Art:200 Ton Free trader

[phavoc]

Going against canon isn't a huge deal. But stating that MGT maneuver drives are magical and can be located anywhere on a vessel to produce thrust doesn't match any ship illustration or deckplan.

Where does it state in the rules they have to be located at any particular place on a ship?

It doesn't. Nor does it state that the other issue is the norm.

However historical, anecdotal and every ship illustration that shows the rear of the ship, as well as all the published deckplans I've ever seen, indicate that engines are located in the rear - thus leading to very logical conclusion that engines operate on physical principles. There's also the whole idea of turnover that is in the previous and latest version of MGT. If your engines worked in a magical way, then no turnover is required. Instead the tables should read acceleration/deceleration.

Which is why I asked the question in the first place. If it's stated somewhere in the rules that your thrusting mechanisms can be located anywhere within a vessel, I've missed that chapter/section. Not to mention I've never seen a deck plan or ship illustration to reflect this.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Where does it state in the rules they have to be located at any particular place on a ship?

Reaction drives has no rules for placement either, but an exhaust nozzle is implied?

New High Guard reputably has a chapter on making deck plans? That would be a great place for such guidelines.

SSOM has some information about this, if that is canonical enough.

 

[AndrewW]

New High Guard reputably has a chapter on making deck plans? That would be a great place for such guidelines.

It does, but doesn't go much into layout. That's up whoever happens to create the deck plans.

Yes it's common to have the manoeuvre drive have an outlet at the back but not 100%, The Antique Trader in Merchants and Cruisers for example doesn't.

 

[Reynard]

Tradition from Classic has dictated not changing the deckplans. MegaTraveller has described the maneuver as a thruster plate able to rotate to yaw, pitch and roll. Most descriptions of 'gravitic' drives as pushing and pulling on gravity wells which doesn't involve any expulsion from the ship. That's the 'reactionless' aspect. Mongoose doesn't actually say what it should look like but rather says 'whatever'. We're all using illustrations both interior and exterior from the 70s and get lazy with our imaginations.

Personally, if I see an illustration with 'exhaust port', it's the energy sinks to remove various waste energies which might actually glow in the visible spectrum.

BTW, nice illustrations! Keep it up.

 

[phavoc]

Tradition from Classic has dictated not changing the deckplans. MegaTraveller has described the maneuver as a thruster plate able to rotate to yaw, pitch and roll. Most descriptions of 'gravitic' drives as pushing and pulling on gravity wells which doesn't involve any expulsion from the ship. That's the 'reactionless' aspect. Mongoose doesn't actually say what it should look like but rather says 'whatever'. We're all using illustrations both interior and exterior from the 70s and get lazy with our imaginations.

Personally, if I see an illustration with 'exhaust port', it's the energy sinks to remove various waste energies which might actually glow in the visible spectrum.

BTW, nice illustrations! Keep it up.

You should update your collection of deckplans then. MGT 1e, and 2e show the same thing (engines at the back). There's nothing lazy about imaginations, at least I don't see it that way. I'm going to assume that with the plethora of reaction drives showing up you aren't going to posit that reaction drives, too, are somehow magical and may apply thrust in a 360 direction?

I forgot which version specified that gravity drives were different than the anti-gravity a ship or vehicle had. Once a ship left a gravity well it's anti-gravity was useless, thus an actual maneuver drive was required to move the ship along. Hence the idea that drives function along the lines one would expect them (and everything supports that view).

I agree the illustrations are nice. Good artwork is always appreciated.

 

[wbnc]

Where does it state in the rules they have to be located at any particular place on a ship?

Reaction drives has no rules for placement either, but an exhaust nozzle is implied?

New High Guard reputably has a chapter on making deck plans? That would be a great place for such guidelines.

SSOM has some information about this, if that is canonical enough.

Thansk for the positive words on the art guys. I can always use any feedback I get.


If I remember correctly. At least according to the Starship Operators Manual...Grav Plates are omi-directional but they generate reduced thrust at varying angles. They produce full thrust in one direction only. and very limited thrust in the opposite direction. So you can put plates all around the bulk of a ship for attitude control, generating lateral movement, and maintaining flight in a gravity well. But generally, a design will have a Main set of Thrust plates in one location to generate maximum straight line acceleration.

