So I was fixing the Gagh-Class Tramp Trader (it’s supposed according to the ship write up to be 200dt but when you add everything together it’s 242dt and that’s with the armor tonnage being 10 when it’s supposed to be 12, come on guys check things with a calculator) and I decided to use a small bridge since it’s supposed to be “optimized for low-cost haulage” and I was shooting for high cargo space. I got it to 85dt of cargo with 2 double turrets. And it got me thinking the description of small bridge is “ It is possible to install a smaller bridge than a ship should normally have. This is usually done to save space or money.” Which seems tailored made for merchant ships even the disadvantage “ A ship with a smaller bridge suffers DM-1 for all checks related to spacecraft operations made from within the bridge (for example, Astrogation and Pilot checks).” Wouldn’t seem to be a major concern seems to me it can be offset by taking time. So what’s everyone’s thoughts on this should merchant ships in general has a small bridge or not and if not why?
Merchant ship bridges
- Thread starter tytalan
- Start date
Terry Mixon
Emperor Mongoose
I can see the logic of some manufacturers doing that.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Small bridges are more for saving money.
As long as no sudden manoeuvres are planned, should be okay.
As long as no sudden manoeuvres are planned, should be okay.
I can see arguments for allowing extra time or not.
I would expect most merchants to avoid landing in those conditions it doesn’t pay to take unnecessary risks so I just don’t see the problem. Also I don’t think normal crosswinds are going to effect a 100 dt ship using maneuvering drive and if they are why are you trying to land in a Freetrader in a hurricane?
Arkathan
Emperor Mongoose
I said abort or wear brown pants. That about covers it.
Unpredictable turbulent winds at ground level endanger existing craft larger than a free trader. When you gimp your ride, your high tech advantages are reduced, thereby making modern concerns relevant.
If you want to land your cargo ON a planet with an atmosphere, instead of using a high port, then cheaping out on piloting ability is not worth that extra 4 tons of cargo.
Arkathan
Emperor Mongoose
In some cases, but near the ground those winds get weird. You cannot take minutes to respond to microbursts that throw even big craft around in seconds. Now you've reduced your ability to react to sudden random gusts at the same time that you've reduced your ability to know about gusts at odd angles... for an extra four tons of cargo.
Small Bridges: Good where you don't need pilot skill, not enough reward for the risk when you do.
Like I said I’m not sure that wind is even a factor with a ship that is controlling gravity and harnessing it for propulsion. Also 747 have a lot less pilot control with small cockpits and you don’t see them crashing all the time. Low to the ground is not where you normally have issues with Unpredictable turbulent winds that’s normally high up in the jet streams if your having that kind of weather close to the ground they divert you to a different airport. I just don’t think you have that much problem in a planetary atmosphere now if you were going deep in a gas giant I’d agree with you but merchants don’t generally go deep.
Another thing to consider is a freetrader doesn’t use wings for lift so they don’t have huge sails to catch the wind and give the turbulent a lever to throw them around with. It’s a lot harder for the wind to move something that doesn’t include its own lever.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Probably dependent on actual weight, and wind speed.
Lifters don't anchor you in place, by default; they'll just keep the vehicle at a certain altitude.
Though, in theory, if you use lifters with a counter force such as a tractor beam, that would keep you at that altitude, and provide a virtual anchor.
Lifters don't anchor you in place, by default; they'll just keep the vehicle at a certain altitude.
Though, in theory, if you use lifters with a counter force such as a tractor beam, that would keep you at that altitude, and provide a virtual anchor.
Arkathan
Emperor Mongoose
Give a 747 a Sesna cockpit and see how well it handles.
High up, turbulent winds that drop you hundreds of feet in seconds do not tend to crash a plane. That happens near the ground with a microburst. While rare most places on Earth, they occur, and the bank will probably not look kindly on preventable Rapid Unplanned Disassemblies.
Some free traders might not have wings. The option is definitely available for new construction. (EDIT: and in traveller, those wings give a bonus to piloting.) Instead, the entire body is acted upon by the microburst, and with diminished detection and diminished reactive capability, the risk is there. Now add in alien environments and weather.
If you want to reward careless people at your table, that is your prerogative.
Me? Small bridges are not worth the 4 ton squeeze unless you are staying the heck away from piloting rolls. I love small bridges... on space bricks, where they belong.
Last edited:
Arkathan
Emperor Mongoose
That assumes you have a constant force acting upon the craft, or that you can anticipate the soon to be incoming force and change the power to the lifters/tractor at exactly the right time. Also, keep in mind that if you are too cheap to install a full bridge, you do not have tractor beams.
Civilian grade sensors are already at a -2.
Now give yourself a -1 to sensors and a -1 to piloting for the small bridge... and if you are doing both, then that penalty too, and remember that if you are stuck piloting a budget craft, you probably don't have a crew with a particularly high skill in either. Travellers are the exception, even among starship crews.
Low tech world? No help from the tower for you.
Only if you pay the tonnage for them
You do understand microbursts only accrue in a storm front. There’s also a big difference between something depending on lifting surfaces to fly and something that’s using a gravity powered flight system. But you can punish your players by making them do consistent piloting checks every time they fly their ship if you want. But me I’ll stick to the book which states “ A streamlined ship is designed to enter a planetary atmosphere and can function like a conventional aircraft. Pilot checks are required in high winds and other extreme weather.” And I expect most merchants would not chance landing in extreme weather.
