Air/Raft

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

OK, this has been an issue in Traveller since the LBB days. The air/raft is an open-topped vehicle.

Yes, that is what Traveller has always said. But come on. It should at least have a soft-top.

Perhaps in the description section, you can say that a very common option is to have a removable top, which provides protection from rain etc. (not a sealed enviromental unit) for xxx credits more.

PLEASE put that in the core book.

Look around, how many civilian vehicles today have NO top? None, even a Jeep has a soft-top...

 

[-Daniel-]

Look around, how many civilian vehicles today have NO top? None, even a Jeep has a soft-top...

Come to California and you would be shocked how many you would see. My favorite are top chopped Broncos and Pick Ups. :wink:

But serious, I do agree, I have always House Ruled in a "lock into place top" was included, not a sealed environment top as you point out. It just makes sense.

 

[Jak Nazryth]

Per my post in general comments, I think that some (or most) open vehicles (open top) should grant partial cover from most attacks unless they are coming from above. Doors and sidewalls should give partial cover of -1 or -2 and can be treated as cover (10 points of additional armor) per the bonus armor chart on Beta page 74. Only if the attacker misses because of the partial cover does the extra "door/sidewall" armor get added. The passengers can still get damaged by weapon fire punching through the air/raft doors.

 

[MongooseMatt]

They will certainly have that option in the Vehicle Handbook (and we'll have a sealed Air/Raft too), but let's keep things simple for Core.

As for gaining cover, I see where you are coming from, but we need to look at averages and what effect they will really have - for example, if you are below an Air/Raft, surely all occupants are hidden?

The thing is, do we really want rules covering common sense areas like that or are we happy leaving it to refs? Open, incidentally, will only apply to vehicles where the occupants are really exposed. An WWII Half Track, for example, may not be considered Open as it has substantial protection for passengers.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Matt is correct. I went back and looked at the description of the Air/Raft on page 138.

In the description is says that it is an open topped vehicle. BUT, it does NOT have the OPEN VEHICLE trait like the G/Bike (ok call it a speeder...).

So, anyone in an Air/Raft would get the 2 points of armour from the side protection, even though their heads are poking above the door top.

 

[Liodre]

This seems like the place to ask (instead of making a new thread).

Maybe being brand new to looking a Traveller (the beta is my first go at it) I don't have the background but, looking through the vehicle section just now, is there a reason that the air/raft and G/bike cost a quarter million credits? The grav system?

It seems that the ubiquity of those vehicles would be much less at that cost, much less a biker subculture based around the G/bike. Why (for the average person) risk Cr275,000 in a gang conflict or stunt race?

If I missed something please let me know, but thought I'd ask.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

A very old question and argument. I suspect you are right and the grav system is driving the cost, but we haven't seen the new vehicle design rules to be sure.

Air/Rafts have ALWAYS been very expensive for how popular the descriptive text says they are all the way back to the first books in 1977.

 

[phavoc]

Yes, prices will need to come down for some things, as I'm not sure the "average" family could afford a new air raft. If we use Cr 1 = $4 USD, that makes an air raft the equivalent of a $1,600,000 automobile. And that's outside the reach of MOST people.... unless you have a very long payoff period. It's still out of reach of many, but the "average" person might be able to afford it with say a 30-40yr payoff period. Assuming the vehicles in the future are built to high standards, it becomes more possible. Still kinda hard, but definitely doable. And it sets things up for an active used market, which would be pretty cheap after a decade or two off the lot.

 

[-Daniel-]

Yes, prices will need to come down for some things, as I'm not sure the "average" family could afford a new air raft. If we use Cr 1 = $4 USD, that makes an air raft the equivalent of a $1,600,000 automobile. And that's outside the reach of MOST people.... unless you have a very long payoff period. It's still out of reach of many, but the "average" person might be able to afford it with say a 30-40yr payoff period. Assuming the vehicles in the future are built to high standards, it becomes more possible. Still kinda hard, but definitely doable. And it sets things up for an active used market, which would be pretty cheap after a decade or two off the lot.

I have never thought of the AirRaft as the SciFi equivalent of a family car. And I have never thought of them as $1.6 million level vehicle either. Interesting when we push the reality envelope what comes out. :|

 

[phavoc]

There have been the aircars, i.e. Buick and Chevy of the future, in previous supplements. Air rafts are the only basic grav vehicle to get put into the core books. But in some ways the air raft is the cheap open top version of the grav car, so I guess it really depends on how you view it.

 

[-Daniel-]

There have been the aircars, i.e. Buick and Chevy of the future, in previous supplements. Air rafts are the only basic grav vehicle to get put into the core books. But in some ways the air raft is the cheap open top version of the grav car, so I guess it really depends on how you view it.

Trust me when I say I didn't mean you were wrong, just that I had not thought of them that way. It is funny to me because I had no problem adding them to almost all space ships and to using them in my games, just for some reason didn't think of them as the "car" slot in my games. :mrgreen:

Now that I think of it that way, I see the normal AirRaft more like the jeep or pick-up role. "Off-Road" support once the ship lands planet side. Sort of like my friends little smart car he tows behind his large Motor Home. So now I am also questioning the cost, like you, it seems high for a common every day vehicle (at least at higher tech levels).

 

[Condottiere]

A well maintained air/raft might be a bitterly fought over family heirloom.

 

[-Daniel-]

I was thinking of the high cost and realized, maybe part of the cost could be that not many cars can exit atmosphere like an AirRaft can. Course the driver needs to be in a vaccsuit, but still.

 

[GuernseyMan]

I think the tech levels are a little bit off with some of the vehicles:

Air Raft TL8
Grav Bike TL12
Armoured Fighting Vehicle TL12
G-Bike TL12
G-Carrier TL15

This means that Air Rafts are just around the corner (assuming we're TL7.5 at the moment as the book suggests) but it will take thousands of years before someone make a military version (G-Carrier)!

We don't invent the AFV for another few hundred years, despite the fact we have them now.

The TL of the Air Raft is actually the reason for the huge expense. When they are first developed (April of next year) they will be eye-wateringly expensive. I've not seen it but I would expect the rules to include manufacturing tech at higher levels. On a TL 8 world the Air Raft might be that expensive but should be considerably cheaper on a TL14 world!

 

[Condottiere]

A Segway Grav bike that tries to keep you vertical/stabilized in line with the local gravitational field.

 

[MongooseMatt]

I think the tech levels are a little bit off with some of the vehicles:

Just to point out, this is not when the vehicles become available, but what they look like at that specific TL...

 

[Infojunky]

Just a bit of a note on Price, have any of y'all ever priced Aircraft?

While the Air/raft is treated as a truck, it is a flying truck....

 

[GuernseyMan]

Just to point out, this is not when the vehicles become available, but what they look like at that specific TL...

On page 131 - "TL: The lowest Tech Level the vehicle is available at."

You may want to change this wording if that is the intention.

 

[MongooseMatt]

On page 131 - "TL: The lowest Tech Level the vehicle is available at."

You may want to change this wording if that is the intention.

I meant specific vehicle - good point though.