Deck Plans - Fresher Options

[Patron Zero]

One thing I've observed in all Classic Traveller deck plans is the space consumed by a 'standard' fresher in a stateroom or crew cabin being, in my opinion, excessive.

I cannot understand any vessel, military affiliated or otherwise, not having accommodations more like modern submarines or at the very least wet navy surface ships. One might believe in a Traveller setting aboard a small starship when usable space would be at a premium and each and every potential waste of such a limited commodity would be avoided at all costs, yet the 'standard' fresher arrangement defies that logic.

I also hold the opinion that so many redundant and repetitive plumbing systems would tax the closed recycling system more than is actually necessarily. Again space and resources better allocated to other onboard needs and to provide the crew (and passengers) with other potential services and features.

Even the most modest modern recreational vehicle offers hygiene facilities if such are admittedly a bit spartan, the same is found on modern rail cars and passenger aircraft. So simply wondering how did fresher design seem to fall behind the technology that makes star travel possible ?

I attach the links below to two possible answers to reducing the wasted space of the 'accepted' layout for personal hygiene facilities on starships. Pardon my rant but it's just one small bump in the huge Traveller universe yet to be smoothed out.

http://inventorspot.com/articles/vertebrae_18120
http://www.ecojohn.com/

 

[PFVA63]

Hi,

I guess a couple things to consider include;

• on most modern current ocean-going naval vessels the levels of accommodation (including the toilet/shower facilities) have been steadily increasing,
  
  if you're going to be onboard a ship for several weeks at a time (like in Traveller), a higher level of accommodations than you might find on a train, bus, or RV might be desirable
  
  the stacked bathroom that you provided a link to, appears to still take up a fair amount of space once you unfold it all

So, while I think you're probably correct in assuming that designers would want to be very careful with how they use space on a starship in a Traveller type universe, I don't really have a problem with putting a fresher in each stateroom.

Regards

PF

 

[aspqrz]

I think the issue is not toilet facilities, but the overall waste of space.

There's probably not much you can do to minimise the size of said toilets (Hey, I'm no namby pamby yank ... they're not "half bathrooms" :roll and related facilities (tho I did see an invention some years ago that had a hinged closet liner inside the shower recess that swung out when you wanted to use the shower ... there would have been obvious problems with mould etc. due to damp) but with high technology, there's something else you can do ...

Foldaway beds, for example, save space for non-sleeping activities. Ditto foldaway tables. Not necessarily ones that fold into the wall like on sleeper trains, but ones using high tech materials that, say, extrude from the floor (or wall). Lots more space could be provided, especially for Middle Passage ... or even High Passage on non-luxury vessels.

Or you could have futons, like Japan does. Why assume that western european originating cultural practises relating to sleeping survive several thousand years in the future. You could even have luxury vessels touting "Japanese themed accommodation" and making it a premium deal :lol:

Wall mounted flat TVs and entertainment systems vs. CRT/Table mounted ones and similar space saving.

Lots of European Hotels still :shock: have toilet/bathing facilities "down the hall" and only a washbasin (and are quite nice accommodations -- I know, I've happily stayed in them, not being so uptight as the average American allegedly is ... of course, there were a fair few Americans of all ages staying in the same places I was, so maybe the "average american" only works for Lehmann Brothers , accommodation wise), perhaps, in the room itself. Sure, this would not be possible for real first class accommodation, but for Middle Passage, and so-called "High Passage" on Free Traders, why not?

Which brings us the the real bugbear. The accommodation rules from CTrav. High Passage. Middle Passage. Low Passage (which would be illegal in any advanced society, or at least attract severe criminal penalties for each person who actually dies while undergoing it, IMO anyway ).

There really should be ... Luxury Class (much better than High Passage, but simply not available on the Free Trader class ships that are usually the ones encountered in Traveller campaigns), First Class (High Passage), Standard Class (Middle Passage), Economy Class and Steerage.

Luxury Class would be a lot larger, probably several HP sized rooms, in a single "Suite". Lots of extra dedicated luggage space elsewhere.

