Are Traveller ships too big?

I once sat down with LBB:5 HIgh Guard 2ed and wrote an essay about how ships and space warfare change as you advance through the TLs.
This thread has gone the usual way of only thinking about the Third Imperium and TL15, The FFW was fought between theTL14 forces of the Zhodani and the TL15 forces of the Imperium, so how did the Zhodani plan to fight a technologically more advanced enemy? How did the TL14 vs TL14 Solomani Rim War play out? Why is the TL15 vs TL15 Rebellion such a meat grinder?

In HG 80 space warfare starts ay TL7, as you advance through the TLs everything changes, at some TLs the changes for a more advanced fleet make a massive difference. Often overlooked are that maximum ship size changes, maneuver drive and agility change as the low TLs advance from 7->9

Any chance you have that around? Any version would be fine, it's something I've considered doing several times, and I'd love to see someone else's take on it.
 
I wrote it, pen and paper.

The advantage of retirement is having time to type stuff up. I'll dig the notebook out of the attic and start transcribing.
Can also take a photo and post it if you prefer. Or pm me. If you don't want to type the whole thing.
 
Hmm. So I'll swap to dreadnought and frigates as well..

Not sure what to call my hunters though. I guess I can use cruiser for consistency.

Nor the guards. Escort is not appropriate. I don't really like corvette, but I guess it could be done? Eh, if I'm trying to make them relatable to the rest, sure, I'll call them corvette.
Or you can call them Hunters.

HUnter-Killer or HUKs seems to be more a name used in science fiction than in reality, and it's also a mission designation used by subs or things that hunt subs, so it's as valid an evolution as destroyers is....

I had one of the names for the non-jump types be Defender instead of Protector, but then I got all anal about not reusing letters.
Really prefer Corvette to Escort, though. (no, not because it's a synonym for a 'professional companion' but because it was a rather cheaply built gutless car). But I should not spend my Saturday looking up obscure thesaurus entries for imaginary ships, but focusing on writing about imaginary vehicles.

Cruiser, though, admittedly also a role, but you've got protected cruisers and armoured cruisers. And even battlecruisers, which are not cruisers at all... police cruisers, patrol cruisers, booze cruises

None of which helps answer the OP question, for which I have no good answer, except: it depends.
 
During the 18th and 19th centuries, a sloop-of-war was a warship of the British Royal Navy with a single gun deck that carried up to 18 guns. The rating system of the Royal Navy covered all vessels with 20 or more guns; thus, the term encompassed all unrated warships, including gun-brigs and cutters. In technical terms, even the more specialised bomb vessels and fire ships were classed by the Royal Navy as sloops-of-war, and in practice these were employed in the role of a sloop-of-war when not carrying out their specialised functions.

In World War I and World War II, the Royal Navy reused the term "sloop" for specialised convoy-defence vessels, including the Flower class of the First World War and the highly successful Black Swan class of the Second World War, with anti-aircraft and anti-submarine capabilities. They performed similar duties to the destroyer escorts of the United States Navy, and also performed similar duties to the smaller corvettes of the Royal Navy.
 
Or you can call them Hunters.

HUnter-Killer or HUKs seems to be more a name used in science fiction than in reality, and it's also a mission designation used by subs or things that hunt subs, so it's as valid an evolution as destroyers is....

I had one of the names for the non-jump types be Defender instead of Protector, but then I got all anal about not reusing letters.
Really prefer Corvette to Escort, though. (no, not because it's a synonym for a 'professional companion' but because it was a rather cheaply built gutless car). But I should not spend my Saturday looking up obscure thesaurus entries for imaginary ships, but focusing on writing about imaginary vehicles.

Cruiser, though, admittedly also a role, but you've got protected cruisers and armoured cruisers. And even battlecruisers, which are not cruisers at all... police cruisers, patrol cruisers, booze cruises

None of which helps answer the OP question, for which I have no good answer, except: it depends.
"Too big" is just too subjective. Too big when compared to what? Star Trek? Maybe. Star Wars, Not even close! An Imperial Class Star Destroyer is like 6.5 Million dtons.
 
I've been thinking about my own terminology for starships, especially for warships. I'll type it up if i ever finish working on my TU.
"Too big" is just too subjective. Too big when compared to what? Star Trek? Maybe. Star Wars, Not even close! An Imperial Class Star Destroyer is like 6.5 Million dtons.
I don't think Traveller ships are too big, but it's fortunate that the rules can be used as we like; for example, if someone wants to use the ship construction rules but limit the size to (for example) 15,000 tons, and reduce the size of jump drive to 10% of book value, that might help make an interesting setting.