As for nozzles, I add them to some designs as attitude controls, or additional directional thrust reasoning that they vent plasma from the fusion reactor instead of a chemical fuel. a few liters of Liquid Hydrogen flash heated to a high temperature plasma can generate a lot of thrust per unit of volume. I use that design style for my own setting. Unfortunately, until someone updates the Starship Operators manual or Mongoose releases some more detailed info on how a ship works, we have to piece it all together from past works or develop our own vision of how things work.

If I am working on a Traveller piece I like to use a set of plates at the rear of the ship as the main straight line thrust generation system. Usually, I put them at the rear of a ship. where I place clusters of plates. such as at the end of the nacelles of the drawing above.In other cases I mount them on wings/boom/pods further away from the main body to increase leverage.I'll always have multiple clusters so they can generate varying thrust to alter the attitude or general direction of travel.

Interestingly if you arrange a series of grav plates around the interior of a conical shape, the ability to create vectored thrust is increased. without getting into the way vectors balance out ( it has been a very long time since my last physics class so I don't remember the fine details)when all the plates are active and at full power,the thrust generated is down the centerline of the cone. In theory, by altering the power of various plates you can electronically steer the centerline of thrust as if you were physically moving a chemical rocket nozzle.

electronically steering the direction of thrust allows the ship to pitch, yaw,rotate and slide laterally if you have multiple "nozzles"now the very serious drawback to this is the nozzle has to be very robust to handle the forces exerted on it without crumpling into modern art. Also, any damage to a thrust cone would cause the plates to become misaligned and generate asymmetric thrust. Which would force the pilot, and the flight control software to adjust the system to generate thrust in the desired manner.

 

[Reynard]

"I forgot which version specified that gravity drives were different than the anti-gravity a ship or vehicle had. Once a ship left a gravity well it's anti-gravity was useless, thus an actual maneuver drive was required to move the ship along."

MegaTraveller separates gravitic drive which manipulates gravitons and is the basis for lifters in grav vehicles and ships. They are limited by the vicinity of a gravity well. Thrusters are advanced gravitic tech that manipulate strong and weak nuclear forces for reactionless propulsion. I thought I saw somewhere that ships use maneuver outside the 10D gravity limit and rely in lifters within 10D. Many books to scour.

 

[FreeTrav]

Please, wbnc, contact me by email, editor@freelancetraveller.com. I think that if you can do some scenes that fit nicely in 8.3x11, with 'bleed' to go out to 8.5x11.7, you can have some Freelance Traveller covers.

 

[wbnc]

Please, wbnc, contact me by email, editor@freelancetraveller.com. I think that if you can do some scenes that fit nicely in 8.3x11, with 'bleed' to go out to 8.5x11.7, you can have some Freelance Traveller covers.

:shock: :lol: 8) Well tht was unexpeted. I can sure try my best 8)

 

[Jame Rowe]

Not quite what I imagined the exhaust port to look like.

Maneuver Drives in current Traveller editions have neither exhaust nor propellant. There’s nothing to be called “jetwash” (or even “drivewash”, which is a slightly more appropriate term). As such, there is no reason to have any nozzle of any kind at the back of the ship, except for compatibility with other games.

Which gave what reason for trolling like this?

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

You expected there to be an exhaust port, and you expected that exhaust port to look like something. Both of those were incorrect assumptions.

 

[Jame Rowe]

You expected there to be an exhaust port, and you expected that exhaust port to look like something. Both of those were incorrect assumptions.

Neither of which requires you comment upon them. Ergo, you're trolling.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

Not when you are trying to apply those assumptions as part of constructive criticism.

Any attempt at constructive criticism based on an invalid assumption is destructive, whether intentional or not.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Not when you are trying to apply those assumptions as part of constructive criticism.

Any attempt at constructive criticism based on an invalid assumption is destructive, whether intentional or not.

And yet, when specifically told that you're trolling, you keep trolling, which is even more destructive, especially when you've been told to stop.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

Except I’m not trolling. You’re just choosing to take it that way. I pointed out that the foundation for your criticism was in error, and, therefore, your criticism was invalid. Now, you may not like that I did this, but that doesn’t make it some kind of personal attack. You were simply wrong about the necessary facts, which required a correction.

Trying to trump up charges of trolling when there are no grounds might itself be considered trolling, but I wouldn’t go so far as accusing you of trolling here, when it’s clearly a defense mechanism, rather than some overt attempt to derail a thread. Regardless, please keep this thread on topic. If you have issues with what I’ve said, address them to me individually.

 

[Jame Rowe]

Except I’m not trolling. You’re just choosing to take it that way. I pointed out that the foundation for your criticism was in error, and, therefore, your criticism was invalid. Now, you may not like that I did this, but that doesn’t make it some kind of personal attack. You were simply wrong about the necessary facts, which required a correction.