First Class would be somewhat larger than it is (or Standard Class smaller, either would fly), probably with its own toilet/shower facilities. Some dedicated luggage space elsewhere.

Standard Class would share toilet/shower facilities "down the hall" and be slightly smaller and less well appointed but would have its own washbasin. Luggage space limited to what can be stored in the cabin.

Economy Class would be the size of Standard, but less well appointed again, and sleep four, rather than two. Toilet/shower facilities down the hall, no washbasin, less luggage space (and only what can be stored in the room).

Steerage? Bunk beds. 6-8 to a room. Colonist or military accommodation. (The lack of which has led to some really amazingly silly assumptions regarding mercenary operations in MTRav's much maligned Mercenary :shock: :shock:

That's my .02 centicredits worth anyway.

Phil

 

[heffe2001]

One problem I see with your approach is the 'steerage' class. One of the main reasons low passage is as it is, lifesupport. There's only a finite amount of lifesupport & supplies that the ships can handle, and adding the support & food for 6-8 more people to a small ship like a Free Trader, you're going to be cutting into cargospace...

 

[aspqrz]

One problem I see with your approach is the 'steerage' class. One of the main reasons low passage is as it is, lifesupport. There's only a finite amount of lifesupport & supplies that the ships can handle, and adding the support & food for 6-8 more people to a small ship like a Free Trader, you're going to be cutting into cargospace...

The cost for life support is evidently 2000 Cr stateroom + 1000 additional per extra person.

So, say you charge 1250 Cr per person for Steerage at 6 person per Middle Passage equivalent space.

That's 7000 Cr for Life Support for 7500 Cr in fares. 500 Cr profit.

At 8 per, that's 9000 Cr for Life Support for 10k Cr. 1000 Cr profit

Or make it 1500 Cr per person. That makes it 2000 Cr profit at 6 per or 2000 Cr profit at 8 per.

Or 2000 Cr per person. That makes it 5000 Cr profit at 6 per, or 7000 Cr profit at 8 per.

Instead of 6000-3000 = 3000 Cr for a dual occupancy Middle Passage space, sure -- but what would you, as a Free Trader owner rather have, a cabin that's likely empty as often as not at a potential profit of 3000 Cr per jump, and a loss of 1000 Cr per Jump if empty, or one that makes a minimum of 500 Cr profit each jump with at least two persons?

Now, you could argue that people will be dying to travel by Low Passage ... well, maybe you can believe the survival rates would be acceptable to any reasonably advanced society without criminal charges for murder or incompetence (I can't, but YMMV, of course :wink but I don't think so.

And it makes military vessels more believable.

Sorry, but, no, you're not going to have even a long duration military vessel with troops/spacers in the equivalent of Mid Passage cabins at two per. You're going to have them, likely, in at 4 per, mayber even 6 per, and likely hot-bunking.

The sums in Mercenary are stuffed because they assume the ridiculous costs and space "requirements" of the core rulebook ... maybe it makes sense to you and some others, never did to me.

Again, YMMV :wink:

Phil

 

[zanwot]

I fully agree with asprqrz. The space per person has allways been plain silly when you consider military vessels or just cheap travel. Hey you can even make minimal space rooms like those japanese hotels.

 

[aspqrz]

I fully agree with asprqrz. The space per person has allways been plain silly when you consider military vessels or just cheap travel. Hey you can even make minimal space rooms like those japanese hotels.

Coffin Hotels. Yeah.

No worse than Low Passage :shock:

Except, well, you probably won't be dead when you wake up in one ... you'll just wish you were :wink:

With advanced tech you could have them as 12 to a "standard" room and have them "fold away" during the "day" so the occupants have a little more space and don't go entirely stir crazy :lol:

Phil

 

[heffe2001]

I would envision something more like Corbin's apartment in The Fifth Element. Bed slides away, shower slides up and the fridge is underneath, etc. My only argument with the low passage thing is the space required for the lifesupport for those additional passengers. Power to run the tubes is cheap compared to the space required for lifesupport (IMO anyway).

