Ask MongooseMatt ANYTHING!!!

[Terry Mixon]

Okay, not really anything, but when we post questions about the rules or potential typos in the feedback area, we often don't receive a response, so I'm creating this thread in the hopes of getting some response to questions we have, even if it is "we're looking at that" or some such.

I'll kick this off with a question I posted a few days ago. The emergency low berths in High Guard 2022 Update are listed at MC1 a pop. Seems real pricy since Mongoose 1e and all the previous versions of Traveller we checked had it being KCr100. In Mongoose 1e, it was listed as MCr.1 and we suspect a typo. Can we get some clartity on that so we can update the starship build sheet to reflect what we suspect if we're right? Thanks.

Also, allow me to suggest that adding KCr, BCr (or GCr to please @Geir), and TCr to your repertoire would be really helpful and would minimize the complaints about not having comma separation in your big numbers, too.

And sorry for all the wild AMA questions you're about to get @MongooseMatt.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Go out the airlock and walk on the hull.

Seriously? That is your answer? Remind us to never let you write rules for anything ever again.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Ahhh, sorry. I misread (or skimmed) your post. Docking clamps, yes. One-hundred percent, they do not have hatches to the ship. I think there is a pirate vessel like that in the PoD set.

Wait. Are you just undoing the fix you made that satisfied the problem? Really?

 

[MasterGwydion]

Wait. Are you just undoing the fix you made that satisfied the problem? Really?

Yeah it seems to be @paltrysum opinion that if he designed aircraft carriers, you'd have to jump in the water to get into the airplanes.

Which also means that pilots in Light Fighters are wearing vacc suits, since light fighters don't have an airlock. Meaning, if you are not wearing a vacc suit, you don't fit into the pilot seat of a light fighter.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Go out the airlock and walk on the hull.

Docking clamps can be made to incorporate an airlock so why would they not potentially come with the docking hatch as you so reasonably stated earlier?

 

[Condottiere]

Spacecraft designs generally reflect the priorities of the contractor.

Usually, a carrier would have internal storage for a considerable number of fighters, and at least one launch tube and landing bay, each.

If you're docking the fighters externally, pilot comfort is not the top priority.

 

[paltrysum]

Yeah it seems to be @paltrysum opinion that if he designed aircraft carriers, you'd have to jump in the water to get into the airplanes.

Which also means that pilots in Light Fighters are wearing vacc suits, since light fighters don't have an airlock. Meaning, if you are not wearing a vacc suit, you don't fit into the pilot seat of a light fighter.

Haha! Well, no, that wouldn't be my suggestion. I'd go with docking spaces whenever possible, but have a look at the Indigo-class pirate carrier in the Pirates of Drinax ships book. The fighters are literally attached to the hull, like remoras on a shark. Maybe there's a tube that goes up through the belly of each fighter?

 

[paltrysum]

Docking clamps can be made to incorporate an airlock so why would they not potentially come with the docking hatch as you so reasonably stated earlier?

I think we're confusing docking spaces with docking clamps. Or maybe just I am. I don't think these would have an airlock, but the description is deliberately vague. The craft are on the exterior of the hull and thus 1) prohibit the mother ship from performing atmospheric reentry, and 2) enable the individual craft to be targeted during combat.

Whether there is a tube, protected by the ship's life support, or you have to climb out on the hull, seems to be within the designer's imagination. But no airlocks for sure. You'd have to pay for them separately. An optional hatch door, yes, but no airlock.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Spacecraft designs generally reflect the priorities of the contractor.

Usually, a carrier would have internal storage for a considerable number of fighters, and at least one launch tube and landing bay, each.

If you're docking the fighters externally, pilot comfort is not the top priority.

many carriers in Traveller carry their fighters on docking clamps and not in internal bays. Basically, internal bays are only used with a launch and recovery system, but those combined are 20 times the size of the fighters that they are meant to be used by, so they only exist on the largest carriers.

Most Highport use docking clamps instead of internal bays on the highports due to cost. I guess this means that most people visiting highports have to exit their ships in vacc suits just to go to the station.