Trying to trump up charges of trolling when there are no grounds might itself be considered trolling, but I wouldn’t go so far as accusing you of trolling here, when it’s clearly a defense mechanism, rather than some overt attempt to derail a thread. Regardless, please keep this thread on topic. If you have issues with what I’ve said, address them to me individually.

He's going by the original art. My reaction was based on the original art, saying, "hmmm, not quite like the original art, but hey, develop your own style."

You're shitting all over what I'm saying, and THAT'S trolling. I will report you for trolling if you respond to this since you're obviously being hostile.

 

[fusor]

You're shitting all over what I'm saying, and THAT'S trolling. I will report you for trolling if you respond to this since you're obviously being hostile.

Maybe everyone should step back a little here.

Far be it for me to defend T-T, but actually I don't think he's trolling here, and I don't think he's being hostile. I would however suggest that you're being rather over-defensive.

You were commenting about "exhaust ports". All T-T said was that that M-Drives don't have exhaust ports (how can they, if they're not "exhausting" anything because they're reactionless?) - he's correct about that. Though it's not clear to me what you're referring to as "the exhaust port" anyway (that'd be at the rear or the ship if it existed, and we don't see the rear in these pictures) - or were you referring to the intakes/recesses on the side?

Possibly you're talking past eachother and referring to two different things? He (and I) apparently think you're referring to "a place that stuff from the M-drive is vented from" - i.e. some kind of nozzle - is that correct or are you referring to something else (e.g. some kind of small hole or vent that some other gas is released from?)?

 

[Jame Rowe]

Maybe everyone should step back a little here.

Far be it for me to defend T-T, but actually I don't think he's trolling here, and I don't think he's being hostile. I would however suggest that you're being rather over-defensive.

You were commenting about "exhaust ports". All T-T said was that that M-Drives don't have exhaust ports (how can they, if they're not "exhausting" anything because they're reactionless?) - he's correct about that. Though it's not clear to me what you're referring to as "the exhaust port" anyway (that'd be at the rear or the ship if it existed, and we don't see the rear in these pictures) - or were you referring to the intakes/recesses on the side?

Possibly you're talking past eachother and referring to two different things? He (and I) apparently think you're referring to "a place that stuff from the M-drive is vented from" - i.e. some kind of nozzle - is that correct or are you referring to something else (e.g. some kind of small hole or vent that some other gas is released from?)?

When I saw them in the CT art, I assumed they were exhaust ports as what they are was never explained. The art style was kept in MgT; I was commenting to say, "Hey, that's a bit of a change that I didn't expect. But go with it, artist! For art!"

So probably yeah, two different things.

 

[Tenacious-Techhunter]

Traveller has inherited a lot of art conceived in ignorance on how a spacecraft should function. Analyzed critically, there are numerous flaws with it. Many people are so in love with the canon that any divergence is sacrilege. As a purely practical matter, however, in order to appeal to a wider, more educated audience, the art must reflect the science. Additionally, the performance parameters for that science must be interpreted through the game rules, to the extent possible.

I was dismissing your argument on purely technical grounds, nothing more. And I am terribly insulted that anyone would think anything less. Regardless, no offense was intended; only useful advice. Please pay closer attention to what is being said in the future, because if a disagreement backed by scientific fact can’t win on this forum, then the basis for all productive discussion is simply nonexistent.

 

[fusor]

Traveller has inherited a lot of art conceived in ignorance on how a spacecraft should function. Analyzed critically, there are numerous flaws with it. Many people are so in love with the canon that any divergence is sacrilege. As a purely practical matter, however, in order to appeal to a wider, more educated audience, the art must reflect the science. Additionally, the performance parameters for that science must be interpreted through the game rules, to the extent possible.

Please stop going on about 'appealing to a wider audience'. You're basically fighting this one-man crusade that nobody else here gives any kind of a toss about - Traveller is what it is, and the people here like it the way it is (though most people would admit that Traveller does have flaws). If you want to add realism to it in your own games, then go nuts and add realism there. If you want to add realistic options to the game for everyone else to use, then that's fine too. But your approach of saying "it's all wrong, throw it all out and start again" is unconstructive and confrontational and really obnoxious - if you want to do that then either do it yourself in your own games, or go play something else more in line with what you want.

And while you're at it, please stop derailing threads just so you can go on your crusade.