Carrier Deck Crews

[steve98052]

Since some discussion in this thread has mentioned the Oort Cloud region as less than extremely distant, I offer this clarification to jargon related to distant regions of a stellar system:

- The Oort Cloud is a huge region of space. The Sun's Oort Cloud is believed to extend out as far as a light year -- roughly a third of a map hex. Its existence is hypothesized as the source of extremely long-period comets, but no confirmed observations of Oort Cloud objects have been made.

- The Kuiper Belt is a much closer region of space. It is the home of outer system objects in long-term stable orbits, with low to moderate orbital inclination and eccentricity. The Sun's Kuiper Belt extends from the orbit of Neptune (about 30 AU) to about 50 AU. Notable Kuiper Belt objects are Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, Quaoar, Chaos, Varuna, and possibly Orcus and Ixion.

- The Scattered Disc is a somewhat larger region of space, and the source of periodic comets. Its objects are in orbits with less long-term stability, higher orbital inclination, and a much larger range of orbital eccentricity. The inner range of Scattered Disc objects is similar to that of Kuiper Belt objects, but with higher eccentricities the outer range of their orbits is more distant. The inner reach of the Sun's Scattered Disc is 30 to 35 AU, and the outer reach extends well beyond 100 AU. Notable Scattered Disc objects are Eris and Sedna.

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scattered_disc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trans-Neptunian_objects
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90377_Sedna
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eris_(dwarf_planet)

 

[Condottiere]

Actually, stopping first at a gas giant begins to make more sense.

It's less likely to be fortified or guarded than the primary, assess the situation, gather up the lost sheep, tank up, if necessary for a tactical withdrawal or an in-system jump with lots of fuel for maneuvering.

Does an extra week make a difference? Surprise is lost, you could unmothballize the ordinary ships (or you could try), you could send out a distress call (which might have nasty consequences eventually for the attacker, but won't help you within the requisite timeframe).

Pearl Harbour means you drop in on top of the primary (or wherever the fleet has it's base), shoot up everything in sight, and if you're not planning on staying making your way to the nearest gas giant (since you have to suppose the fuel storage facilities would be destroyed by the defenders).

 

[phavoc]

Actually, stopping first at a gas giant begins to make more sense.

It's less likely to be fortified or guarded than the primary, assess the situation, gather up the lost sheep, tank up, if necessary for a tactical withdrawal or an in-system jump with lots of fuel for maneuvering.

Does an extra week make a difference? Surprise is lost, you could unmothballize the ordinary ships (or you could try), you could send out a distress call (which might have nasty consequences eventually for the attacker, but won't help you within the requisite timeframe).

Pearl Harbour means you drop in on top of the primary (or wherever the fleet has it's base), shoot up everything in sight, and if you're not planning on staying making your way to the nearest gas giant (since you have to suppose the fuel storage facilities would be destroyed by the defenders).

Yep, all depends on your attack plans. Lightning attacks have their advantage, but if you run into something you can't handle, you are stuck with no way to retreat.

Assuming you are in a ship capable of 4G acceleration, it's about 80hrs flight time from the Earth to Jupiter. That's a simplified calculation, not taking true orbital position into account. So it would be a little over three days travel time. You would only make a jump if you were a 1G ship. I would suspect most military ships would be 3-4G capable.

Three days wouldn't be enough to take a ship out of mothballs, but it would be enough time (probably) to bring standby ships online, or bring crew up from a planet to man defensive stations that are normally not kept fully manned.

 

[Condottiere]

Is that continuous thrust and deceleration?

Unless I missed errata, fuel consumption is 2.5% per thrust hour, which at four gees means about eight hours, assuming cramped quarters.

 

[phavoc]

Is that continuous thrust and deceleration?

Unless I missed errata, fuel consumption is 2.5% per thrust hour, which at four gees means about eight hours, assuming cramped quarters.

It's accelerating at 4G to your turnover point, and then decelerating to zero relative to Jupiter. It would be a shorter trip if you accelerated all the way and were doing a fly-by.

Fuel consumption would depend on your power source. For a standard M-drive, your range is dictated by your power plant fuel consumption. You are citing the reaction drive fuel chart. For a fusion power plant on, for example a sJ drive, 2 tons of fuel will last for two weeks.

 

[Condottiere]

I looked over HG, but outside gravitics for smallcraft, I don't see any mention of a reactionless drive, which is why I previously mentioned that I would add smallcraft gravitics drive to a starship as diesels.

 

[phavoc]

I looked over HG, but outside gravitics for smallcraft, I don't see any mention of a reactionless drive, which is why I previously mentioned that I would add smallcraft gravitics drive to a starship as diesels.

pg42 of HG lists the Maneuver drive (as gravitic). Below that is a reaction drive -

Fuel Required (as a percentage of the ship’s displacement) = 2.5% x
Maximum Thrust x hours of Maximum Thrust required.

For example, if a thrust of 4G for two hours is required, then 4 x 2 x
2.5% = 20% of the ship’s tonnage must be dedicated to fuel.

Reactionless drives don't exist TL15 and under.

 

[Condottiere]

But pointedly left out on pages 53 and 63.

Smallcraft have gravitics in generic models; page 57 mentions that they are the smaller versions of drive plates, which probably start becoming available at TL9.

This seems like an editorial decision was made late in the design process to remove reactionless drives but any calculation of space travel and combat would show that it would literally force any ship to stand and fight it out, unless it could withdraw and retank, relying on heavy armour and redundancy to last it out, rationing fuel as far as possible.

 

[phavoc]

But pointedly left out on pages 53 and 63.

Smallcraft have gravitics in generic models; page 57 mentions that they are the smaller versions of drive plates, which probably start becoming available at TL9.

This seems like an editorial decision was made late in the design process to remove reactionless drives but any calculation of space travel and combat would show that it would literally force any ship to stand and fight it out, unless it could withdraw and retank, relying on heavy armour and redundancy to last it out, rationing fuel as far as possible.

Yeah, I see that. I read that section on pg 57 as just a restatement. Drive plates are gravitic drives, just with a different name. The work exactly the same so I've always lumped them together.

The TL tables listed on 53 (like a few other tables) don't quite match up to the tech level or the in-book explanations. It's a common problem. Gravitic 1G M-drives are definitely NOT available at TL7.... maybe if you wanna install a bazillion ion drives, but that table is clearly not correct. Then again, missiles are available at TL6, and they are exactly the same as the TL15 ones... go figure!

And you are right, there's no mention of TL for M-drives in capital ship construction.

Reactionless drives have always been non-canon for Traveller since it's inception. I think TNE had some variations with the primary technology behind drives, but their's were also not reactionless. At least that's what I recall on the topic.

 

[Condottiere]

I tend to term drive plates as reactionless, in comparison to the reactionary rocket ones. I think they were introduced in HG because players were tired of watching to see if the fuel gauge was blinking empty. The only real advantage I see for using them would be as afterburners, or in light fighters, where a quick interception is more important than endurance.