HG 2022 Deck Plans: What am I looking at when the scale is 1 Square = 50 Tons?

I always looked at AHL as a nod to A Mote in God's Eye... except it doesn't revert to spinning when it stops thrusting.
 
Once you get artificial gravity, inertial compensation and manoeuvre drive factor/three, people will pay for the convenience.
 
I’ve always concepualized the Azhanti as a tailsitter design without the need to ever actually tailsit.

IMO all of the largest ships in Traveller could benefit from taking a look at things perpendicularly. I mean, they have gravity control right? But that’ll never happen so it is what it is.

It would be an interesting thought experiment to start with spin-hull deckplans and then Dispersed deckplans, and keep moving up in tech until you get a Type S. Where did the shift happen?… There’s got to be some cool ship design possibilities in TLs 8-11 that we’ve never really explored.
Pretty sure Ian Stead made a tail sitter Scout... I probably have it buried in some subdirectory...
 
Here is a radical idea: maybe all ship deckplans produced by Mongoose should get the their scale written right on them. Call me crazy, but it seems not that difficult a thing to do: if it is squares, fine, or if there is no grid then just a little scaling line on the side like normal maps have. Takes like 5 seconds for the artist to do and then we don't all have to spend hours trying to mathmatically back-engineer the intention, in order to actually use the maps.

There oughta be a law.
 
I suspect in their calculations, once it's past a certain tonnage, it's not worth it.

Look up Mongoose First deckplans, specifically Fighting Ships.
 
What's the issue?

I assume that the Azhanti is still a tailsitter, and what you see is a more abstract representation.
This thread has taken a tangent about "tail sitters" which has nothing to do with my original question which still has not been answered.

The issue is not just about AHL, that is only one example.
Yes, it seems to be a tailsitter, also not the issue. I actually had no idea it was ever otherwise.

The issue is about the scale that departs from .5 Dton per square scale. ON ANY SHIP IN HG

When you take a ship ANY ship (tail sitter or not) and and say, ok the squares are now equal 50 Dtons per square, you can't just assume it got larger in only 2 dimensions and not the third dimension, the z axis (for your 3D printers out there).

Arkathan in his reply on page one of replies to my thread seems to actually understand my question and has flat out stated in his reply that yup, it's still just 3m floor to ceiling.

But if this is the case, then the ship, ANY ship, becomes like a giant irregular shaped disk. This is not just a little fudging with fuel tanks. It is a massive distortion!

Imagine taking a side view photo of the ship. Opening it in paint and then grabbing one side of the left or right selection bar to resize it bigger but NOT keeping the aspect ratio. You would stretch the image out such that it would look nothing like it the original.

Are there any 3D printers out there who get what I am trying to point out?

This might help. Take the Tigress. 27decks right? 1 Square=100Dtons? 1.5m=.5 DTons?
This spherical section of this ship appears to be 15 Squares, thus 1500D tons, thus 3000m in diameter.

But each deck only has a 3m high ceiling, right? ok 3m x 27 decks means 81m

Thus the thing that looks like a sphere in the Tigress is a huge flat disk 3000m in diameter but only 81m thick.

Now do we see the problem? (I feel like I am going crazy explaining this an no one seems to see it..... (the gaslights are flickering!! I saw them flicker!! lol)
 
I think there is a much bigger problem than the flat disc..

Area of a circle is pi r^2
If diameter is 3000m
R is 1500m
Area of one deck is pi 1500m*1500m
Area of one deck is 2250000 m^2 * pi, call it 7,000,000 m^2
Volume of 1 deck is therefore 21,000,000 m^3
Volume of one deck is therefore 1,500,000 dtons?


500,000 dtons is about 7,000,000 m^3

a sphere with volume 7,000,000 m^3 is about 237m diameter
divide by 1.5m, you get about 150 'standard' squares

so the scale on that deckplan, for 15 squares, should be 10 'standard' squares (or 5 dtons), not 100dtons...

and while you'll still end up around 80 decks (45ish if you ignore the fuel decks), only one deck will be that large
 
Last edited:
The deck plans are, at best, confusing.

A deck is about [wlh] 450 × 60 × 1.5 m, or about 6000 Dt.

As drawn the ship is 450 m wide and 12 × 3 m = 36 m high.

At a guess, someone got lost in the tailsitter vs. airplane layout maze...
 
1. When it comes to spacecraft design, always check the maths.

2. The maths has changed, in the meantime, but for those who do like detailed deckplans, there's Mongoose First.

3. I've decided that if I ever got around to doing a new spacecraft, it's going to be a cube.

4. And remember, this is not the edition to rely on the accuracy of the deckplans.
 
All maps period. They almost never do and that is maddening.
I do not use deckplans, since I have yet to find any deckplans that actually match the ships in question. The people who created this mess were game designers and artists, not engineers. lol. Also, when you handwave a lot of the details about what goes into a spaceship, it makes it hard to draw as you don't really know what is there. How much open space is in a Standard Berth? No idea. All I know is that it takes up 4 tons of hull space, but that 4 tons of hull space is not usable area, so when I go to draw a deckplan, how much of that space should be drawn as accessible? Half? 25%? more? less? I have no idea. Then this same concept applies to every part of the ship? How much open space is in the Bridge? The Common Areas? The Engineering Space? etc.

Edit: Doing better would be difficult, but adding a consistent scale on the maps would be a good start.
 
A lot of the larger ship's 2d plans do not make sense in 3d. It's just designers not understanding 2d space and 3d volume, having to make quick assumptions and guesses, and thinking that if they fudge it no-one will notice that they dont make any sense. But at the end of the day its just a game, so you can maybe just rule that each floor plan for these larger ships has 3m of fuel in between each deck or something like that to stretch them out to the right shape.

It really needs an architect to get a hold of these ship designs in Revit and make them realistically designed .... most lay people cannot understand even simple 2d plans and how they go together to form a simple two storey house never mind a multi-deck space ship, this is why we work in 3d most of the time now, but even architects sometimes struggle to reconcile complex 3d building designs :unsure:

Imagine working for the likes of Zaha Hadid where you have to not only design very complex flowing building designs in 3d, but also make them useable as buildings and completely buildable :)

 
Last edited:
I suppose there isn't much need here to point out Ian Stead's ( @middenface )work but:


But from what I understand of his process, he makes sure the 3D shape and the 2D deckplans are compatible as part of his work porcess, so for those, I have high confidence that they work out. And here is that scout tailsitter:


Looks like he's doing more for Mongoose now, so those should be in the correct proportions.
 
Back
Top