Drop tank mounted fuel/cargo tanks

[rinku]

Once you add in all that stuff I think the multiple Hull idea may be cheaper.

What about a new thing, streamlined external cargo mounts? +20% cost to the external cargo mount, maybe with a -20% capacity penalty as well (regular internal cargo on a streamlined ship doesn't run into that as you can use fuel tanks, electronics and other components to fill the awkward spaces created by streamlining)? Still subject to that landing penalty, but avoids the normal rolls for atmospheric operations.

 

[rinku]

Or...

What about using the modular hull rules?

It has to be internal volume, but if the main desire is to have flexible fuel/cargo arrangements, you could designate a portion of the ship to be swappable between them. Likely to be less involved than setting up and taking down fuel storage in the cargo bay, although a sole operator without a facility to store the modules would probably prefer those.

Not to mention, another way to quickly deliver a big box full of payload and take on board a new one. May be cheaper than docking clamps.

 

[Condottiere]

Might have other considerations involved, which aren't stated, or, overlooked.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Or...

What about using the modular hull rules?

It has to be internal volume, but if the main desire is to have flexible fuel/cargo arrangements, you could designate a portion of the ship to be swappable between them. Likely to be less involved than setting up and taking down fuel storage in the cargo bay, although a sole operator without a facility to store the modules would probably prefer those.

Not to mention, another way to quickly deliver a big box full of payload and take on board a new one. May be cheaper than docking clamps.

I still think the cargo/fuel containers are the way to go. It's fixed volume but can be quickly swapped from one to the other.

 

[Condottiere]

Why? Think how the bolts work on a safe door. Do the same thing with the pop-up part. It pops up and locks into position on all sides. Now it is directly bolted, immobile, to the hull.

Edit - Plus, you doubled the cost and the tonnage. It's already been taken into consideration.

It's like an elevator shaft, mostly empty space.

 

[mavikfelna]

The cheapest and easiest thing would be streamlined external fuel pods, giving a -1 DM to ship handling in atmo that are +25% more expensive. And then allowing fuel pods to be cargo/fuel containers for double cost and -10% capacity.
Making external cargo mounts be upgraded to streamlined when not in use for +25% cost is the next cheapest and easiest thing.

 

[phavoc]

Once you add in all that stuff I think the multiple Hull idea may be cheaper.

What about a new thing, streamlined external cargo mounts? +20% cost to the external cargo mount, maybe with a -20% capacity penalty as well (regular internal cargo on a streamlined ship doesn't run into that as you can use fuel tanks, electronics and other components to fill the awkward spaces created by streamlining)? Still subject to that landing penalty, but avoids the normal rolls for atmospheric operations.

Nah, no extra cost. However streamlined cargo would lose carrying capacity since its conformal. Rather than 20% cost increase, do a 20% Dton decrease. That better reflects the fact that curves are not as handy to store stuff in as flat lines. Liquid cargos would not suffer a penalty though.

 

[ProfGrizzlyJon]

Easy answer: Streamlined module, with aerofins, custom made for a specific class-starship, that attach to dropship mounts and a docking clamp.



You guys make everything so complicated, when Traveller has rules for almost anything