 9.65 tons (0.35 tons cargo) and cost of MCr 13.1. Throw in a computer, a weapon (probably a pulse laser, with the High Guard changes to make is a 2d6 damage weapon), and possible some streamlining, and you got a fighter.
Or this one:
Size: 10 tons [MCr1]
Maneiver Drive: sA (2-G performance) [0.5 tons, MCr 1]
Power Plant: sA [1.2 tons, MCr 3]
24 hours fuel (0.1 tons)
1 hardpoint mounting a 5-ton railgun barbette with 20 rounds of ammo [total 6 tons MCr 4]
Cockpit [1.5 tons, MCr 0.05]
0.7 tons of railgun ammo magazine (14 additional rounds)
Cargo: 0 tons
Total Cost (without computer): MCr 9.05
Effectively a fighter with a spinal mount. No armor, and the railgun has a short range, but its 3d6 damage. Add streamlining (only costs MCr 0.1) for atmospheric use. Even with no armor, the scaling between ground-based weapons and starships will protect it from most non-starship weapons, so it can be put to good use in an atmosphere if its streamlined. (With the x50 multiplier, it only does 525 damage on average to vehicles and personnel...)
Depends on how you treat the system; do you think that a class sA hull means a 10 dTon hull or an up-to-10 dTon hull?
I'm generally fine if someone were to want to do a 35 dTon, or 150 dTon or whatever. You're not gaining any advantage under the rules - as the cost and drive performance jumps the full amount at each threshold, unlike for capital ships.
Looking at this problem I think I'll redo drives for small craft like I did for MRB sized ships. (% based rather than fixed.) Probably start with smallest PP as a base. These craft will be the "tanks" & "fighter aircraft" found at higher TL's. Vehicles being replaced ~ late TL 9.