Arkathan
Emperor Mongoose
You don't seem to understand that they OCCUR, you are assuming terrestrial weather, and you've gimped your controls. And your gravity thrust is balanced based on steady conditions, not varied winds that can push large objects tens of meters. You then trash your argument by stating that you are going to use the rules that say the craft can function like conventional aircraft... and you've degraded your sensors and your ability to react to information you aren't getting in time.
A microburst IS extreme, and rather speedy, REQUIRING a pilot check, and this makes the THIRD TIME I've said Abort or wear brown pants... I'm not sure what part of that you don't comprehend, since it is what YOU said as well.
Now, how do you determine that something like that happened? A routine pilot check or a secret roll. Failing that roll indicates a potential incident, which the players must react to. Could be another vessel going off course, could be a flock of alien "birds" that explode on contact... could be a microburst. Then they roll an appropriate skill to alleviate the situation. It breaks up the routine and reminds them not to let their guard down.
Bottom line is that you are risking crew and passengers for FOUR TONS of cargo.
As stated, YOU can reward reckless people in your game. I will continue to keep small bridges on bricks that don't worry about weather. And yes, I punish stupid players, but generally not with instadeath. Anything that intentionally reduces your ability to pilot a ship that will routinely need piloting rolls borders on stupid. That includes fancy maneuvers to shave time in landing. Operating while impaired (like with a small bridge) is a reason for requiring a pilot check at my table.
But you do you.
Last edited:
The only difference between your bricks and a streamlined ship is that the streamline ship is actually less affected by the weather than the brick. That’s what streamlining does, I’m not sure why you think a streamlined ship with M-1 is going to have more issues with wind and weather than a partially streamlined ship with M-1 but the CRB says the opposite of what your saying “ Partial streamlining allows a ship to skim gas giants and enter Atmosphere codes of 3 or less, acting in the same way as streamlined ships. In other atmospheres, the ship will be ponderous and unresponsive, reliant on its thrusters to keep it aloft. All Pilot checks will be made with DM-2.” You literally have the situation reversed!
. You do you but I’ll be honest the ideal of randomly creating situations that have no bearing on the story just so you can punish your players is very GM vs Players instead of building a story. Have fun don’t bother responding we obviously have very different styles when it comes to GMing
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Low tech sensor.
Having grownup living on a med level airport I can’t see any type C or better starport not being able to warn ships of weather where it’s inadvisable to land. It’s not like a Freetrader doesn’t have the fuel to stay in orbit for a couple of weeks for clear landing.
Low tech sensor.
By the way I love the pic.
Perkanis83
Banded Mongoose
Right there is subtext here that is being missed what arkathan is talking about is that small bridges belong on bricks in space which I fully agree with. But that is the thing bricks in space never enter a atmosphere and if the do it is most often a one way trip due to system failure or some other factor, Streamlined ships are expected to enter atmosphere and therefore should not gimp themselves when it comes to anything that has to do with handling the random fast acting stuff that can happen in said atmosphere. Now you are correct in that no self respecting pilot/captain should EVER place their ship in a position where a pilot roll should be needed when entering a planetary atmosphere and if they did that should be a instant recall of their license to handle a ship. So yeah on a cheaply built trader I would definitely go for a small bridge and just have that as a reason for why its operating manual states that you should never under any circumstance enter a atmosphere in any unsafe manner.The only difference between your bricks and a streamlined ship is that the streamline ship is actually less affected by the weather than the brick. That’s what streamlining does, I’m not sure why you think a streamlined ship with M-1 is going to have more issues with wind and weather than a partially streamlined ship with M-1 but the CRB says the opposite of what your saying “ Partial streamlining allows a ship to skim gas giants and enter Atmosphere codes of 3 or less, acting in the same way as streamlined ships. In other atmospheres, the ship will be ponderous and unresponsive, reliant on its thrusters to keep it aloft. All Pilot checks will be made with DM-2.” You literally have the situation reversed!
You do you but I’ll be honest the ideal of randomly creating situations that have no bearing on the story just so you can punish your players is very GM vs Players instead of building a story. Have fun don’t bother responding we obviously have very different styles when it comes to GMing
They don't save money directly as the cost of a bridge is based on the tonnage of the ship not the bridge. So you are gaining cargo capacity (and not much at that). If you have very little cargo capacity then an extra 4 Dton for speculative cargo (or an extra stateroom or 8 more low berths) might be worth the trade.
A hull hit caused by a bad landing or botched docking would cost a minimum KCr100 to repair and any extra revenues would need to be balanced against that probability.
I would also argue that making everyone's job more difficult on a daily basis would degrade morale. To get the same performance you would need to be paying any bridge crew 50% extra (as that is the premium for crew with 1 better skill) or if routinely take their time would mean they are working longer hours than a regular crew. I'd consider that 50% bonus to be approaching the financial cost of preserving morale.
The bridge space also supplements the common space / cabin space to a degree (compare cockpits and bridges).
I am sure there are merchant captains skimping on common areas, stuffing crew into spacer niches and using cramped bridges to squeeze out extra revenue. Their crews will probably be either pretty belligerent, frequently replaced or possibly institutionalised. The crew might start "compensating" themselves through theft, embezzlement or simple vandalism to get a bit more time in port.
Plenty of food for stories there.