Star Destroyer size is vastly overstated, and taken from the old West End Games RPG. Even if it's really a mile long, it wouldn't need 34000 crew.
 
Spaceships: Ship Design Philosophy and Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts

50. In Traveller terms, for the Confederation Navy, there would be a clear separation between it's capital assets, and everything below that.

51. Until last year, the Mongoose version of the modern order of battle demonstrated a cruiser gap, starting from two kilotonnes till about two hundred kilotonnes.

52. The patrol ships would imprint the impression of a presence of the Confederation on the dirtside dwellers below and their respective authorities, being armed enough to be taken seriously, and take care of themselves in most situations.

53. In wartime, even in the likely second line roles, they would need to have enough capabilities to at least be able to perform their missions successfully.

54. So in the meantime, will have to be satisfied with the two hundred tonne torpedo boat.

55. Maxed out the range, apparently three and a half kilokilometres, I guess megametres.

56. Gave it a decent thirty two plus knot speed, which appears to be fast enough to deliver the payload in tact to the unappreciative target audience.

57. Optimistically, it has a reload torpedo, and the lightest possible two incher, which in theory, should be a threat to other unprotected torpedo boats.

58. To round it off, minimum bulkheads, and cramped quarters.

59. I guess you could have no staterooms, and then utilize the volume of now empty fuel tanks for the next week or so, during and after transition, the issue being how to account for life support.
 
Spaceships: Ship Design Philosophy and Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts

120. I think Traveller had it correct that you need specialized starwarships.

121. While everyone may take a rather sceptical view of the Imperial class star destroyers, outside of the lack of acceleration, they may actually have had it correct with a single aerospace group of about seventy two TIE fighters, plus utility craft.

122. The reason would be the demonstrated effectiveness of fighters and bombers in the Star Wars universe.

123. The Tigress class is a luxurious exception, because if it's damaged, you could lose both a gun platform and a fleet carrier.

124. It may have been designed more for political and diplomatic effect.

125. Undoubtedly an impressive flagship, keeping the Tigresses together as a cohesive force, whether in a battle squadron of eight or four, depending on whatever the current definition is, is really a waste.

126. A step down would be the assault, strike and/or attack cruisers, which tend to include an aerospace group.

127. These matter a lot less, since they're likely meant to operate independently, and would need a more rounded set of capabilities.

128. Managed to move Edwardian era pre dreadnought campaign.

129. May actually have been the golden age of armoured cruisers, since I enlarged the original design of thirty five hundred tonne using the more or less same armament configuration, to a twelve kilotonne proto battle cruiser, increasing the speed from sixteen to twenty eight knots, and adding all the usual safety mechanisms then prevalent.
 
Starwarships: Classifications

Capital ship
Based on tonnage and capability, over a hundred kilotonnes, and either a heavily armed and protected ship of the line, or a carrier of combat craft capable of combined massive power projection.

Major combatant
Based on tonnage and capability, minimum twenty five kay tonnes, to possibly above a hundred kilotonnes, either a quite heavily armed and protected vessel, or a carrier of combat craft capable of a hefty collective punch.

Minor combatant
Based on tonnage and capability, below twenty five kilotonnes, but above five kay tonnes, capable of a substantial contribution to combat power, either directly or as a force multiplier.

Intermediate combatant
Normally, a major combatant sized vessel but with combat capability on par with a minor combatant.

Large combatants
Based on tonnage, combat capable ships above five kilotonnes.

Medium combatants
Based on tonnage, combat capable ships above a kilotonne.

Small combatants
Based on tonnage, combat capable ships above a hundred tonnes.

Bombers
Strike craft, principally armed with physical ordnance, usually missiles or torpedoes.

Fighters
Spacecraft, capable of intercepting and destroying other spacecraft, and securing aerospace control.
 
Classes
Neatly tries to correspond current capabilities of the warship to indicate either frontline service, or secondary duties; second class doesn't mean the warship won't be eligible for the battle fleet, just that it's more dispensable, and might make up the majority of warships.

Ratings
Ratings implies that the technological underpinnings are fairly stable, so that it's fairly easy to categorize warships by obvious capabilities.

Dreadnought
The best and newest (and most expensive) line-of-battle ships are designated dreadnoughts. They form the backbone of the front-line battle squadrons and continually evolve to meet new threats or exploit new ideas. As a dreadnought class loses its cutting-edge status, it is downgraded to Battleship designation. The two hundred thousand tonne Kokirrak class dreadnought is about to suffer this reduction in status, reflecting the fact that the design is becoming obsolescent. Current Imperial dreadnoughts include the Plankwell class (two hundred thousand tonnes) and the awesome Tigress class (semimegatonne), which carries three hundred fighters in addition to its main armament.

