Modules for the Modular Cutter

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Simple Mechanics task if that. No more than d6 man-hours for the whole compartment, and that is erring on the side of being overly labor intensive.

That is one reason I don't like them. IRL I've seen that fail. A tanker (product tested by our lab) delivered a load to a employer of mine unloaded a small amount due to protocol and tested from the storage tank (last thing in was the same product) it was contaminated. Cost a small fortune to the tanker company to clean it and the load had to be returned and replaced as they hadn't cleaned the pump used adequately.

I see them as dangerously impractical when it could result in the loss of the ship and crew if the area was not properly decontaminated before refueling.

Also it restricts you to the two functions. A modular fuel tank could be replaced with a cargo module, passenger module, science module or luxury module. Core to the idea is using modules to repurpose a volume of fuel storage if the ship needs to perform a different function with lesser (or no) jump.

 

[Arkathan]

Previously you only discussed fuel and cargo, and at a higher TL than ours, you can assume via game mechanics that it is foolproof.
So are you still talking modular cutter modules or ship modules that are not limited to 30 ton blocks?

 

[Condottiere]

I think it was the canonical clipper starship that used cutter modules.

I'd say that if the spacecraft design specifically says it uses a standard component, than it probably is interchangeable.

 

[Arkathan]

I think it was the canonical clipper starship that used cutter modules.

I'd say that if the spacecraft design specifically says it uses a standard component, than it probably is interchangeable.

I don't have a problem with it, just trying to establish the frame of reference and scope.
I think building the Nakagin Capsule Tower in space using cutter modules would be wild.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Previously you only discussed fuel and cargo, and at a higher TL than ours, you can assume via game mechanics that it is foolproof.
So are you still talking modular cutter modules or ship modules that are not limited to 30 ton blocks?

It doesn't functionally matter. The basic question is the same can a module which is a fuel tank be used directly for jump fuel.

My experience is nothing is fool proof due to all the inventive idiots and lazy people out there. I've worked with people who did things they KNEW would screw the customer because it was easier. Some lazy cleaner who skips steps to work less will make such a system fail at times.

 

[Arkathan]

It doesn't functionally matter. The basic question is the same can a module which is a fuel tank be used directly for jump fuel.

My experience is nothing is fool proof due to all the inventive idiots and lazy people out there. I've worked with people who did things they KNEW would screw the customer because it was easier. Some lazy cleaner who skips steps to work less will make such a system fail at times.

A fuel tankage in a ships's module that is installed in the ship is connected to the Ship's fuel system. A cutter module sitting in the cargo bay, hangar bay or a docking port has to be pumped - unless you spend the same amount of time and money hard-piping it in like a demountable tank.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

I don't have a problem with it, just trying to establish the frame of reference and scope.
I think building the Nakagin Capsule Tower in space using cutter modules would be wild.

The original ship that I was working on where this came up was an alternative to the Seeker. A Seeker being used to prospect having lots of fuel can stay out longer and do more prospecting, cargo is unimportant. A Seeker mining an asteroid needs maximum cargo and only enough fuel for the round trip to their asteroid and time on site to mine enough to fill their cargo capacity. Only rarely does the Seeker need the fuel to jump to another system to prospect in. A modular fuel tank allows the ship to be customized for multiple roles but only if it can jump using fuel directly from the module.

These things don't of course apply to Seekers performing other roles or to other ships. A 300 ton Free/Far Trader might use the cutter modules directly as fuel tanks (and I previously designed them at that and other tonnages without modules).

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

A fuel tankage in a ships's module that is installed in the ship is connected to the Ship's fuel system. A cutter module sitting in the cargo bay, hangar bay or a docking port has to be pumped - unless you spend the same amount of time and money hard-piping it in like a demountable tank.

That was pretty much my thinking. At worst I thought a standard cutter tanker module wouldn't work but a module designed specifically for use as a fuel tank would, at worst a minor price premium for the tank vs the tanker module.

To me the time for mounting and removing the demountable tank makes it impractical. A module on the other hand can be swiftly swapped for alternative uses.

 

[Condottiere]

Think about it.

Hundred tonne starship with one or two thirty tonne cutter modules.

Though, hull configuration would tend to preclude the Suleiman class.

 

[Arkathan]

That was pretty much my thinking. At worst I thought a standard cutter tanker module wouldn't work but a module designed specifically for use as a fuel tank would, at worst a minor price premium for the tank vs the tanker module.

To me the time for mounting and removing the demountable tank makes it impractical. A module on the other hand can be swiftly swapped for alternative uses.

