50 ton Explorer vehicle (wip)

[wbnc]

Trying my hand at vehcles and working with new textures and techniques...so I started off with a biggin.I haven't worked up the stats yet but this bruiser is a monster. the idea is a mobile long endurance base of operations for a small survey team operating in areas with a decent degree of surface stability. Its not gonna climb mountains, or outrun anything faster than a Yugo but it's got plenty of leg room.

It could be used for a mobile base of operations for a small group if they were playing a planet side scenario or a mobile command center for a merc group. You'd need a fairly beefy transport to get it to the ground but once it got there, unless someone starts firing off antiship rounds, yer good to go.

 

[Epicenter]

Let me start off by saying I like the vehicle - the way it looks and so on. I like that you're doing something I feel Traveller is in dire need of - artwork, in this case computer renders.

Just some thoughts, though: IMO, I don't really think a 50-ton explorer vehicle is a good idea for a variety of reasons. tl;dr, I'd say keep the design but make the vehicle a lot smaller, something the volume of that front cab would still be pretty gargantuan but be closer to a useful size.

* It's big and its heavy. It's difficult to transport (it takes up a large volume of space). This alone is going to make it less attractive. It's not going to be able to go many places because it is so large - places that you could go to with a smaller vehicle. The high weight of the vehicle would also prevent it from being very useful, especially considering it's an explorer vehicle and is unlikely to be in areas where there are nice roads that could support such a weight -- in many ways, due to the large tires (tyres) the ground pressure will be less, but it's still a large concern.

* It's likely expensive. You're also sort of committed to buying one - a kind of "eggs in one basket" type thing. If this is a design for an OTU-type universe, there's anti-gravity, so a big concern of a wheeled vehicles would be economy (unless grav vehicles are cheap, in which case wheeled transport is likely as extinct as the Dodo, so we'll assume grav vehicles are expensive). A large, capable vehicle like this would be a lot of money, money that a group that couldn't afford a grav vehicle wouldn't have - they'd look at it, dream about it, and talk about how great it'd be to have it, but they wouldn't buy it.

* "Eggs in one basket." Touching on that eggs in one basket thing, when you're exploring it's always safer to have multiple redundancy. A convoy of smaller vehicles means the loss of a single vehicle isn't going to leave you stranded; groups of vehicles can be sent to do different errands, one vehicle can pull another out of a bog or something, and so on. Smaller vehicles are on a more human scale - it can be field serviced (which is probably a large concern for anyone using wheeled vehicles in an age of grav vehicles - they want a simple, rugged vehicle that can have quite a bit of work done on it right in the field). Back to the question of expense; the loss of a single vehicle is also bearable for the funding organization. The loss of a large, capable vehicle is likely disastrous.

 

[Condottiere]

Either environment based factors, and/or economic ones.

Once you hit thirty tonnes, you may prefer tracks; ground pressure.

Once you have a fusion reactor at technological level eight, power to weight ratio may appear to be less of an issue, nor refueling.

 

[wbnc]

Let me start off by saying I like the vehicle - the way it looks and so on. I like that you're doing something I feel Traveller is in dire need of - artwork, in this case computer renders.

Just some thoughts, though: IMO, I don't really think a 50-ton explorer vehicle is a good idea for a variety of reasons. tl;dr, I'd say keep the design but make the vehicle a lot smaller, something the volume of that front cab would still be pretty gargantuan but be closer to a useful size.

* It's big and its heavy. It's difficult to transport (it takes up a large volume of space). This alone is going to make it less attractive. It's not going to be able to go many places because it is so large - places that you could go to with a smaller vehicle. The high weight of the vehicle would also prevent it from being very useful, especially considering it's an explorer vehicle and is unlikely to be in areas where there are nice roads that could support such a weight -- in many ways, due to the large tires (tyres) the ground pressure will be less, but it's still a large concern.

* It's likely expensive. You're also sort of committed to buying one - a kind of "eggs in one basket" type thing. If this is a design for an OTU-type universe, there's anti-gravity, so a big concern of a wheeled vehicles would be economy (unless grav vehicles are cheap, in which case wheeled transport is likely as extinct as the Dodo, so we'll assume grav vehicles are expensive). A large, capable vehicle like this would be a lot of money, money that a group that couldn't afford a grav vehicle wouldn't have - they'd look at it, dream about it, and talk about how great it'd be to have it, but they wouldn't buy it.