Apparently, super would be over a semimegatonne; fast would be with at least a four parsec strategic movement.

Battleship
Including both downrated dreadnought classes and purpose-designed second-class line-of-battle ships, the Battleship designation covers the bulk of Imperial capital ships. Like dreadnoughts, battleships concentrate their firepower in a huge spinal mount and batteries of secondary bay weapons. Defenses include thickly armored hulls and huge sandcaster batteries. Battleships are deployed by preference in massed squadrons, but may be encountered detached as guardships or showing the flag. Battleships are second-class only when compared with dreadnoughts; any battleship is capable of ripping the heart out of a heavy cruiser with a single salvo.

Generally speaking, in internal classifications, second class would be one technological level down from default dreadnought, though if it's modernized, they may retain first class or dreadnought status. Third class would be two technological levels down from default, and generally unmodernized. While there may be a better science fiction term than coastal, it would be am interstellar warship with probably minimum sized capital class spinal mounts, but rather shortlegged, I'd say about factor one or two parsec range in the fifth millenium point of view, considering that factor three is considered the norm. Distant station flagships might require custom built second class battleships, economical operations or specific environmental conditions, rather than deploying an older dreadnought, or one whose performance doesn't make it suitable in the battle squadrons.

Battlecruiser
More lightly protected than a battleship, though mounting the same armament, the battlecruiser is designed for a slightly different role than the line-of-battle. Battlecruisers cannot stand up to their own armament for long, but they are not intended to. Instead, they undertake fast strike operations against enemy shipping or bases, or chase down enemy cruisers doing so against their own side. Battlecruisers sometimes possess a higher jump capability than battleships or dreadnoughts, to give enhanced strategic mobility. The Imperial Navy does not favor battlecruisers, although some of its potential opponents consider them useful enough to deploy in large numbers.

Apparently, your parsecage may vary; it's always been an interesting question how you spell it, battlecruiser or battle cruiser, and that tends to imply how you actually plan to use them, not necessarily stated role(s). Dreadnought armoured cruisers are the technological level twelve expression of this type of warship, and by technological level fourteen, fast battleships, or armoured battlecruisers is the confluence in the requirement of more protection and the minimal compromise of tactical speed and strategic range. A battlecruiser is a capital ship, while a battle cruiser is a very souped up version of an armoured cruiser, whose armament approaches or equals that of a battleship, but isn't expected to be in the line of battle. Light (battle) cruiser, or large light cruisers, are abominations, trying to skirt bureaucratic restrictions and frankenstein a monitor/coastal battleship/battlecruiser hybrid.

Battle Rider
Battle riders are designed to be an alternative to Jump-capable warships. Since a whole squadron can be carried by a huge Battle Tender, the battle rider need not devote space to Jump engines or fuel. The space thus saved can be used for weaponry and armor, while the money saved pays for the lightly-defended tender. A battle rider is up to fifty percent more effective in combat than an equivalent jump-four-capable ship, but lacks the mobility to break off if the fight goes against it. Tenders are vulnerable to enemy action and since their loss will leave the squadron stranded, resources must be diverted to protecting them. The result is that battle rider squadrons are not always as effective as they might at first seem. The concept is not currently in favor with the Imperial Navy, though many squadrons still exist. Some battle riders have been transferred to the colonial fleets, assigned as guardships at depots and strategic worlds, or sold to friendly powers.

That's because their doctrine is probably flawed, not that I actually care; battle riders are supposed to be jumpless coastal battleships, and therefore can operate in deep space.