 

[PFVA63]

Hi,

I guess one thing that strikes me about things like the Japanese Coffin hotels are that in a big city they may be fine, because you don't spend 24hrs a day in them, and there is a whole big city outdoors to spend time in. But, on a starship, unless there is sufficient commons spaces elsewhere on the ship I'm not sure how well something that would work on a Traveller starship, where you might be in transit stuck on the ship for a couple weeks.

As for the apartment in the movie "The 5th Element" the one thing I could never figure out was where all that stuff slid into. If the bed slid out of the apartment, then where does it slide into?

One thing that might be useful would be to try and layout the accommodations for a starship not using the Traveller rules but instead sizing stuff based on what you might think is reasonable, and then make sure that all the necessary stuff, like life support, the galley, a place to eat, sanitary facilities (either a communal one down the hall or one per stateroom), emergency equipment (including stuff like a sick bay or medicine locker, etc), air locks, connecting passageways, etc, and then see how this compares to the Traveller recommended 4dtons per stateroom.

Regards

PF

 

[heffe2001]

As for the 5th Element, It looked like the wall also contained cabinets, or storage areas, and the bed slid out from under that (slide out to sleep, slide in and free up that room when you're not). As for the 'autowash/fridge', not sure what would be above them, but it'd have to slide around 7-8' up, same down, so it's kind of inefficient there. Tables, chairs, etc could do the same.

 

[aspqrz]

I would envision something more like Corbin's apartment in The Fifth Element. Bed slides away, shower slides up and the fridge is underneath, etc. My only argument with the low passage thing is the space required for the lifesupport for those additional passengers. Power to run the tubes is cheap compared to the space required for lifesupport (IMO anyway).

We actually don't know. The only figures we have are that a Stateroom costs 1000 Cr to "run" even if empty -- which may not be actual life support costs -- and that costs are 2000 Cr per occupied stateroom + 1000 Cr per extra person in that Stateroom.

We can assume (and make an ass out of u and me :lol that the 1000 Cr is minimum life support costs even if the room is empty and, presumably, even open to space, so it is probably the cost of running the life support plant for a stateroom sized space.

The additional 1000 Cr (effectively) per person is almost certainly mostly for meals.

Since there is no allocated Life Support *space* anywhere, we have no idea where, how much, or any damn thing about it :shock:

Phil

 

[Infojunky]

Phil that is the crux of the problem.

Where is the life-support equipment?

Why isn't it a viable damage result in in ship combat?

Maybe we will see an answer in High Guard, but I some how doubt it.

 

[Patron Zero]

"As for the apartment in the movie "The 5th Element" the one thing I could never figure out was where all that stuff slid into. If the bed slid out of the apartment, then where does it slide into? "

Not to claim any substantial knowledge of architecture or HVAC-plumbing systems but I think there's a simple answer to how everything fit together in such an obviously tight allotment of living space. The film did not depict the thickness of the actual floors (or ceilings) between living units, most people might be assuming such to be like what we commonly know in the modern world.

Perhaps there was a support layer between each 'dedicated' floor which might house the disappearing appliances and other features necessary to the living space of our hero, Corbin Dallas. To fit that concept into Traveller terms, let's refer to that space as a half-deck most commonly found in engineering sections and avionics bays but not necessarily restricted to such .

 

[aspqrz]

Phil that is the crux of the problem.

Where is the life-support equipment?

Why isn't it a viable damage result in in ship combat?

Maybe we will see an answer in High Guard, but I some how doubt it.

You could assume it's subsumed in the Engineering Plant (Power Plant) -- that it uses raw power from the Fusion generators to flash everything into the component elements and recycle.

High tech enough?

Of course, you could also assume that the 1000 Cr minimum charge for an empty stateroom sized space is for CO2 scrubber canisters replaced regularly and refilling the ship's water tanks at the end of the voyage.

Low tech enough?

I agree, though, with only the very barest of information ... often used with absolute downright dumbness by designers ... we're really stuck.

But you can't contradict Canon!