* "Eggs in one basket." Touching on that eggs in one basket thing, when you're exploring it's always safer to have multiple redundancy. A convoy of smaller vehicles means the loss of a single vehicle isn't going to leave you stranded; groups of vehicles can be sent to do different errands, one vehicle can pull another out of a bog or something, and so on. Smaller vehicles are on a more human scale - it can be field serviced (which is probably a large concern for anyone using wheeled vehicles in an age of grav vehicles - they want a simple, rugged vehicle that can have quite a bit of work done on it right in the field). Back to the question of expense; the loss of a single vehicle is also bearable for the funding organization. The loss of a large, capable vehicle is likely disastrous.

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback.
.I did a number of models of ground vehicles a while back but applying my improved skills to the project. This is the biggest vehicle I could envision being remotely successful outside of one-off special projects. I'll do a down scaled little brother for this one soon.

The problems you mentioned are valid concerns. It would definitely not be for most users. A bit like the Terex Titan and similar heavy earth moving vehicles it might appeal to a fairly narrow band of users. I had envisioned it as a bit of a rare sight. Something you would not see often but when you did it would be impressive as hell. It would be useful for things you can't do with smaller vehicles such as carrying around full command centers, mining drones. and processors. fabrication plants etc...or acting as a mobile Hub for a large survey/expedition

s far as ground loading goes the Terex Titans are able to operate with hundreds of tons of ore in the cargo bed. thats over one million pounds ( 500,000 Kg) gross weight. So they can handle these wouldn't be anywhere near that weight since they are not carrying around half a million pounds of ore. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDAQPHok-DE
and they operated in strip mines and other areas with pretty..ummm lousy cough cough road conditions...trust me been there drove over that.

it would be the sort of thing you deploy if you plan on being in an area (say a continent or remote colony)for an extended period and probably have no plans for relocating it afterward. the scenario I have in my head was based around a number of them being reclaimed after a mining company moved out and abandoned them planetside when local unrest made the company very unpopular and they had to cut and run. The new owners are using them as the core of their mobile community including a few set up as mobile power plants/refineries.

 

[phavoc]

An exploration vehicle of that size would work well in a hostile environment, for example world with very high winds that smaller vehicles would find too dangerous to work in. Or maybe exploring planets with hazardous environments where the bulkier vehicle could be carrying tougher/special hulls that ignore the hazards (corrosive, hot, etc). A vehicle like this might be required to work on say the hellish surface of Venus, or the sun-side of Mercury.

I don't think it would make too good of a merc vehicle though. The cost/upkeep would tie up a lot of capital for a organization small enough to fit inside, plus since it's not a true armored vehicle/tank, it would be too susceptible to damage, and then their investment is gone. It's better suited for science I think than military.

Keep up the artwork please!

 

[wbnc]

An exploration vehicle of that size would work well in a hostile environment, for example world with very high winds that smaller vehicles would find too dangerous to work in. Or maybe exploring planets with hazardous environments where the bulkier vehicle could be carrying tougher/special hulls that ignore the hazards (corrosive, hot, etc). A vehicle like this might be required to work on say the hellish surface of Venus, or the sun-side of Mercury.

I don't think it would make too good of a merc vehicle though. The cost/upkeep would tie up a lot of capital for a organization small enough to fit inside, plus since it's not a true armored vehicle/tank, it would be too susceptible to damage, and then their investment is gone. It's better suited for science I think than military.

Keep up the artwork please!

Sure I can do that...... Got nothing else to do tonight

I worked with the original model and made up a smaller explorer a bit larger than yer standard ATV.

and an older pic of the stock standard ATV...dern I need to rework that ...Eeeshhhh ....one thing about learning new tricks...ya have to go back and rework yer old stuff.

 

[Nobby-W]

[ . . . ]
It could be used for a mobile base of operations for a small group
[ . . . ]

For a vehicle, it might be good to think about the payload - what do you need to carry?

• If you want to carry a mobile base, how big and mobile does it need to be - command vehicles can generally fit a command centre with C3I facilities into the back of a modified APC or truck.
  