You can configure a (or multiple) 30 ton section(s) of a ship's modular space to be compatible with cutter modules. They just have to be installed versus simply carried.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Go further with other sizes.

Imagine the standard Free Trader leaves at the same time as a modular Freighter with a 100 ton module holding cargo and passengers. They arrive at their destination at the same time (more or less) and the Free Trader docks and waits to unload cargo while negotiating for new cargo, takes days. The Freighter belongs to a line and is on a regular route, it docks and transfers the module, moves to another dock and receives a module, using UNREP the station refuels it and resupplies it and it leaves on its return flight within hours of arriving. Which will be more profitable and be able to offer lower rates? The module it left might well be picked up a day or 2 later by another ship of the same line having been refilled.

 

[Arkathan]

Go further with other sizes.

Imagine the standard Free Trader leaves at the same time as a modular Freighter with a 100 ton module holding cargo and passengers. They arrive at their destination at the same time (more or less) and the Free Trader docks and waits to unload cargo while negotiating for new cargo, takes days. The Freighter belongs to a line and is on a regular route, it docks and transfers the module, moves to another dock and receives a module, using UNREP the station refuels it and resupplies it and it leaves on its return flight within hours of arriving. Which will be more profitable and be able to offer lower rates? The module it left might well be picked up a day or 2 later by another ship of the same line having been refilled.

I have, I was just going with the original cutter module premise.
I have two sets of deck plans on the forums for ships that use multiple 54 Dton cube modules to maximize their function as multi-role ships.

 

[Condottiere]

If the hulls holds multiple modules, it can selectively drop them, at each destination, and pick up new ones.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Go further with other sizes.

Imagine the standard Free Trader leaves at the same time as a modular Freighter with a 100 ton module holding cargo and passengers. They arrive at their destination at the same time (more or less) and the Free Trader docks and waits to unload cargo while negotiating for new cargo, takes days. The Freighter belongs to a line and is on a regular route, it docks and transfers the module, moves to another dock and receives a module, using UNREP the station refuels it and resupplies it and it leaves on its return flight within hours of arriving. Which will be more profitable and be able to offer lower rates? The module it left might well be picked up a day or 2 later by another ship of the same line having been refilled.

I have a merchant tender that swaps out cargo, low berth, and passenger pods. It can quickly swap them out, refuel, and depart, leaving the hands at the station to take charge of unloading everything and loading it up for the next ship. Very efficient.

 

[steelbrok]

I have a merchant tender that swaps out cargo, low berth, and passenger pods. It can quickly swap them out, refuel, and depart, leaving the hands at the station to take charge of unloading everything and loading it up for the next ship. Very efficient.

I've often thought that demountable low berths make more sense than dedicated ones.
Freeze the passengers, load them as cargo, unload at destination and revive in proper medical facility

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

When a module is deployed independently to act as a satellite or planetary base how many hull points does it have? After all some of them have weapons and must expect people to be rude and fire upon them.

 

[Arkathan]

A module is cheaper to make because it lacks spacecraft grade hull according to HG. It is designed to be contained inside the original ship's hull.
What you describe is more of a breakaway hull, which costs like a spacecraft, but is protected.
Nothing stops you from making those modular, or special use, but they have design requirements that modules don't have.
I'd have to re-read the rules on the orbital station module in that regard.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

Nothing stops you from making those modular, or special use, but they have design requirements that modules don't have.
I'd have to re-read the rules on the orbital station module in that regard.

The small craft book has several modules that are capable of acting as independent satellites/mini stations or as building in a ground base (temporary or permanently). But none of them have hull points assigned.

For example: The Spaceborne Early Warning Module for example. It has a turret, power plant, emergency power plant, advanced sensors even a computer 20/fib and so forth.

 

[Arkathan]

The small craft book has several modules that are capable of acting as independent satellites/mini stations or as building in a ground base (temporary or permanently). But none of them have hull points assigned.

For example: The Spaceborne Early Warning Module for example. It has a turret, power plant, emergency power plant, advanced sensors even a computer 20/fib and so forth.

Either the module is intended to use pressurized vehicle stats, which would be a valid pressurized hull with no Spacecraft hull rating, or the author of Small Craft ignored the existing rules. I am leaning towards vehicle grade status, since other ground modules are meant for temporary base building in hostile or vacuum environments.

 

[Fluffy Bunny Feet]

All the prices are from ship construction. So one would assume it qualifies as some form of ship. If nothing official were stated I'd be inclined to give them 1/2 hull points due to how the price is 1/2 of a hull of the same size making it unusually fragile.