Conventional & Command Bridges on Hulls >2,000 tons

[snrdg121408]

Morning PDT all,

I am trying to determine if
(1) A command module/bridge is the same thing as a conventional bridge?
(2) A command bridge's cost is calculated based on the same size command module bridge or the cost of the installed command module/bridge?
(3) HG 2e has change the rules on the relationship of the command bridge and a command module/bridge?

Background
In HG 1e, p. 65, a command module/(conventional?) bridge's tonnage takes up 0.5% of the ship's total tonnage at a cost of MCr0.1 and a command bridge, p. 45, requires 80 tons per section costing 50% more than a conventional bridge of the same size.

Using the HG 1e Capital Ship Design Example pp. 69-72 a 75,000 ton hull has four sections. Per the rule on p. 65 the hull's command module/bridge is 75,000 x (0.5% x 4) = 75,000 x 2% = 75,000 x 0.02 = 1,500 tons with a cost of 1,500 x MCr0.1 = MCr150.

The installed command bridge per the rule on p. 45 requires 80 tons per section which is 80 x 4 = 320 tons. The cost, if I understand the cost portion of the rule is 50% of the cost of the same size conventional bridge (command module/bridge?). The example appears to calculate the command bridge's cost using the 1,500 ton command module's/bridge's (Conventional bridge's?), which is 4.6875 times bigger than the 320 ton command bridge, cost of MCr150 instead of a conventional bridge (command module/bridge?) of the same size.

A 320 ton conventional bridge (command module/bridge?) would cost 320 tons x MCr0.1 = MCr32. The cost of a 320 ton command bridge is 50% more than a 320 ton conventional bridge (command module/bridge?) of MCr32 + (MCr32 x 0.5) = MCr32 + MCr16 = MCr48.

I am hoping that I did understand HG 1e command module/bridge (conventional bridge?) and command bridge rules correctly and that HG 2e has be written clearly enough that I will not being asking a similar question in the future?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

New High Guard is simpler. A single system for ship design.

Command Bridges
A command bridge is used by ships intended to lead squadrons or entire fleets, where the control of large regions of space is critical. A command bridge consumes 80 tons, can be used by any ship of 5,000 tons or more and costs MCr0.75 per 100 tons (or part of) of the ship it is installed within. It functions as a normal bridge but also grants DM+1 to all Tactics (naval) checks made by Travellers within it.

 

[snrdg121408]

Afternoon PDT AnotherDilbert,

Thank you for the reply and the way HG 2e command bridge rule differs from HG 1e.

New High Guard is simpler. A single system for ship design.

Command Bridges
A command bridge is used by ships intended to lead squadrons or entire fleets, where the control of large regions of space is critical. A command bridge consumes 80 tons, can be used by any ship of 5,000 tons or more and costs MCr0.75 per 100 tons (or part of) of the ship it is installed within. It functions as a normal bridge but also grants DM+1 to all Tactics (naval) checks made by Travellers within it.

Before going through the HG 2e command bridge rule I think I may have figured out what the HG 1e command bridge may have been saying.

Hg 1e Command Bridge 1e p. 45

A command bridge costs 50% more than a conventional bridge of the same size. Capital ship command bridges take up 80 tons
per section of ship and located in a single location (which may be separate from the main bridge).

A conventional (command module/?) bridge has a cost of Cr100,000 or MCr0.1 a command bridge's cost is going to the 50% more than the conventional bridge's cost of Cr100,000 or Cr100,000 x 1.5 = Cr150,000 or MCr0.15. The HG 1e 75,000 ton hull's command bridge is 80 tons x 4 sections = 320 tons and costs 320 x MCr0.15 = MCr48.

Let me see if I understand the HG 2e Command Bridge rules:

Hulls >= 5,000 tons can install a command bridge that requires 80 tons of hull space at a cost of MCr0.75 per 100 tons of the ship's hull.

A 75,000 ton installs a command bridge which takes up 80 tons of space and costs (75,000/100) x MCr0.75 = 750 x MCr0.75 = MCr562.5.

I can agree with the command bridge tonnage in either HG 2e or HG 1e the cost on the other hand my first reaction is the the command bridges cost is way to high. In HG 1e the command bridge is both smaller and cost less than the conventional bridge which I agree with.

How are conventional bridges tonnages and costs calculated?

 

[phavoc]

New High Guard is simpler. A single system for ship design.

Command Bridges
A command bridge is used by ships intended to lead squadrons or entire fleets, where the control of large regions of space is critical. A command bridge consumes 80 tons, can be used by any ship of 5,000 tons or more and costs MCr0.75 per 100 tons (or part of) of the ship it is installed within. It functions as a normal bridge but also grants DM+1 to all Tactics (naval) checks made by Travellers within it.

Command (or flag) bridges should be based upon the size of the ships/flotilla/fleet they are meant to command. So that essentially gives you a small/medium/large version. It would be comprised of holo tanks, work stations, etc, where commanders would oversee the battle and provide direction for the fleet. A one-size fits all makes no sense. A destroyer flotilla would need much less space than a full fleet, with battleships, cruisers, carriers and escorts. Also the pricing shouldn't be set to the size of the ship, especially since the size is fixed. That makes no logical sense whatsoever.

 

[snrdg121408]

Afternoon PDT phavoc,

New High Guard is simpler. A single system for ship design.

Command Bridges
A command bridge is used by ships intended to lead squadrons or entire fleets, where the control of large regions of space is critical. A command bridge consumes 80 tons, can be used by any ship of 5,000 tons or more and costs MCr0.75 per 100 tons (or part of) of the ship it is installed within. It functions as a normal bridge but also grants DM+1 to all Tactics (naval) checks made by Travellers within it.

Command (or flag) bridges should be based upon the size of the ships/flotilla/fleet they are meant to command. So that essentially gives you a small/medium/large version. It would be comprised of holo tanks, work stations, etc, where commanders would oversee the battle and provide direction for the fleet. A one-size fits all makes no sense. A destroyer flotilla would need much less space than a full fleet, with battleships, cruisers, carriers and escorts. Also the pricing shouldn't be set to the size of the ship, especially since the size is fixed. That makes no logical sense whatsoever.

In HG 1e I think that the 80 tons per section for the command bridge was a way to adjust the size for the units to be commanded. A 1,000,000 ton hull has 480 tons of command bridge. What caused my confusion in both HG 1e and at this point HG 2e is the cost. Of course in HG 1e the confusion started with the Capital Ship Design Example Command Bridge's rule of cost being calculated for the at 50% than the same size conventional bridge's cost. I now feel that the rule met to say 50% more than the cost of a conventional bridge. I also feel that if the rule had been written something like this: "A command bridge requires 80 tons of hull per section and costs MCr0.15 per ton of command bridge." would have avoided my, if I'm on the right track, confusion.

If I'm totally out to lunch then I am still trying to figure out what 50% more than the same size conventional bridge really means and if the Design Examples command bridge cost calculation is correct.

 

[phavoc]

Afternoon PDT phavoc,

In HG 1e I think that the 80 tons per section for the command bridge was a way to adjust the size for the units to be commanded. A 1,000,000 ton hull has 480 tons of command bridge. What caused my confusion in both HG 1e and at this point HG 2e is the cost. Of course in HG 1e the confusion started with the Capital Ship Design Example Command Bridge's rule of cost being calculated for the at 50% than the same size conventional bridge's cost. I now feel that the rule met to say 50% more than the cost of a conventional bridge. I also feel that if the rule had been written something like this: "A command bridge requires 80 tons of hull per section and costs MCr0.15 per ton of command bridge." would have avoided my, if I'm on the right track, confusion.

If I'm totally out to lunch then I am still trying to figure out what 50% more than the same size conventional bridge really means and if the Design Examples command bridge cost calculation is correct.

Yeah, but that makes no sense. You could have a flag bridge in a 50,000Dton cruiser vs. a 1,000,000Dton Dreadnaught doing the exact same thing. And that's where the logic fails. It's fine to make them generic, but they should at least be sized properly for their function. Also, if you have a flag bridge, you have a built-in staff for it, usually at least half or more are officers, thus your stateroom tonnage is different, too. Not to mention senior officers may have a flag mess, etc. I made some myself and added in the flag bridge crew and their attendant stateroom and other tonnage. So that 80 ton flag bridge might also require an additional 300 tons of staterooms, flag mess, etc.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello again phavoc,

Afternoon PDT phavoc,

In HG 1e I think that the 80 tons per section for the command bridge was a way to adjust the size for the units to be commanded. A 1,000,000 ton hull has 480 tons of command bridge. What caused my confusion in both HG 1e and at this point HG 2e is the cost. Of course in HG 1e the confusion started with the Capital Ship Design Example Command Bridge's rule of cost being calculated for the at 50% than the same size conventional bridge's cost. I now feel that the rule met to say 50% more than the cost of a conventional bridge. I also feel that if the rule had been written something like this: "A command bridge requires 80 tons of hull per section and costs MCr0.15 per ton of command bridge." would have avoided my, if I'm on the right track, confusion.