• If you're not in a war zone, do you really need your base in the back of an ATV - could you pack it into tents or something deployable like an advanced base or shipping container. Is there even a civilian market for this kind of thing of do you have to DIY with a shelter and buying the kit yourself?
  
• If you just need somewhere to sleep then you could do that in a RV or the back of a truck, or tents.
  
• If you just need something deployable than the shelters listed in Book 3 would do that.

On the other hand, if your payload is really big then you need a really big vehicle - for example, the big soviet mobile launcher trucks. If you want an idea of how big folks make offroad vehicles in practice then the Mercedes Unimog family, Hagglunds ATVs, Denel G6 SPH or the big MAN or Oshkosh 8x8's might be a better guide as to practical sizes for off-road vehicles.

One application for a big ATV might be a mobile shelter for a vacuum world or some other hostile environment. As you don't really have the option of stepping outside for a leak, this really does have to carry a complete environment if you want it to accommodate a team for any length of time. Another variant on this might be a cutter module fitted with some kind of mobile shelter.

 

[Condottiere]

The Deserts of Kharak have a lot of vehicle designs ripe for ripping off, including land carriers.

Lower technology ground vehicles are pretty much tied to circumstances experienced or expected, and the range would at most likely be continental.

 

[wbnc]

[ . . . ]
It could be used for a mobile base of operations for a small group
[ . . . ]

For a vehicle, it might be good to think about the payload - what do you need to carry?

• If you want to carry a mobile base, how big and mobile does it need to be - command vehicles can generally fit a command centre with C3I facilities into the back of a modified APC or truck.
  
• If you're not in a war zone, do you really need your base in the back of an ATV - could you pack it into tents or something deployable like an advanced base or shipping container. Is there even a civilian market for this kind of thing of do you have to DIY with a shelter and buying the kit yourself?
  
• If you just need somewhere to sleep then you could do that in a RV or the back of a truck, or tents.
  
• If you just need something deployable than the shelters listed in Book 3 would do that.

On the other hand, if your payload is really big then you need a really big vehicle - for example, the big soviet mobile launcher trucks. If you want an idea of how big folks make offroad vehicles in practice then the Mercedes Unimog family, Hagglunds ATVs, Denel G6 SPH or the big MAN or Oshkosh 8x8's might be a better guide as to practical sizes for off-road vehicles.

One application for a big ATV might be a mobile shelter for a vacuum world or some other hostile environment. As you don't really have the option of stepping outside for a leak, this really does have to carry a complete environment if you want it to accommodate a team for any length of time. Another variant on this might be a cutter module fitted with some kind of mobile shelter.

You thought that out pretty well. I'd agree ith most points without hesitation. In many cases, the actually deciding factor might be the local conditions or the mission parameters. or simply what's available.Several mining companies I worked security for had offices they could pick up and move built int shipping containers. The engineers had an office built into a lrge RV they could drive from site to site.One company has an RV refitted as an emergency response vehicle with an incident response office and supply lockers for their rescue team in back.I am happy to say that as thoroughly "wasted" money since its set in the parking lot for years and never been used for more than a training classroom...if they need it they have it...but they really try not to need it.


the biggest advantage of a self-contained self-mobile ATV or explorer...time, and mobility. You can drive across a continent and not stop to step outside and ummm enjoy the scenery...yeah that's what yer doing.

Even if the command center can be fitted into the back of an ATV/APC. Being able to fit the command center, expedition leaders quarters, office, his assistants office, and a lab/workshop/medical center into a heavily armored environmentally sealed vehicle might be an attractive option. Since its slower than the imperial senate passing a paperwork reduction act being able to move constantly with everything it needs to operate within arms reach once again might be attractive. And being able to snicker at a martian dust storm or take hurricane force winds without flipping over...

"Weather says were looking at a force dust storm.....slow it down Frank try not to run over anything we need, And tell the rest of the convoy to dig in we'll proceed on and meet them on the other side.."

some applications would be much better served being fully mobile and self-contained. say if you a 20 ton construction deck, a fusion reactor, and a couple of staterooms into one vehicle it becomes a factory on wheels. it can drive directly to a site, manufacture parts on site, and bring along its own work crew. it ca even work on the go, keeping up with the main body of a convoy as it rebuilds that scouter someone drove into a ravine.

