Military ships and crew

[swordtart]

Only if you dice them finely.

 

[rinku]

Yeah, that has been done, historically...



Although I guess that's technically Stables...

 

[phavoc]

First define Time-Limited some of the troops going to FFW traveling from Corridor were on ship for close to a year. Plus Marines assigned to ships are routinely placed in Barracks in Traveller ship designs. Then you have ships like the Mercenary Cruiser where the ship is home and they spend years on ship going from mission to mission. Plus if they are passengers and only on ship for short duration doing nothing but waiting for drop why have training facilities? Your logic doesn’t work.

You do realize that you made my point?

Troops traveling for a year in barracks-style accommodations while crew get cabins? Mercenary troops relegated to being stacked like cordwood as their living quarters while other ships crew get 2 man cabins? Even for volunteers this will engender poor morale amongst the cannon fodder.

The interpretation of the rules like this runs smack into the reality that such things are highly unlikely to exist. Bad rules are just that - bad rules - and when they are contraindicated by common sense they should be revised. Troops assigned to serve aboard a ship should have the same cubeage as anyone else of their same rank. Troops being transported by the ship (temporarily) should be the only ones occupying barracks.

Assigned and transported by are two entirely different issues. My logic works quite well because it's, yanno, logic.

 

[tytalan]

I would certainly not object if the rules were re-written to say that only basic passengers (such as embarked troops) could use Barracks, but once you explicitly include marines and "ships troops" and vague comments about "other function" it all becomes a bit random.

Like in my original post I see this as an option only on military vessels it takes more discipline for it to be viable than most civilian crews have.

 

[Terry Mixon]

You do realize that you made my point?

Troops traveling for a year in barracks-style accommodations while crew get cabins? Mercenary troops relegated to being stacked like cordwood as their living quarters while other ships crew get 2 man cabins? Even for volunteers this will engender poor morale amongst the cannon fodder.

The interpretation of the rules like this runs smack into the reality that such things are highly unlikely to exist. Bad rules are just that - bad rules - and when they are contraindicated by common sense they should be revised. Troops assigned to serve aboard a ship should have the same cubeage as anyone else of their same rank. Troops being transported by the ship (temporarily) should be the only ones occupying barracks.

Assigned and transported by are two entirely different issues. My logic works quite well because it's, yanno, logic.

One thing that has to be taken into account, and that has been mentioned earlier, is that the restricted space of a barracks is suitable for military ground pounders and needs to come with expansive other spaces for them to spread out in. The barracks are simply rack space, not living space.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Like in my original post I see this as an option only on military vessels it takes more discipline for it to be viable than most civilian crews have.

What about crews manned by little people? They need less volume. Now imagine PC's trying to invade a ship in battle armour and finds the corridors are narrow and the ceilings 4' high.

 

[Terry Mixon]

What about crews manned by little people? They need less volume. Now imagine PC's trying to invade a ship in battle armour and finds the corridors are narrow and the ceilings 4' high.

 

[tytalan]

The interpretation of the rules like this runs smack into the reality that such things are highly unlikely to exist. Bad rules are just that - bad rules - and when they are contraindicated by common sense they should be revised. Troops assigned to serve aboard a ship should have the same cubeage as anyone else of their same rank. Troops being transported by the ship (temporarily) should be the only ones occupying barracks.

Here’s the part your missing the concept of troops being ‘transported and temporarily’ doesn’t exist a year about ship is not temporary that just doesn’t make common sense. Travel times in Traveller prevent to concept of temporary.

In Submarines E-4 and below are housed in barracks style housing they don’t get private rooms or two to a room. While on ship you have a bunk and a locker nothing else. Yes it’s an aster way of living but subs don’t have a ton of extra room just like navel starships. You have to earn the rank to live more comfortably.

Also historically Mercs tend to live more comfortably than actual military it has to do with the ability to leave anytime instead of having to work out a term of service.

 

[tytalan]

The interpretation of the rules like this runs smack into the reality that such things are highly unlikely to exist. Bad rules are just that - bad rules - and when they are contraindicated by common sense they should be revised. Troops assigned to serve aboard a ship should have the same cubeage as anyone else of their same rank. Troops being transported by the ship (temporarily) should be the only ones occupying barracks.