If I'm totally out to lunch then I am still trying to figure out what 50% more than the same size conventional bridge really means and if the Design Examples command bridge cost calculation is correct.

Yeah, but that makes no sense. You could have a flag bridge in a 50,000Dton cruiser vs. a 1,000,000Dton Dreadnaught doing the exact same thing. And that's where the logic fails. It's fine to make them generic, but they should at least be sized properly for their function. Also, if you have a flag bridge, you have a built-in staff for it, usually at least half or more are officers, thus your stateroom tonnage is different, too. Not to mention senior officers may have a flag mess, etc. I made some myself and added in the flag bridge crew and their attendant stateroom and other tonnage. So that 80 ton flag bridge might also require an additional 300 tons of staterooms, flag mess, etc.

In the earlier post you stated that the purpose of a command bridge is "It would be comprised of holo tanks, work stations, etc, where commanders would oversee the battle and provide direction for the fleet."

How many workstations and holographic projection tanks fit in to 80 tons or 80 x 14 = 1,120 cubic meters of space?

A star system that has not been discovered by the Third Imperium has a fleet of system ships with the largest being 50,000 tons. The civilization calls the ship a battleship or dreadnaught while the Third Imperium would classify the hull as a cruiser. In either case the 50,000 ton hull is the civilization's flag ship and has a command bridge installed and does the same job as a Third Imperium's 1,000,000 ton dreadnaught.

Another quoted from the earlier post "Command (or flag) bridges should be based upon the size of the ships/flotilla/fleet they are meant to command."

A force composed of 10 1,000 ton Destroyer Escorts and a single 3,000 ton destroyer set-up as the flag ship is equipped with a command bridge in HG 1 e the destroyer has two sections which requires a command bridge of 80 x 2 = 160 tons and the bridge is 3,000 x (2 x 0.5%) = 3,000 x 1% = 3,000 x 0.01= 30 tons. I would say that the command bridge could easily handle the ten destroyer escorts. Of course the 160 tons devoted to the command bridge means that the destroyer command ship has had to compromise in other areas like weapons, armor, small cargo capacity, or any other component.


The biggest ship does not necessarily need to be the command and control vessel, but then again the bigger the better chance of survival.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello all,

Okay, my reply to phavoc time stamped Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:47 am got posted by mistake, I wanted to preview the thing. Instead of deleting the post I'll try a new one.

Afternoon PDT phavoc,

In HG 1e I think that the 80 tons per section for the command bridge was a way to adjust the size for the units to be commanded. A 1,000,000 ton hull has 480 tons of command bridge. What caused my confusion in both HG 1e and at this point HG 2e is the cost. Of course in HG 1e the confusion started with the Capital Ship Design Example Command Bridge's rule of cost being calculated for the at 50% than the same size conventional bridge's cost. I now feel that the rule met to say 50% more than the cost of a conventional bridge. I also feel that if the rule had been written something like this: "A command bridge requires 80 tons of hull per section and costs MCr0.15 per ton of command bridge." would have avoided my, if I'm on the right track, confusion.

If I'm totally out to lunch then I am still trying to figure out what 50% more than the same size conventional bridge really means and if the Design Examples command bridge cost calculation is correct.

Yeah, but that makes no sense. You could have a flag bridge in a 50,000Dton cruiser vs. a 1,000,000Dton Dreadnaught doing the exact same thing. And that's where the logic fails. It's fine to make them generic, but they should at least be sized properly for their function. Also, if you have a flag bridge, you have a built-in staff for it, usually at least half or more are officers, thus your stateroom tonnage is different, too. Not to mention senior officers may have a flag mess, etc. I made some myself and added in the flag bridge crew and their attendant stateroom and other tonnage. So that 80 ton flag bridge might also require an additional 300 tons of staterooms, flag mess, etc.

If the largest hull in a fleet is 50,000 displacement tons this vessel will probably have a command/flag bridge installed and perform the same duties as a 1,000,000 displacement ton dreadnaught. There is a good chance that civilization that built the 50,000 displacement ton vessel might even call the thing something that translates to dreadnaught or battleship.

From HG 1e p. 67
"Quarters: Staterooms or quarters must be provided for the entire crew. The captain of the ship must be provided with an individual stateroom, as must the commanding officers of each section and the commander of the ship's troops. All other personnel on military vessels must be provided with the equivalent of half a stateroom each.