The Deserts of Kharak have a lot of vehicle designs ripe for ripping off, including land carriers.

Lower technology ground vehicles are pretty much tied to circumstances experienced or expected, and the range would at most likely be continental.

Its call an Homage....rip off is such a prejudicial phrase they have some interesting designs but a few of them are way out of the scope of "vehicle" more like altitude restricted starship scale vessels..


I try to do a model a day, so I have plenty of backlogs to rework and gt into a bit more presentable form...such as

 

[Infojunky]

I try to do a model a day, so I have plenty of backlogs to rework and gt into a bit more presentable form...such as

This image puts a last work with the ATV and AFV in a better context.

Some Automotive limits, pretty much the widest car, truck Etc. etc... is limited to 3 meters. With that the heaviest armored vehicles are not much wider maxing out at 4 meters, also note this limit applies to heavy equipment as well (at least in their transport configuration).

Now, in a related vein, Haul Trucks and the related heavy equipment vary between the large automotive limits 3 to 4 meters and 9 meters. Now vehicles in this size class often require their own roads, but that is really controlled by the loads they are required to carry. Though others are equipped and geared for off road travel.

With all that consider core infrastructure, if your world is built up to support a road network, as contragravity is introduced it will most likely conform to existing infrastructure.

Also note a lot of the vehicles as constructed in the Various MgT books are horribly oversized.

 

[wbnc]

This image puts a last work with the ATV and AFV in a better context.

Some Automotive limits, pretty much the widest car, truck Etc. etc... is limited to 3 meters. With that the heaviest armored vehicles are not much wider maxing out at 4 meters, also note this limit applies to heavy equipment as well (at least in their transport configuration).

Now, in a related vein, Haul Trucks and the related heavy equipment vary between the large automotive limits 3 to 4 meters and 9 meters. Now vehicles in this size class often require their own roads, but that is really controlled by the loads they are required to carry. Though others are equipped and geared for off road travel.

With all that consider core infrastructure, if your world is built up to support a road network, as contragravity is introduced it will most likely conform to existing infrastructure.

Also note a lot of the vehicles as constructed in the Various MgT books are horribly oversized.

I generally treat the vehicles in the core books as one not intended for regular service on built-up world. For those Vans trucks, and aircars would be the order of the day. I imagine driving an ATV through the middle of any city would be a peculiar sight. Around a spaceport or headed out of town to the bush you might see them. Sort of like seeing a convoy of APCs on flatbeds going down the highway it happens its not a sign of anything special but you notice it when yu see it.

Generally the vehicles in the books re slightly oversized. You really do not realize how oversized they are until you start building a virtual object that you can pull apart and measure with some precision..and set a human sized figure next to it..as I did in the group shot...

The air raft is a good example. Its listed at 4 tons. which is the size of a one car garage or Bobtail tractor trailer ( one without the cargo trailer attached) Yu can fit a dozen people in a 4 DT space with a recliner and cooler each.... Heck, I have set in the back of an M113 APC ( which has a volume of about 2 tons) with a dozen people...it wasn't comfortable but we fit.

An air rafts tonnage is TWICE that of an existing APC but it's shown as if it's the size of slightly oversized Kublewagen...

An M-1 abrams MBT with the barrel in place would take up 6 displacement tons measured from tip of the barrel, to rear end, and across it's widest point laterally. Traveller ATV is around 10 displacement tons . assuming some of that volume is dead space to allow for clearance when loading. I am also assuming the tonnage of a vehicle is a box formed by measuring its widest point, longest point and tallest point not the actual volume of the vehicle since at least some of that volume is going to be empty air and voids created by the shape and configuration of the vehicle....an AFV is bigger than an M-1 Abrams, almost the size of a railroad box car.


Sample real world total volume for Existing vehicles
M-113_________________________________2 Dtons ( etremely space efficient its almost a square with very little deadspace inside its footprint.)
M1 Abrams (not including barrel length)_____5 Dtons. ( due to hull shape thereis room inside the vehices footprint for a spare engine and several tons of fuel and ammo)
Brtish MkI (WWI Tank)___________________22 Dtons ( also extremely space efficeint the vehicle has little deadspace insde its footprint.)
Terex Titan Dump truck_________________78 Dtons (mosly empty space for dump box and ground clearance but it can carry 350 short tons of ore in a single load)

 

[Condottiere]

 

[wbnc]

yeah, Willys Jeep broken down for shipping... Less than .5 DT...with wheels installed it's still less than half a ton displacement. a G-bike is listed as taking up 1.5 tons. Oddly the shipping tonnage of a grav floater... a one man Gravity vehicle capable of orbital ascent is listed as 0.5 tons

The ground car has a Shipping volume of 2.5 DT...the physical volume of an M-113 APC.

 

[Infojunky]

One of the changes I applied to Vehicles 5-6 was the "Shipping Volume" was actually the Garage/Hanger Volume. A lot of things made a lot more sense after that...

 

[wbnc]

One of the changes I applied to Vehicles 5-6 was the "Shipping Volume" was actually the Garage/Hanger Volume. A lot of things made a lot more sense after that...[/quote
that helps some but half a ton of space for basically a grav powered chair? or 1.5 tons for a Large motorcycle..that's a roomy garage..and then add 10% or double that for docking space or a full hanger on a Starship.

 

[Infojunky]

that helps some but half a ton of space for basically a grav powered chair? or 1.5 tons for a Large motorcycle..that's a roomy garage..and then add 10% or double that for docking space or a full hanger on a Starship.

I didn't say it was a perfect solution, I said it helped. It also helped that there was a lot of wiggle room in the system. Other bits I discarded were the minimum spaces limit on fusion reactors, I figured the 10%space cost was sufficient, if pushed it might be a nice way to wire in a tech level effect other than the base vehicle chart. I also selectively threw out the Light vs Heavy limitations as there a bunch of armored vehicles in previous editions that are smaller than 5 dTons.

 

[wbnc]

that helps some but half a ton of space for basically a grav powered chair? or 1.5 tons for a Large motorcycle..that's a roomy garage..and then add 10% or double that for docking space or a full hanger on a Starship.

I didn't say it was a perfect solution, I said it helped. It also helped that there was a lot of wiggle room in the system. Other bits I discarded were the minimum spaces limit on fusion reactors, I figured the 10%space cost was sufficient, if pushed it might be a nice way to wire in a tech level effect other than the base vehicle chart. I also selectively threw out the Light vs Heavy limitations as there a bunch of armored vehicles in previous editions that are smaller than 5 dTons.

Don't get me wrong I like the idea I m not a perfectionist.I am always happy to have" works well enough"..if "perfection" would require a metric butt ton of paperwork and revisions.

I really haven't ad a chance to concentrate on vehicle design rules yet. I have had a full plate with starships writing, and teaching myself to model things...I may have lots of free time but not that much. I still want to see my GF once in a while and occasionally have to take a trip to the facilities and eat.

 

[Condottiere]

Volume does not equal weight.

Also one reason the ten percent provision for spacecraft hangar space is wrong.

 

[steve98052]

When you get into the neighborhood of 50 dtons, I start to think about the Modular Cutter. A very ground useful vehicle in that size range would be a vehicle to carry Modular Cutter modules while planetside.

So how about something like this: a giant truck with docking clamps on both ends. To load a cutter module:

1. The truck folds its docking clamps down flat, folds support cradles vertical, and folds outriggers out the side for extra stability and weight support.
2. The cutter lands in the support cradles.
3. The truck activates powered rollers to slide the cutter forward or backward until the module is aligned with its docking clamps.
4. The cutter unclamps the module, releasing it into the truck's cradles.
5. The cutter flies upward and away.
6. The truck folds its docking clamps up to mate with the ends of the module.
7. The truck retracts the outriggers, and is ready to drive.

I can imagine at least three types of undercarriage. The most obvious type is ordinary wheels, which would only be practical on a paved surface (or heavy duty gravel track like the NASA rocket crawler roads). Another obvious type is a tread structure, which would probably be several sets of tracks for redundancy. A third possibility would be rocker carriage wheels, which would spread the load onto a larger surface area and operate on somewhat rugged terrain while retaining a lot of the speed and maintenance advantages of wheels.

 

[Condottiere]

There are some unknown unknowns.

How much does a docking clamp weigh once it's on a planet with standard gravity?