Tell that to mongoose. Yes troops assigned to a ship should have the same cubeage as sailors and transported troops barracks just like in the real navy just like on a submarine. Common sense says they should be revised so all E-4 and below are housed in Barracks just like real life.

 

[phavoc]

One thing that has to be taken into account, and that has been mentioned earlier, is that the restricted space of a barracks is suitable for military ground pounders and needs to come with expansive other spaces for them to spread out in. The barracks are simply rack space, not living space.

Barracks are suitable as temporary berthing space. A marine assigned to a ship for a 6 month deployment of said ship would be considered a passenger, albeit a longer-term one. I have no issue with them being assigned barracks. If a Marine is assigned as crew (not temporary) then they should be treated exactly like the naval crew of similar rank.

Tell that to mongoose. Yes troops assigned to a ship should have the same cubeage as sailors and transported troops barracks just like in the real navy just like on a submarine. Common sense says they should be revised so all E-4 and below are housed in Barracks just like real life.

I don't think we are on the same wavelength for the discussion here. I posted up-thread an example of crew quarters aboard the BB-Texas - it was very similar to the pic above.

I've tried to explain where the difference is, and where the rules are not well written to reflect what should be normalcy. I will try one more time, and if this doesn't work I don't see there being any more utility in discussing further as we don't seem to be communicating our points well.

To explain it better I'm going to set up a scenario - We have the good ship Lollipop, a planetary assault ship. There are three individuals, all of the same rank - Bob, Mary and Larry.

Bob is assigned as a cook. He cooks every watch and has damage control duties during combat.
Mary is assigned as a shipboard Marine for the Lollipop. Her duties can include shipboard security, security in port, boarding actions, or damage control party assignments during combat.
Larry is also a Marine, but he's being transported by the Lollipop to invade some dastardly enemy of the Imperium.

Bob has a cabin and has regular duties/watches aboard the ship. He is full-time naval crew.
Mary has a cabin and has regular duties/watches aboard the ship. She is full-time Marine crew.
Larry is in a barracks space with the other Marines being transported on the ship. Upon arrival at their destination he'll leave the ship.

Bob and Mary, being crew and equal rank, should have equal quarters aboard the ship. Larry, not being crew, only needs the barracks because he's essentially living cargo.

The duties of Bob and Mary are different, however both are assigned to the ship and go where the ship goes and will remain as crew until they are transferred to a new duty station. Larry isn't assigned to the ship and leaves when the ship reaches its destination. These are two entirely different crewing scenarios - assigned to the ship vs being transported by the ship.

Under the rules as written, Larry and Mary would both get barracks as Marines, but Bob gets a cabin. And this is where I take issue with the rules. Crew is crew, passengers are passengers. Treating Larry and Mary the same is illogical - one is assigned to the ship and one is not. Treating Bob and Mary the same is logical - both are assigned as crew and neither is a passenger.

The above explanation holds true today for submariner crews, and used to hold true for ships that actually embarked Marines permanently as regular crew - they received equal treatment as far as cubeage goes based on their rank - not their job function.

Crew is crew, and passengers are passengers. Doesn't matter what their job functions are, if they are assigned to the ship then all crew of similar rank should be treated the same regardless of their job functions aboard the ship.

Travel times, for crew at least, are irrelevant insofar as a ship having the necessary capabilities to support and entertain its crews for long periods between ports. I referred to a year in reply to your statement about troops being transported from Core to the Marches.

 

[MarcusIII]

Tell that to mongoose. Yes troops assigned to a ship should have the same cubeage as sailors and transported troops barracks just like in the real navy

On navy amphibious carriers (LHDs/LHAs) sailors have better, less crowded berthing than do the embarked US Marines. Nature of the beast. For the sailors that is their permanent living space. Not so for the embarked Marines.

 

[Condottiere]

What's sauce for the Mongoose, is sauce for the gander.

In other words, if one human can berth there, all humans can.

Individually, of course.