Terry Mixon
Emperor Mongoose
I usually put in enough refining capability to refine in one day and assume a second day is needed to collect the unrefined fuel: Maneuvering, scooping, etc. I like your sweet spot, though. Something to think about.
Imperial Navy Refueling Operations
- Thread starter Terry Mixon
- Start date
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Fuel processing is cheap.
The hazardous part is under combat conditions.
Or, state monopoly.
The hazardous part is under combat conditions.
Or, state monopoly.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
In the normal course of business, it's almost certainly going to be fuel drones, and a gas station in orbit.
You add the potential cost of repairs.
Retrospectively, the term High Guard does reflect an important aspect of naval operations, which I believe means that large tankers would be more assets that are used in peacetime, and in wartime, would be strategically prepositioned, and not, without really good reason, taken into a combat zone.
You add the potential cost of repairs.
Retrospectively, the term High Guard does reflect an important aspect of naval operations, which I believe means that large tankers would be more assets that are used in peacetime, and in wartime, would be strategically prepositioned, and not, without really good reason, taken into a combat zone.
Geir
Emperor Mongoose
Another thing to consider if scooping from a gas giant is that your refining timer starts when you start scooping. Depending on a number of factors, a whole day can already pass before you get back out to 100D from the gas giant.
I like your logic on trade-offs, though. They makes sense. And in a complicated fleet action, with some units acting as High Guard while others refuel, it might take 2-3 days for all the ships to get back into formation anyway (though, you could argue that those doing High Guard initially should be the ones with the fastest turn-around time, since they have to refuel last - throw in some optimizing UNREP maneuvers and you have a detailed fleet logistics plan - which might make for more work than is 'fun' in a session, but it's an interesting exercise.
boggo2300
Banded Mongoose
If you only descend to the shallows it's not that dangerous, just takes a long time
You'd have to look at it from a couple of different angles.
First, for the most part, refueling operations are typically considered something you do while not under fire. So the automatic assumption there is that you have time on your hands. Not saying days or weeks, but it's not like refueling under fire. Still, no navy would want to be caught with dry tanks, so a naval designer has to balance between costs/tonnage and time. Is 24hrs to purify your tanks enough? Do you need to get that down to 8hrs? I don't have a good answer, and I would think any answer is going to be mostly opinion-based on someone's interpretation of good naval designs or operations.
Secondly, it does make some sense to put fuel purifiers on shuttles, but then you have to consider cost and time. Is there enough time to purify your tanks from the time you start your skimming to the time that shuttle docks with it's ship? And is that cost-effective? Players tend to look at things from a min-max perspective rather than from a naval operations perspective. In reality navies do things that are more aligned with cost restrictions from peacetime operations vs wartime operations. Exceptions for special operations or specific circumstances would be natural.
Then you'd have your ships that are designed for raider operations or scouting under potential fire. Those ships would potentially need to have the tonnage set aside for refueling under fire, or perhaps just a wee bit ahead of pursuing forces. For those specific ships you'd expect them to be optimized for potentially dicey environments and they may indeed devote the tonnage to purify fuel in just a few hours (or just enough time to clear a gas giant's 100D limit). Granted they can jump with unrefined fuel, but it's within reason they'd have it like that.
Finally, fleet tankers are gonna be designed to be efficient, not necessarily optimal. Meaning they'll spend the majority of their career stooging around with plenty of time on their hands. Even in wartime they are going to be part of a fleet train that's specifically NOT going to be anywhere near the fighting. Unless they are designated a fast replenishment ship, they'll be like 2G capable and are fully expecting to have plenty of time to purify their tanks. Most of their operations are going to be peacetime things anyways, so I doubt any naval team is going to have a burning desire to devote scarce fleet credits towards something as unsexy as tankers. The Admirals in their battleships need those credits more desperately.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
I think the biggest commerce raider was the Bismarck.
Any refuelling done, would preferably be somewhere the opposition isn't watching.
I think there was one option, where the Royal Navy waits until refuelling is underway, and then launch torpedo attacks.
Any refuelling done, would preferably be somewhere the opposition isn't watching.
I think there was one option, where the Royal Navy waits until refuelling is underway, and then launch torpedo attacks.
You can't really project real world navies or airforces too well into Traveller space navies. The fuel use is orders of magnitude higher than for shipping, but unlike aircraft starships can refuel themselves and don't crash into the ground when the fuel runs out.
They are a bit like ships during in-system operations, but a bit like aircraft in regards to limited fuel at strategic ranges. But I'd not push the analogy TOO far.