Passengers should be provided with single staterooms. Low passengers should be provided with individual low berths.

Staterooms require 4 tons at a cost of MCr 0.5 per stateroom. Staterooms actually average about 2 tons, but the additional tonnage is used to provide corridors and access ways, as well as galley and recreation areas. Low berths require 0.5 ton per berth, at a cost of MCr 0.05 each."

On a 50,00 ton hull the conventional bridge is 1,000 ton per HG 1e p. 65. The command section per p. 67 works out to be (50,000/10,000) x 5 = 5 x 5 = 25 personnel. The table on page 67 requires each member of the command crew to be in a single occupancy stateroom, that means 25 staterooms taking up 100 tons of space. My quibble is that the support personnel would not be in single staterooms since they are enlisted. The commanding officer and executive officer each will get a single stateroom. I would give single staterooms to five other officers in the command section bring the total to seven single staterooms taking up 28 tons. The remaining 18 personnel would share double occupancy staterooms for a total of 9 staterooms taking up 36 tons. The total stateroom tonnage (the corridors, access ways, galley, and recreation spaces) require 64 tons of space.

The 300 tons for the flag staff equals 75 staterooms. Not having any guidelines I'll say that 21 officers get single staterooms that leaves 54 staterooms. There 54 junior officers and enlisted support personnel that will be in double occupancy staterooms requiring 27 staterooms. We have 27 staterooms remaining to designate as other rooms like gyms, libraries, or any other component not included in the rules.

The 54 junior officers and support personnel will probably be in three watch sections which will have 18 personnel on watch with 18 doing maintenance and the other 18 sleeping. Of the 21 officers I'd say 18 stand watches bumping the total to 24 per three section watch. In Hg 1e the command bridge is 320 tons on a 50,000 ton hull. From the information and I understand it correctly given earlier HG 2e the command bridge is a single 80 tons I do not see a problem with 24 people fitting into the space.

Of course I am probably out to lunch, but the above is my opinion.

Again my apologies for my previous post and I hope this one is a lot clearer.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Phavoc has a point: The Command Bridge is only 20 dT bigger than a regular Bridge, but works as both the ship's bridge and the fleet's bridge.

For a large ship I would add both a Bridge for the ship and a Command Bridge (and some extra staff) for squadron/fleet command.

Here added as a module: http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?p=899140#p899140

Flag Bridge  Command Bridge         1      80    100      
             Briefing Room         30     120     15      
             Staterooms           100     400     50      
             Common Areas         50%     200     20      
             Boat Bay                     200        
SUM                                      1000    185

 

[phavoc]

A flag bridge shouldn't be considered the ships bridge, or even the auxiliary one. In theory any compartment can command other sections if it has communication capability and control, weapons and engineering spaces are still capable of operation. Bit that's more in scfi books than anything.

A flag bridge is going to be about seeing the big picture and communications among all the fleet. A large enough fleet will have multiple c&c ships, with only one designated as the primary, the rest filter the orders to those that fall within their command structure.

I would put no more than two stations per dton, as you could cram more in, but this is not the place to have spatial efficency, but operational. The larger the flag bridge, the bigger the primary holo display is going to be. And you wouldn't have three full watches going either. You have the primary, with all the commanders, and then you'll have a skeleton set at other times because theres no fighting going on to handle. Any planning would go on when the fleet is not at combat status.

As for quarters, you can figure at least half the staff is officer based, with senior ratings sitting at the control stations. And plenty if funky junior officers too because that's a rotation that all officers will go through. Because they are flag officers they won't necessarily mix with the other crew. Even the ratings may be separated with different quarters. Flag personnel aren't attached to a ship, unlike normal crew, so they get treated differently.

Just how many control stations are required is debateable. An AWACS aircraft has two dozen stations for operators as well as additional command crew. The flight crew just hauls around the cargo. Plus these people have satellite links back to the pentagon and other command centers. A deployed fleet will not and therefore all the decision makers have to be on the ship or in the fleet. This means you'll have potentially larger than just the minimum.

Senior flag officers, especially admiral and above will have outsized cabins fitting their rank, plus their own personal dining area and workspaces. For them you could easily quadruple the space for an flag admiral. Those underneath, also of senior rank would have cabins at least the same size as the ships captain, plus their own mess, recreation areas, cools, support staff,etc. It takes a village to house them all. Which is why I prepackaged that tonnage into the flag bridges I created. Then you just drop the size you want too a design and viola, all done.

