Brute Heavy yard Tug, with stats

[AnotherDilbert]

Space craft with M-drives have contra-gravity capability.

They do? Says who?

I admit I have always assumed this was the case. Curious, wonder where I got the idea from.

Well if that is not the case then it is a major missing add-on to the ship design. I mean, if it were not included, I would expect to see it listed as something that could be added to a ship.

Most(?) space opera has giant starships gently floating in the air.

MT goes into detail with M-drives, Contra-grav, and Artificial gravity. Spacecraft generally do not have Contra-grav, even though the design sequence allows it.

Where is it listed as an optional add-on? I must have missed it.

MT Referee's Manual p65 details M-Drive, p66 details Thrust-Based Suspension, among then Contra-grav.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

it's not specifically stated in Mongoose. But in older books like Starship operators Manual do include detailed descriptions of how drive plates, gravitics etc work. I don't know if it's canon, but I like to use that version lacking any official comment from Mongoose.

It's interesting that we both go to SSOM for details.

I see p2-3 describing how to vector the thrust from the M-drive, and p28 describes artificial gravity and how it cannot escape the hull. I do not see anything suggesting Contra-grav?

 

[phavoc]

Well, that's a fair question. And the answer is they must have, or else no scout or free trader or any other craft would ever be able to land so precisely in the landing pads at star ports.

I'm unconvinced. SSOM describes how spacecraft can land. It seems it can even be done today:

Space X uses a rocket that descend very slowly on its rockets instead of free fall...so it doesn't heat up and turn into a pretty, pretty fireball in the sky.

MT goes into detail with M-drives, Contra-grav, and Artificial gravity. Spacecraft generally do not have Contra-grav, even though the design sequence allows it.

SpaceX goes up/comes down via rockets. For Traveller that would mean their main drives (i.e. the classic rockets from the 50s landing tail first). Now it's my turn to be unconvinced. MGT leaves out a LOT of details in spacecraft operations. So, for the sake of argument, lets leave out the idea that all starships capable of landing on a planet do NOT have contragravity capability.

MGT took out repulsors and tractors from CT that were listed as being able to help ships take off/land, so that's out.

How do they land then?

 

[wbnc]

Well, that's a fair question. And the answer is they must have, or else no scout or free trader or any other craft would ever be able to land so precisely in the landing pads at star ports.

I'm unconvinced. SSOM describes how spacecraft can land. It seems it can even be done today:

Space X uses a rocket that descend very slowly on its rockets instead of free fall...so it doesn't heat up and turn into a pretty, pretty fireball in the sky.

MT goes into detail with M-drives, Contra-grav, and Artificial gravity. Spacecraft generally do not have Contra-grav, even though the design sequence allows it.

SpaceX goes up/comes down via rockets. For Traveller that would mean their main drives (i.e. the classic rockets from the 50s landing tail first). Now it's my turn to be unconvinced. MGT leaves out a LOT of details in spacecraft operations. So, for the sake of argument, lets leave out the idea that all starships capable of landing on a planet do NOT have contragravity capability.

MGT took out repulsors and tractors from CT that were listed as being able to help ships take off/land, so that's out.

How do they land then?

repulsors and tractors are back in as of the latest High guard revision. at least in weaponized form. several ships in the HG book are armed with tractor beams so it looks like the technology is available in 3I.

it wouldn't be a stretch to assume less powerful versions would be available for use as in landing and take-off systems.
I really don't have a problem with leaving it up to individual Refs o decide how the systems work. But at least as far as the core setting we could really use some enhancement and clarification of the standard methods of propulsion used by common starships.... I wouldn't want to be the one having to endure the firestorm any version of drives they settled on would cause..it would be of hellishly epic proportions.

 

[-Daniel-]

MT goes into detail with M-drives, Contra-grav, and Artificial gravity. Spacecraft generally do not have Contra-grav, even though the design sequence allows it.

Where is it listed as an optional add-on? I must have missed it.

MT Referee's Manual p65 details M-Drive, p66 details Thrust-Based Suspension, among then Contra-grav.

MT Referee's Manual. Not a book I own. Curious and interesting.

This conversation has taken a very interesting turn. :mrgreen:

 

[phavoc]

I opened up a new thread to we won't derail your tug discussion.

 

[fireyphoenix22]

http://orig11.deviantart.net/434f/f/2008/212/d/9/d964f148fb27f6d89c480a0a79089564.jpg

cargo tug non atmospheric

 

[wbnc]

Okay, stage two......
Shortened the length a bit. added The arms along the center of the craft are part of the docking clamps, and forced linkage systems. Instead of one large clamp, the arms can be combined to mimic clamps of varying sizes. The clamps would lock on using either strengthened sections of the ships hull or magnetic grapples, and straps around the vessel to secure it in place.

teh large arm at teh rear is for lockig onto odules, or cargo containers that are tumbling or unstable, as well as anchoring the tow cables and cargo nets when in space.

I will be adding landing struts as soon as I decide how to attach them without them getting in the way.

what I am doing is replacing a few of the systems with multiple docking clamps of varying sizes. up to 300 tons. anything larger will have to be carried strapped/anchored to the external cargo clamps. the struts coud be swapped out for onger struts if needed to allow for proper clearance.

in the image the external cargo clamp is that basket looking rig under the tug. additional sections can be added to provide extra capacity. a system of struts and guy wires wold provide support for the array and would be added as needed.

it still has the modular hul feature so all of the hardware other than drives, powerplant and control cabins can be removed and replaced, or additional systems added.

 

[-Daniel-]

Nice shift wbnc . I do like the shorter length better.

I am curious, does it have bridges on both sides?

 

[wbnc]

Nice shift wbnc . I do like the shorter length better.

I am curious, does it have bridges on both sides?

thanks. the feedback helps a lot.

The bridge is split into for and aft sections. one crewman in each section.