HG Capital Ship Design Hull Configuration Question

[snrdg121408]

Evening all,

I'm confused by how MgT HG Planetoid and Buffered Planetoid handles
the cost and useable space.

In CT transporting a planetoid hull costs Cr100 per ton and tunnelling
is Cr1,000 per usuable hull dtons. Why Cr4,000 for the combined total
of transporting and tunnelling?

In this case the total cost of the hull is hull tons x 4,000 instead of 100,000, right?

On HG p. 63 the text states that a planetoid can only use 80% of the
available hull volume and a buffered planetoid can only use 65% of the
volume. The Planetoid Monitor on HG p. 113 is a 30,000-dton hull,
which my calculation indicates has a usuable volume of 19,500 dtons.
Adding up the tonnage column I get 30,000 dtons, which is over the
available space by 10,500 dtons. If the hull size were 46,154 dtons
then the design's useable hull volume is 30,000 dtons.

Did I miss anything in the text?

 

[atpollard]

I'm confused by how MgT HG Planetoid and Buffered Planetoid handles
the cost and useable space.

In CT transporting a planetoid hull costs Cr100 per ton and tunnelling
is Cr1,000 per usuable hull dtons. Why Cr4,000 for the combined total
of transporting and tunnelling?

In this case the total cost of the hull is hull tons x 4,000 instead of 1,000,000, right?

It looks like a simplifying change to make planetoid hulls cost 4% of the cost of building a hull. Only the author can tell you his intentions, but it seems like a change that I can live with. In the end, the cost difference will be dropped in rounding off the cost of the finished ship.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Regarding the design in the book, my guess is it is an error (although I don't have the book with me to check).

When I do Planetoid Hull designs, the size of the hull would be the 20% - 35% "wasted space".

In the end, I would want my design sheet to account for the entire volume of the Planetoid.

 

[snrdg121408]

Afternoon atpollard,

I like the combined tunnelling and transportation cost too, which makes
the calculation a bit easier. I was wondering why 4,000 and not 1,100.
Your assessment that I'd have to ask the author is the truth, but not
overly important. Actually, the cost difference if the monitor is correct
in calculating the cost actually makes the planetoid ship cheaper.
A conventional 30,000-dton costs Cr300,000 compared to Cr120,000.

Thanks for the reply here and on the other Traveller boarders of the past
few years.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello Rikki Tikki Traveller,

What you don't have the statisitics memorized yet :shock: ? :lol:

I have a feeling you are right about the design is not in specification
for a buffered planetoid hull per the HG Capital Ship design sequence.

Since I started designing with CT I usually use the 20 and 35% waste
space factors too. However, HgT calculates usable space as 80 and 65%.

I agree that the waste space should be included in the design sheet.
Unfortunately, the 10,500 dTons of waste space is not listed which
allowed the design to use the full 30,000 dtons like a conventional hull.

Had the 10,500 dtons of waste space been included the fighters,
weapons systems and muntion volume of 17,109.8 dtons would have
been pared down some.

Again thanks for the reply.

 

[EDG]

You can spare yourself a lot of headaches if you just forget what previous editions said. Use MGT as the sole ruleset, and then you'll have less inconsistencies

 

[atpollard]

Afternoon atpollard,

I like the combined tunnelling and transportation cost too, which makes
the calculation a bit easier. I was wondering why 4,000 and not 1,100.
Your assessment that I'd have to ask the author is the truth, but not
overly important. Actually, the cost difference if the monitor is correct
in calculating the cost actually makes the planetoid ship cheaper.
A conventional 30,000-dton costs Cr300,000 compared to Cr120,000.

Thanks for the reply here and on the other Traveller boarders of the past
few years.

It has always been a pleasure. I love talking Traveller in all it's flavours.

A problem commonly encountered in MegaTraveller was not being able to see the forest for the trees:

What percentage of the final cost of a 30,000 dTon Monitor is the 180,000 credit differnce in price between the old and new cost calculating method? IMHO anything less than 1% is not worth worrying about (especially since multiple ships can cost 10 to 20% less based on the rules system) and any cost of less than 0.1% of the final cost was (again IMHO) probably not worth calculating in the first place.

 

[rust]

IMHO anything less than 1% is not worth worrying about (especially since multiple ships can cost 10 to 20% less based on the rules system) and any cost of less than 0.1% of the final cost was (again IMHO) probably not worth calculating in the first place.

This is what made me ... seriously dislike GURPS technology, one has
to waste a lot of time for the calculation of tiny details (stuff like a low-
light TV camera at TL 10 with a weight of 0.125 pounds, a volume of
0.0025 cubic feet, a cost of 62.5 Credits and a power requirement of
"negligible"), so designing a single medium size ship could become a
job for an entire weekend. :roll:

 

[snrdg121408]

Evening EDG,

The tunneling and transport cost of Cr4,000 per dtond is not a big issue, I
was just curious why the cost was about 4 times higher.

The real problem and headache is that the published example does not
appear to agree with the MgT Capital Ship requirement for buffered planetoids.

The Buffered Planetoid Monitor, per HG p. 113, is 30,000-dTons and has
a hull cost of Cr120,000. Refering to HG p. 63 Only 80% of the volume
of a planetoid hull is usable and 65% of the volume of a buffered
planetoid is usable.

30,000 x 65% = 19,500 dtons of usable volume. The listed weapons
systems, munitions, armories,weapon armored bulkheads, briefing
rooms, and fighters add up to 18,141.8 dtons. This leaves 1,358.2 dtons
of usable space.

If the stated tonnage had been 46,154 dtons then the components would
then one could fit 30,000 dtons of componets. The design as written
appears to me to be broken when I followed the design process.

Thanks for the reply and basically a good way of not pulling one's hair
out.

 

[snrdg121408]

Hello atpollard,

MgT is actually cheaper than the CT tunnelling and transporting cost
methods. In MgT the 30,000 dton hull costs Cr120,000 and in CT,
if I did the math right, is Cr22,500,000.

CT Tunnelling = Cr1,000 x usable space = 1000 x 19500 = Cr19,500,000
CT Transport = Cr100 x full dtons = 100 x 30,000 = 3,000,000
CT total = 22,500,000

If the vessel was a 30,000 dton conventional hull the cost is MCr3,000.

Thanks again for the reply

 

[snrdg121408]

Evening rust,

Yep, MT, TNE, T4, and GURPS all seem the same issues with the
micro-management component design, espcially for non-standard
designs. However, for those who like such details the other design
sequences are lacking detail. I'm somewhere in the middle.

Thanks for the comparison and thoguhts on GURPS stuff.