In regards to the size question, sure, that's always present in the Traveller universe. But the default design ideas and such are Imperium bsed, and then are tweaked to individual races to suit their specific needs and desires. But you need to start somewhere, right?

 

[snrdg121408]

Morning AnotherDilbert,

Phavoc has a point: The Command Bridge is only 20 dT bigger than a regular Bridge, but works as both the ship's bridge and the fleet's bridge.

For a large ship I would add both a Bridge for the ship and a Command Bridge (and some extra staff) for squadron/fleet command.

Here added as a module: http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?p=899140#p899140

Flag Bridge  Command Bridge         1      80    100      
             Briefing Room         30     120     15      
             Staterooms           100     400     50      
             Common Areas         50%     200     20      
             Boat Bay                     200        
SUM                                      1000    185

Looks like I did not understand what you posted about the command bridge. From HG 1e p. 44 "A command bridge is intended for use by warships that will be coordinating the efforts of a squadron of other spacecraft. It incorporates a large–scale holographic display of fleet actions, enhanced communications and control electronics, and space for more command staff. A spacecraft command bridge takes up 80 tons, but gives a +1 DM to Tactics (naval tactics) checks. A command bridge costs 50% more than a conventional bridge of the same size. Capital ship command bridges take up 80 tons per section of ship and located in a single location (which may be separate from the main bridge)."

The only item in the write-up I have a quibble with is the undefined purpose of electronic controls. The Battle Group/Task Force Commander on the Command Bridge is tasked with controlling the actions of all the units involved based on the gathered sensor data. The responsibility for ship handling of the Flag ship and each of the ships in the battle group/task force is that of their ships' Captains/Commanding Officers. If the Command Bridge electronic controls means that it can take control of ship handling away from the flag ship's Captain then I have a problem with the wording. If the electronic controls means manipulating the ship's computer or a computer that is part of the command bridge, or the environmental conditions of the command bridge, or anything but taking control of the ship away from its Captain I'm fine with the wording.

The Combat Information Center (CIC), in my opinion and 20-years of naval experience, coordinates the efforts of assigned assets by gathering and displaying tactical information allowing the Officer-In-Charge to, hopefully, decide on the best offensive and/or defensive use of those assets, which is the same function as a MgT Command Bridge.

From the hint that a command bridge is 20 tons bigger than a ship's conventional bridge HG 2e is appears to using rules similar to the CRB 1e Spacecraft Design Bridge Table. I was hoping that HG 2e would use HG 1e Capital Ship Design command module/bridge rules found on p. 65 for system ship and starships > 100 tons. For small craft hulls I think HG 1e p. 60 works. In my opinion this works better than CT LBB 2 and CT LBB 5.

Thank you and phavoc for your replies

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello phavoc,

A flag bridge shouldn't be considered the ships bridge, or even the auxiliary one. In theory any compartment can command other sections if it has communication capability and control, weapons and engineering spaces are still capable of operation. Bit that's more in scfi books than anything.

I agree with you that the command/flag bridge is not a substitute for the primary/conventional bridge. In HG 1e there is the option to disperse the bridge throughout the each section or gather them into larger pieces. If the bridge is in one section the other sections can not take over if the bridge is knocked out of action. In the majority of the science fiction books I've read the engineering spaces are capable of maintaining the ship's ability to maneuver but is not capable of passing sensor data needed by the weapons department to operate their offensive and/or defensive systems.

A flag bridge is going to be about seeing the big picture and communications among all the fleet. A large enough fleet will have multiple c&c ships, with only one designated as the primary, the rest filter the orders to those that fall within their command structure.

I agree with you on the first part but not totally with the multiple command and control ships filtering the data to pass along to the sub-groups within the battle group/task force. The senior officer of the sub-groups receives the commands from the flag ship and unless there is something that the on scene commander sees to exploit passes the orders to the other units. Filtering the orders has a better chance of causing a mistake giving the other side the advantage.

I would put no more than two stations per dton, as you could cram more in, but this is not the place to have spatial efficency, but operational. The larger the flag bridge, the bigger the primary holo display is going to be. And you wouldn't have three full watches going either. You have the primary, with all the commanders, and then you'll have a skeleton set at other times because theres no fighting going on to handle. Any planning would go on when the fleet is not at combat status.

In MT, TNE, and T4 I could give you the number of workstations needed, unfortunately I have not stumbled on a rule that gave me any idea how many workstations MgT recommends per ton.

My apologies I was thinking in real world terms about the watch sections and I forgot that in the game world the time standing watch does not take its toll on the personnel.