Or so some people would have use believe. Even when Canon needs clarification and simply makes no sense at all :?

Phil

 

[Infojunky]

Of course, you could also assume that the 1000 Cr minimum charge for an empty stateroom sized space is for CO2 scrubber canisters replaced regularly and refilling the ship's water tanks at the end of the voyage.

Low tech enough?

In that case it's the standard Union charge for replacing said filters....

At least that is one solution that has come up over the years....

I agree, though, with only the very barest of information ... often used with absolute downright dumbness by designers ... we're really stuck.

But you can't contradict Canon!

Or so some people would have use believe. Even when Canon needs clarification and simply makes no sense at all :?

Which canon? Or every edtion except CT has had Life-support somewhere in the design sequence. Heck CT did also, but only in striker.

 

[aspqrz]

I agree, though, with only the very barest of information ... often used with absolute downright dumbness by designers ... we're really stuck.

But you can't contradict Canon!

Or so some people would have use believe. Even when Canon needs clarification and simply makes no sense at all :?

Which canon? Or every edtion except CT has had Life-support somewhere in the design sequence. Heck CT did also, but only in striker.

Yes

That's my point.

Every iteration of Traveller has had Life Support charges ...

... and damn all detail about what they mean :? or where the LS machinery resides ... etc. etc. :wink:

Phil

 

[Valarian]

The ship cabin fresher I've always pictured as fold-away toilet pan and sink inside the shower cubicle. The waste pipes would be separated in to grey water (for recycling) and black water (for compressing and disposal).

 

[Infojunky]

The real problem is the one size fits all nature of staterooms. A space that is 3 by 9 meters seems small in metric terms but is actually quite spacious when you translate it in to feet, 10 by 20 ft or half of a single wide trailer. While not huge by housing standards it is a palatial space by ship standards. Having lived in that same space with 11 other men in coffin racks it only claustrophobic if you all are trying to get into your dress whites at the same time.

I also have spent some time aboard merchant ships where accommodations varied from bunk rooms to small cabins for each crewmen all of which fell within the 4 dton footprint.

And the std cabin with attached bath on the one cruise I taken had about 100 sq feet of floor space.

The point her is that it's not the space itself, but the associated common area that is important. With the one size fits all accommodation without any reference to the associated spaces, lounges, galley/mess, etc.. is where the question comes up.

In general I assign only about 1 to 1.5 dtons to the actual space and the rest goes for common areas. Crew accommodations having shared bathrooms and toilets, passengers accommodations arraigned as to their class.

For other volume items i generally allow 10 to 20% of that to go for Access space and companion ways.

 

[Infojunky]

Traditionally half of that is considered cabin.

Traditionally by who?

And a 9m2 cabin for up to two persons is as small as I want to go on a CIVILIAN starship.

You haven't been on many small ships then I take it.

This is not the press-ganged(1) crew of a navy ship, those are civilian volunteers!

(1) Wether by billy-club, draft or their economic situation does not matter

I'm not sure what you mean by this? Navy or merchanter or Passenger?

 

[Infojunky]

Traditionally by GDW and DGP. So I consider it standard.

With a quick flip through of the CT books on my shelf, the average stateroom size is about 3 tons, and considering that the extra ton is generally lost as its porch... I don't see tradition, other than make it look kinda right.

As for the rest: We are talking fictional starships here where you can't go "on deck" for weeks at a time, not real world navy ships. And most ships shown are civies with civilian crews and passengers. They WILL require a certain amount of creature comforts to WORK on the ship.

On Navy ships you don't get to "Go on Deck" very often unless that is you assigned workspace. This has always been one of the weaker arguments Polywogs try to trot out. Yes the quarters I quote are tight, but the rest of the accommodations make up for it it if they exist. Like how much room do you need to sleep in? The rest of your shipboard life will be other places if you are crew.

The Beasts need more room, and the current set up make one spend the crew's space for passenger comfort.

Armed forces types might have less luck but who cares about those.

Man you really need to go tour some working ships, there is a great deal of variability in crew accommodations, from hammocks to staterooms.