Haha! Well, no, that wouldn't be my suggestion. I'd go with docking spaces whenever possible, but have a look at the Indigo-class pirate carrier in the Pirates of Drinax ships book. The fighters are literally attached to the hull, like remoras on a shark. Maybe there's a tube that goes up through the belly of each fighter?

Obviously, there is a "tube" for the pilots to enter the ship from the bottom. You ever seen a minisub dock with a nuclear sub? Minisub docks on top of the sub on a docking clamp and the crew enters and exits through the docking clamp. These same minisubs are entered through the top when they are not connected to a docking clamp. Why is this so hard for you to understand? How long does it take to put on a vacc suit? How long does it take to cycle through an airlock? How long does it take to walk across the hull to your ship? How long does it take to launch from the docking clamp?

Do you want to go through all of that while you are under fire or would you prefer to just install a hatch on your docking clamp? Then you can simply run for your ship, hop in, and launch. No vacc suit required.

 

[Terry Mixon]

I think we're confusing docking spaces with docking clamps. Or maybe just I am. I don't think these would have an airlock, but the description is deliberately vague. The craft are on the exterior of the hull and thus 1) prohibit the mother ship from performing atmospheric reentry, and 2) enable the individual craft to be targeted during combat.

Whether there is a tube, protected by the ship's life support, or you have to climb out on the hull, seems to be within the designer's imagination. But no airlocks for sure. You'd have to pay for them separately. An optional hatch door, yes, but no airlock.

It’s just you this time.

No arguments on reentry.

Airlock optional and must be paid for. Agreed.

Optional docking hatch. Check.

You have literally gone back to your original stance that solved the problem in the first place.

Did you get promoted to management or do you just need more coffee?

 

[MasterGwydion]

I think we're confusing docking spaces with docking clamps. Or maybe just I am.

Only you are.

I don't think these would have an airlock, but the description is deliberately vague.

They wouldn't need an airlock. Why wouldn't they? Because if you docking clamp has a hatch, and your ship has a hatch, then when the ship is docked, the two ships, while docked, form an airlock, when they are not docked, there is no airlock, both ships simply have a hatch.

The craft are on the exterior of the hull and thus 1) prohibit the mother ship from performing atmospheric reentry, and 2) enable the individual craft to be targeted during combat.

Both of these are true and have no bearing on hatches.

Whether there is a tube, protected by the ship's life support, or you have to climb out on the hull, seems to be within the designer's imagination. But no airlocks for sure. You'd have to pay for them separately. An optional hatch door, yes, but no airlock.

Are we publishing ships now that no one would buy? That seems kind of stupid.

 

[MasterGwydion]

and for the record, a Docking Space is an airlock. A Docking Clamp is not an airlock but could have one added, but as soon as you dock another ship to it, you basically have two airlocks, the one you added to the docking clamp and the one created by the two hatches of the mothership and the docking ship.

Edited

 

[Condottiere]

Anything that acts as the foyer or vestibule, vacuum proof, with pumps, would be considered airlock adjacent.

 

[Technetium 98]

The fighters are literally attached to the hull, like remoras on a shark. Maybe there's a tube that goes up through the belly of each fighter?

I get that, practically, you'd want a sealed entrance to the fighter - maybe it's something like the fighters in Star Citizen that drop the seat from the ventral side - but I'll be honest, an improvised pirate carrier where you have to spacewalk to get to your fighter would be damned cool.

 

[Vormaerin]

Docking clamps can be made to incorporate an airlock so why would they not potentially come with the docking hatch as you so reasonably stated earlier?

He's saying what I am saying, they are not INTRINSIC to docking clamps. You can put a hatch or airlock between the two ships, but just because a docking clamp exists doesn't mean that said access point does. That's something you designate separately.

 

[Terry Mixon]

He's saying what I am saying, they are not INTRINSIC to docking clamps. You can put a hatch or airlock between the two ships, but just because a docking clamp exists doesn't mean that said access point does. That's something you designate separately.