Like the real world each side gets to set up things how they want them to be. I would be using what my real world experience to set up the watch sections and you would do things your way. I have no problem with you way.

As for quarters, you can figure at least half the staff is officer based, with senior ratings sitting at the control stations. And plenty if funky junior officers too because that's a rotation that all officers will go through. Because they are flag officers they won't necessarily mix with the other crew. Even the ratings may be separated with different quarters. Flag personnel aren't attached to a ship, unlike normal crew, so they get treated differently.

Here is what I've observed in my experience as active duty navy, an USAF brat growing up with access to an army and air force installation, which as a retiree I still access about the command structure. Enlisted personnel usually out number the officers in the navy, army, and air force.

Yep, I agree that the Battle Group/Task Force Commander and his staff would have quarters that in Traveller includes chunks of corridors, messing facilities, sanitary facilities, and anything not covered by ready made components or modified from the components already available.

Not mixing with the ship's crew, especially in the officer ranks is not usually good when the crap hits the fan. The best officers and their staffs, in my opinion, that mix with the ship's normal crew would improve survivability.

Just how many control stations are required is debateable. An AWACS aircraft has two dozen stations for operators as well as additional command crew. The flight crew just hauls around the cargo. Plus these people have satellite links back to the pentagon and other command centers. A deployed fleet will not and therefore all the decision makers have to be on the ship or in the fleet. This means you'll have potentially larger than just the minimum.

In the HG 1e Capital Ship Design Example the ship's crew complement is 1,178 and 20 passengers. The table on HG 1e PDF p. requires that the 46 personnel assigned to the Command Section are in single occupancy staterooms. In the write-up below the commanding officer, which is covered in the command section, and the senior officers of each section require single occupancy staterooms. There are five sections in the example, in my opinion the Engineering section and Service Crew are always assigned, while the gunnery section, flight section, and ship's troops are add-ons. Since there are five sections there are five additional single occupancy staterooms. The total of single occupancy staterooms is 46 + 5 = 51. The remaining 1,178 - 51 = 1,127 ship's personnel are in double occupancy staterooms which would be 1,127 / 2 = 563.5 round to 564 staterooms. There are 20 passengers, my take the flag officer and staff, get single staterooms. The total number of staterooms onboard are 564 + 51 + 20 = 615 + 20 = 635 staterooms.

Looks like the design example did not include the commanding officer of the ship's troops or provide a flight control officer the should be assigned if there are any launched craft, and totally ignored an officer to command the ship's Service Crew. Dropping the three commanding officers changes the numbers to be 1,178 - 48 command/engineering officer/gunnery officer single occupancy staterooms = 1,130 / 2 = 565 double occupancy staterooms. There are 565 + 48 + 20 = 613 + 20 = 613 + 20 = 633 staterooms, which means either I goofed again or that either the chief gunnery officer or the chief engineering officer is not in a single occupancy stateroom.

Senior flag officers, especially admiral and above will have outsized cabins fitting their rank, plus their own personal dining area and workspaces. For them you could easily quadruple the space for an flag admiral. Those underneath, also of senior rank would have cabins at least the same size as the ships captain, plus their own mess, recreation areas, cools, support staff,etc. It takes a village to house them all. Which is why I prepackaged that tonnage into the flag bridges I created. Then you just drop the size you want too a design and viola, all done.

In either of my stateroom calculations the extra staterooms may very well be used to bump up the size of the Admiral's stateroom.

My take of the HG 1e design example is that some of the sixteen briefings rooms are assigned to the command bridge.

In regards to the size question, sure, that's always present in the Traveller universe. But the default design ideas and such are Imperium bsed, and then are tweaked to individual races to suit their specific needs and desires. But you need to start somewhere, right?

I agree that the standard crew size is Imperium and that the other races may or may not have the crew requirements modified to fit. Unfortunately, I have not built ships for anything but the Imperium, okay I've started some designs focused on Terrans for the Interstellar Wars.

Thank you for the different viewpoint.

 

[phavoc]

I agree with you that the command/flag bridge is not a substitute for the primary/conventional bridge. In HG 1e there is the option to disperse the bridge throughout the each section or gather them into larger pieces. If the bridge is in one section the other sections can not take over if the bridge is knocked out of action. In the majority of the science fiction books I've read the engineering spaces are capable of maintaining the ship's ability to maneuver but is not capable of passing sensor data needed by the weapons department to operate their offensive and/or defensive systems.

It's not hard to set up auxillary control centers anywhere in a ship. But you don't spread them everywhere because you (a) need to man them, and (b) by their nature they have the ability to manage and control your ships systems. So it would be TOO much of a good thing.

I agree with you on the first part but not totally with the multiple command and control ships filtering the data to pass along to the sub-groups within the battle group/task force. The senior officer of the sub-groups receives the commands from the flag ship and unless there is something that the on scene commander sees to exploit passes the orders to the other units. Filtering the orders has a better chance of causing a mistake giving the other side the advantage.

Much depends on the size of the fleet and it's make-up. The central fleet commander is looking at things strategically. Their orders may be "send the reserve fleet to take out the enemys tankers in the rear". Whomever is in command of the reserve fleet would be responsible for creating the tactical commands for undertaking the orders. Also, don't forget that if the primary fleet commander's ship is disabled or destroyed, whomever is second in command would take over. So the idea of multiple command ships works along the spectrum of command and control. It's no different with land groups, where you central commands leave specifics up to the local commanders and their local command centers.

In MT, TNE, and T4 I could give you the number of workstations needed, unfortunately I have not stumbled on a rule that gave me any idea how many workstations MgT recommends per ton.

I really just did it based upon seeing different things and my own experiences with C&C while in the military. In the field, for smaller units, you learn to live in cramped situations, but your scope is far smaller. In the rear information is your friend and only reason for existence. You need the space to have more displays and more everything because your scope is much bigger. Plus in the rear you typically get better seats too...

Here is what I've observed in my experience as active duty navy, an USAF brat growing up with access to an army and air force installation, which as a retiree I still access about the command structure. Enlisted personnel usually out number the officers in the navy, army, and air force.

Yep, I agree that the Battle Group/Task Force Commander and his staff would have quarters that in Traveller includes chunks of corridors, messing facilities, sanitary facilities, and anything not covered by ready made components or modified from the components already available.

Not mixing with the ship's crew, especially in the officer ranks is not usually good when the crap hits the fan. The best officers and their staffs, in my opinion, that mix with the ship's normal crew would improve survivability.



In the HG 1e Capital Ship Design Example the ship's crew complement is 1,178 and 20 passengers. The table on HG 1e PDF p. requires that the 46 personnel assigned to the Command Section are in single occupancy staterooms. In the write-up below the commanding officer, which is covered in the command section, and the senior officers of each section require single occupancy staterooms. There are five sections in the example, in my opinion the Engineering section and Service Crew are always assigned, while the gunnery section, flight section, and ship's troops are add-ons. Since there are five sections there are five additional single occupancy staterooms. The total of single occupancy staterooms is 46 + 5 = 51. The remaining 1,178 - 51 = 1,127 ship's personnel are in double occupancy staterooms which would be 1,127 / 2 = 563.5 round to 564 staterooms. There are 20 passengers, my take the flag officer and staff, get single staterooms. The total number of staterooms onboard are 564 + 51 + 20 = 615 + 20 = 635 staterooms.

Looks like the design example did not include the commanding officer of the ship's troops or provide a flight control officer the should be assigned if there are any launched craft, and totally ignored an officer to command the ship's Service Crew. Dropping the three commanding officers changes the numbers to be 1,178 - 48 command/engineering officer/gunnery officer single occupancy staterooms = 1,130 / 2 = 565 double occupancy staterooms. There are 565 + 48 + 20 = 613 + 20 = 613 + 20 = 633 staterooms, which means either I goofed again or that either the chief gunnery officer or the chief engineering officer is not in a single occupancy stateroom.



In either of my stateroom calculations the extra staterooms may very well be used to bump up the size of the Admiral's stateroom.

My take of the HG 1e design example is that some of the sixteen briefings rooms are assigned to the command bridge.

[/quote][/quote]

I agree that the standard crew size is Imperium and that the other races may or may not have the crew requirements modified to fit. Unfortunately, I have not built ships for anything but the Imperium, okay I've started some designs focused on Terrans for the Interstellar Wars.

Thank you for the different viewpoint.[/quote]

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello again phavoc,

I agree with you that the command/flag bridge is not a substitute for the primary/conventional bridge. In HG 1e there is the option to disperse the bridge throughout the each section or gather them into larger pieces. If the bridge is in one section the other sections can not take over if the bridge is knocked out of action. In the majority of the science fiction books I've read the engineering spaces are capable of maintaining the ship's ability to maneuver but is not capable of passing sensor data needed by the weapons department to operate their offensive and/or defensive systems.