Monitor
Monitors are large system defense craft intended to take on and destroy incoming heavy units. While in theory they can be equal in capability to a battle rider (indeed, a battle rider can serve as a monitor if no tender is available), they tend to be constructed more cheaply and to lower specifications. Monitors thus tend to have relatively low acceleration – two gee is common – as they rarely move far from the world or installation they are defending and operate on interior lines. Defenses are particularly heavy, as the main purpose of a monitor is to remain “in being” to threaten an attacking force. Actually destroying enemy forces is a bonus, but preventing a landing or bombardment is enough. Some monitors are constructed from hollowed-out planetoids. Such vessels tend to have very low acceleration but are extremely hard to kill. They also have stealth and surprise advantages. The Imperial Navy does not build planetoid monitors but many individual worlds do. The Navy primarily uses monitors to defend its bases and depots. Most naval bases have a force ranging from a single light monitor of about five thousand tonnes displacement to several squadrons of battleship-sized units to back up the more numerous light system defense boats. Although battle riders can just as easily be used, monitors have the advantage that they cannot be ‘poached’ for fleet operations, thus leaving a depot inadequately guarded. The largest monitors are designated Battle Monitors. Although smaller than a typical battleship, they do not give up space to fuel tanks and are thus comparable in combat capability. Heavy monitors are generally equivalent in combat to a heavy cruiser, though they are much smaller. The term Light Monitor is assigned to any sublight combat vessel larger than a gunboat (id est anything of one thousand tonnes and up) but not capable of taking on a light cruiser. Specialist monitors are sometimes fielded, such as missile monitors as support platforms, patrol monitors that carry fighters and small craft to police the outsystem, and strike monitors with heavy armament and powerful engines for a rapid attack on an intruder.

And of course, we come to the crux of the matter: monitors are actually riverine and littoral craft, which means they're meant to stick close to planets, which means that you can design these ships with limited range manoeuvre drives.
 
Many of the same arguments listed here have been raised by naval designers over the past.

The question of "too big" is probably one that is of more relevance in the nuclear age with the destructive capabilities of weapons. Bigger guns were a partial response to the creation of torpedoes. A single torpedo hit could cripple/sink a ship (updated designs, watertight compartmentalization and spreading out of machinery lessens that risk, but does not eliminate it even today). Technology allowed for bigger guns, which meant bigger ships, which allowed for more armor - but everything came with a design price and everything had a tradeoff. No ship had full armor over every location because they could not afford the weight penalty. Traveller side-steps this issue and does not address mass, only displacement. Nuclear weapons - that hit at least - have the potential to cause massive amounts of damage disproportionate to their size.

Sometimes bigger does mean the ability to mount more/larger weapons (though aside from a spinal mount we do not see weapons larger than the 100dton bay - which can be mounted on much smaller ships), and armor under the rules can make a smaller ship equal to a massively larger ship - the only difference being that the larger ship has more capacity as a damage sink than the smaller one. Bigger also means it's easier to hit. I always scratched my head over some of the very lightly-armored battleships in some of the source books.

If I recall correctly it was TCS (or maybe MT?) that started to introduce the idea that larger ships started to have weapons bearing limitations, and the ship configuration could also limit the number of weapons to be brought to bear. Again this sort of thing is a trade-off, as a ship can possibly rotate or maneuver to bring a damaged side away from the enemy and continue combat with no loss in effective firepower. How the ships fight also factors into this. If ships fight in a "line of battle" or do they fight as the close with one another head on, etc. Most navies have little armament facing to the rear for combat as they disengage. This is another point that some versions of Traveller side-step.

I don't see any "right" answer to the question. I think it's going to be more one of preference. Players won't be tooling around in a massive warship, so except for those who like playing in that pond with wargaming, it's mostly an exercise in preference and what-if's.
 
Star Destroyer size is vastly overstated, and taken from the old West End Games RPG. Even if it's really a mile long, it wouldn't need 34000 crew.
I was just talking about the volume of the ships. Other ships in Star Wars are far larger than the Imperial Class.
 
I was just talking about the volume of the ships. Other ships in Star Wars are far larger than the Imperial Class.
I'm sure there are. I just started thinking, "what if Star Wars ships aren't as big as the RPGS say, simply because someone in the 1980s didn't understand that the ISD looking like a mile long is being dramatic and not literal?"
 
I think that by the time Lucas had the final script, they were supposed to be milelong.

Coincidence that the length just happened to be a Terran unit of measurement.
 
Ship Classifications

1. Armoured Cruisers - were the predecessors to battlecruisers, of which we don't really see a lot of at TL15. This may be a designation from TL13 for large, long range powerful cruisers from the TL13 era, superceded by battlecruisers in the TL14 period. Battlecruisers being made obsolete by fast TL15 battleships.

2. Protected Cruisers - another relic from the TL13 era, unlike their armoured brethren, used speed and careful use of armour to protect critical components to survive in battle. Succeeded by a general purpose cruiser in TL14, eventually splitting between light and heavy variants to permit wider coverage of spacelanes in proportion to expected threats, as the light cruisers would be more than capable to deal with marauders, pirates and commerce raiders, as well as acting as a flotilla leader, while heavy cruisers would power project into regions where a dreadnought would be considered overkill, show the flag, deal with naval threats that a light cruiser wouldn't be expected to and support the battle line.

3. Ironclads - Titanium armoured armoured warships.
 
Back
Top