Actually, he said you could. Then he said that you couldn’t. Then he, again, said that you could. He might say something else later. Who knows?

 

[MasterGwydion]

He's saying what I am saying, they are not INTRINSIC to docking clamps. You can put a hatch or airlock between the two ships, but just because a docking clamp exists doesn't mean that said access point does. That's something you designate separately.

The only examples that We have all allow access to the ship when it is docked in the docking clamp. This tells Me that hatches are intrinsic.

 

[Vormaerin]

As I said before, if you want proper easy access to your small craft, you should be using a docking space. Docking clamps are for tugs, jump shuttles, and half assed carrier conversions. Even if you put a hatch there, there is no guarantee it will align with any hatch on the vessel you are clamped to unless both ships are explicitly designed to work together.

The description of Docking *SPACE* indicates there's barely enough room on that to get from the ship to the small craft. There's not enough space to even do repairs or maintenance. Docking CLAMPS provide even less connection between the two ships. You *CAN* put an access hatch there. Or an Airlock. But that's not part of the clamp, that's an additional design decision. And if you aren't building a custom vessel to be on the receiving end, you might be spacewalking from your airlock to theirs.

The airlock on a safari ship is in a completely different place than the airlock on a free trader, even though they are both the same size.

 

[Terry Mixon]

As I said before, if you want proper easy access to your small craft, you should be using a docking space. Docking clamps are for tugs, jump shuttles, and half assed carrier conversions. Even if you put a hatch there, there is no guarantee it will align with any hatch on the vessel you are clamped to unless both ships are explicitly designed to work together.

The description of Docking *SPACE* indicates there's barely enough room on that to get from the ship to the small craft. There's not enough space to even do repairs or maintenance. Docking CLAMPS provide even less connection between the two ships. You *CAN* put an access hatch there. Or an Airlock. But that's not part of the clamp, that's an additional design decision. And if you aren't building a custom vessel to be on the receiving end, you might be spacewalking from your airlock to theirs.

The airlock on a safari ship is in a completely different place than the airlock on a free trader, even though they are both the same size.

@MasterGwydion and I have different views on this. My take is that whatever is clamped needs to be designed to mate with the optional built-in docking hatch, like you said.

Otherwise, you are correct. If it is designed to mate, it will work. Otherwise, it won’t.

 

[Technetium 98]

I just noticed the title of this thread, so in recognition of anyone who might come here hoping to ask Matt a question...

Thread 'Docking Clamps vs. Spaces'

Today at 3:44 PM

I argue that leaving some things up to the designer (such as being able to access a clamped ship in a shirtsleeve environment) is completely acceptable in this context. And also that y'all should calm down.

• Technetium 98
• Replies: 19
• Forum: Traveller

• 

 

[MasterGwydion]

As I said before, if you want proper easy access to your small craft, you should be using a docking space. Docking clamps are for tugs, jump shuttles, and half assed carrier conversions. Even if you put a hatch there, there is no guarantee it will align with any hatch on the vessel you are clamped to unless both ships are explicitly designed to work together.

You are assuming a level of granularity that doesn't exist in MgT2. As long as the ship is the right tonnage for the docking clamp, it works. The same way a 110-ton Docking Space works for all 100-ton ships, not just specific models of ship.

The description of Docking *SPACE* indicates there's barely enough room on that to get from the ship to the small craft. There's not enough space to even do repairs or maintenance. Docking CLAMPS provide even less connection between the two ships. You *CAN* put an access hatch there. Or an Airlock. But that's not part of the clamp, that's an additional design decision. And if you aren't building a custom vessel to be on the receiving end, you might be spacewalking from your airlock to theirs.

A Docking Space is a Docking Clamp inside a compact airlock that fits the whole ship inside it. The whole thing is internal. The only difference with only a Docking Clamp is that the ship is hanging in space and the only connection point is where the hatches are.

The airlock on a safari ship is in a completely different place than the airlock on a free trader, even though they are both the same size.

Again, the level of granularity you are talking about doesn't exist in MgT2.