It's not hard to set up auxillary control centers anywhere in a ship. But you don't spread them everywhere because you (a) need to man them, and (b) by their nature they have the ability to manage and control your ships systems. So it would be TOO much of a good thing.

In MgT my auxiliary bridge would be based on a compact bridge and the purpose of them is to take over if the primary bridge is knocked out of action. The only time an auxiliary bridge would be manned is during battle stations, maintenance, and of course during drills.

I agree with you on the first part but not totally with the multiple command and control ships filtering the data to pass along to the sub-groups within the battle group/task force. The senior officer of the sub-groups receives the commands from the flag ship and unless there is something that the on scene commander sees to exploit passes the orders to the other units. Filtering the orders has a better chance of causing a mistake giving the other side the advantage.

Much depends on the size of the fleet and it's make-up. The central fleet commander is looking at things strategically. Their orders may be "send the reserve fleet to take out the enemys tankers in the rear". Whomever is in command of the reserve fleet would be responsible for creating the tactical commands for undertaking the orders. Also, don't forget that if the primary fleet commander's ship is disabled or destroyed, whomever is second in command would take over. So the idea of multiple command ships works along the spectrum of command and control. It's no different with land groups, where you central commands leave specifics up to the local commanders and their local command centers.

My understanding is that a command and control ship is a specialized vessel. Here is how I understand a Battle Group/Task Force. The Battle Group/Task Force Commander is on a battleship, the next senior officer is the commander of the carriers who is embarked on one of the carriers, the next officer is the commander of the cruisers, who is embarked on one of the cruisers. All of the major combatants have a command bridge in case the flag has to be transferred none of the ships are strictly "command ships", they are major combatants that the Senior Commander can when embarked make tactical decisions.

In MT, TNE, and T4 I could give you the number of workstations needed, unfortunately I have not stumbled on a rule that gave me any idea how many workstations MgT recommends per ton.

I really just did it based upon seeing different things and my own experiences with C&C while in the military. In the field, for smaller units, you learn to live in cramped situations, but your scope is far smaller. In the rear information is your friend and only reason for existence. You need the space to have more displays and more everything because your scope is much bigger. Plus in the rear you typically get better seats too...

The problem is that, in my experience and reviewing naval designs, warships are designed to deliver a big hurt on the opposing forces which means that the crew is a secondary concern. The command bridge is going to be, at least in my opinion, is going to be compact but capable. The most high tech and compact systems are going to be on the command bridge. In HG 1e the convention bridge is 1,500 tons and the Command Bridge is 320 tons. Personally, I think the conventional bridge is way to big, but I do not have any ideas to suggest changing the rules.

 

[AndrewW]

In HG 1e the convention bridge is 1,500 tons and the Command Bridge is 320 tons. Personally, I think the conventional bridge is way to big, but I do not have any ideas to suggest changing the rules.

A normal bridge is up to 60 tons in the new version.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello AndrewW,

In HG 1e the convention bridge is 1,500 tons and the Command Bridge is 320 tons. Personally, I think the conventional bridge is way to big, but I do not have any ideas to suggest changing the rules.

A normal bridge is up to 60 tons in the new version.

On one hand I like the HG 2e bridge size on the other hand I feel that the requirement is too restrictive, but 60 tons fitting a Command Crew of 25, okay 23 the CO and XO would show up whenever they want, usually about the time there is a ship's drill.

 

[AndrewW]

On one hand I like the HG 2e bridge size on the other hand I feel that the requirement is too restrictive, but 60 tons fitting a Command Crew of 25, okay 23 the CO and XO would show up whenever they want, usually about the time there is a ship's drill.

Normal bridge, not a command bridge.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello AndrewW

On one hand I like the HG 2e bridge size on the other hand I feel that the requirement is too restrictive, but 60 tons fitting a Command Crew of 25, okay 23 the CO and XO would show up whenever they want, usually about the time there is a ship's drill.

Normal bridge, not a command bridge.

A normal bridge if I understand the HG 1e Crew rules correctly is where six of the seven officers in the Command Section Crew (Command Crew) would stand their watches. The six officers standing watch on the bridge would be the Commanding Officer (CO), Executive Officer (XO), one of the two Navigators, Communications Officer, and Computer Officer. The Medical Officer (MO), who in my opinion should not be in the Command Section since in HG 1e (all Traveller rule sets too) the medics are lumped in with the Service Crew, is not required to stand bridge watches, however there is nothing stopping the MO from qualifying as the Officer Of the Deck.