Strategic initiative demands tankers or mobile bases. Tankers don't have to be especially vulnerable; armour them up, have them bristle with point defence. Because they carry so much fuel, They are ironically very strategically agile - few other ships can make multiple jumps as fast as they can, and some offensive capacity might pay off on occasion. Maybe swapping out the scooping craft for fighters or designing a hybrid tanker/battle tender class?
They are a bit like ships during in-system operations, but a bit like aircraft in regards to limited fuel at strategic ranges. But I'd not push the analogy TOO far.
Strategic initiative demands tankers or mobile bases. Tankers don't have to be especially vulnerable; armour them up, have them bristle with point defence. Because they carry so much fuel, They are ironically very strategically agile - few other ships can make multiple jumps as fast as they can, and some offensive capacity might pay off on occasion. Maybe swapping out the scooping craft for fighters or designing a hybrid tanker/battle tender class?
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Oh, I don't know.
Perforating the fuel tanks, and ensuring that the starship can't retain fuel would tend to fix them in place.
Tankers tend to be pretty soft targets.
I did consider designing tankers with the same hull profile as a Confederation Navy dreadnought, which would have added an additional level of strategic ambiguity.
That's not to say that tanker's aren't useful, you just have to know what to do with them.
Perforating the fuel tanks, and ensuring that the starship can't retain fuel would tend to fix them in place.
Tankers tend to be pretty soft targets.
I did consider designing tankers with the same hull profile as a Confederation Navy dreadnought, which would have added an additional level of strategic ambiguity.
That's not to say that tanker's aren't useful, you just have to know what to do with them.
I'd make them more sub spinal weapon resistant. They should basically be immune to turret grade weapons, and be able to shrug off a lot of bay grade hits. Being a very large hull helps there.
Again, I can't help thinking those are design criteria that suit battle tenders.
Again, I can't help thinking those are design criteria that suit battle tenders.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
After a reassessment, I mostly gave them up.
I wouldn't build one above hundred kilotonnes, and that's mostly because it's just a use case, from large freighter to tanker.
I wouldn't build one above hundred kilotonnes, and that's mostly because it's just a use case, from large freighter to tanker.
Okay, how about flip it on it's head.
Use a standard design battle tender, but operationally equip some with tanker riders, as required? If the zone is dangerous, carry a normal battle rider or two for self defense. If the tanker riders themselves are relatively cheap and expendable (possibly even automated), the other ships have the option of bugging out in the face of danger.
Use a standard design battle tender, but operationally equip some with tanker riders, as required? If the zone is dangerous, carry a normal battle rider or two for self defense. If the tanker riders themselves are relatively cheap and expendable (possibly even automated), the other ships have the option of bugging out in the face of danger.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
I tend to think it would divide into tactical, strategical, and, operational, deployment.
Once you're insystem, it's tactical.
Assuming it's the traditional ski and flee, you sacrifice everything smaller and less important as Low Guard.
Using a tanker means you have the time for it to skim and swim to the capital starwarships to refuel them.
Once you're insystem, it's tactical.
Assuming it's the traditional ski and flee, you sacrifice everything smaller and less important as Low Guard.
Using a tanker means you have the time for it to skim and swim to the capital starwarships to refuel them.
MasterGwydion
Emperor Mongoose
I think @Terry Mixon designed these exact things on one of these threads.
Terry Mixon
Emperor Mongoose
I made fuel pods for a warmonger to deliver fuel, not to do fuel harvesting. Interesting idea to add to the mix, though.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
You can't take it with you.
Mostly.
One primary feature of jumping, is that you consume ten percent of volume of fuel per parsec travelled; which means that the pay it forward requires tankers large enough to refuel the starwarships it's accompanying, potentially leaving them stranded at the arrived parsec.
The obvious solution would be sending a task force large enough to suppress anti refuelling measures in the jumped to parsec, rather than spending resources building (large volume) non combat shipping.
Mostly.
One primary feature of jumping, is that you consume ten percent of volume of fuel per parsec travelled; which means that the pay it forward requires tankers large enough to refuel the starwarships it's accompanying, potentially leaving them stranded at the arrived parsec.
The obvious solution would be sending a task force large enough to suppress anti refuelling measures in the jumped to parsec, rather than spending resources building (large volume) non combat shipping.
Terry Mixon
Emperor Mongoose
I present, the Pelican-Class 50,000-Ton Tanker Rider. It is designed to be delivered to a system via a Warmonger Battle Tender and then to collect fuel for the fleet. It is not equipped with fuel refineries as that is meant to be done by the ships being refueled. With its thrust 6 maneuver drives, it can collect 42,411.9 tons of fuel quickly and load it aboard a ship in less than an hour via the built-in UNREP system. Then it races back to get more. A Warmonger can carry 16 50,000-Ton riders, so up to that many may be deployed alongside standard battle riders.
Last edited:
