Planetary launch

IMTU, I usually rule that any streamlined or partially streamlined ship's hull has lifters built into it that can nullify gravity to an extent. (Essentially a bank of Air/Raft lift modules in the hull.) They float up to a safe altitude and then engage their m-drive to pick up speed for either an orbit or transit to jump radius. Streamlining comes in handy when making any Piloting rolls, though I reserve those for special cases. The lifters are also used when repositioning the ship on the landing pad - energize the grid, and let local "tugs" or ground based tractors float the ship around. This gets rid of the need for wheels.
 
hdan said:
IMTU, I usually rule that any streamlined or partially streamlined ship's hull has lifters built into it that can nullify gravity to an extent. (Essentially a bank of Air/Raft lift modules in the hull.) They float up to a safe altitude and then engage their m-drive to pick up speed for either an orbit or transit to jump radius. Streamlining comes in handy when making any Piloting rolls, though I reserve those for special cases. The lifters are also used when repositioning the ship on the landing pad - energize the grid, and let local "tugs" or ground based tractors float the ship around. This gets rid of the need for wheels.


See? This is a good example of what I'm talking about. Hdan has given it a little thought and can have a reasonable answer if it comes up, without breaking the mechanics or giving a backdoor superweapon to the players or villains (like Star Trek does with so much of its tech).

I never liked the idea of wheels on starships either.
 
Explains all the ship illustrations with landing pad assemblies rather than wheels and why your group's ship lands anywhere on a planet other than the starport. Ever since CT, I have always envisioned VTOL capable ships. An edition or two of Traveller have actually made that clear.
 
CosmicGamer said:
High Orbit Drifter said:
The lifting body design would help, but from Classic Traveller, and all game systems for the Imperium setting since, the vast majority of ships do not have wings.
In mongoose, at least, there is the streamlined design.

Aerofins would be a better fit for wings.
 
AndrewW said:
CosmicGamer said:
High Orbit Drifter said:
The lifting body design would help, but from Classic Traveller, and all game systems for the Imperium setting since, the vast majority of ships do not have wings.
In mongoose, at least, there is the streamlined design.

Aerofins would be a better fit for wings.

aerofins allow for better control, unfortunately they don't really allow for flight...but they would serve as a good way to buy a aerodynamic lifting/fight hull
 
dragoner said:
Aerofins?

High Guard said:
Aerofins: Extendible aerofins improve a spacecraft’s manoeuvrability in atmosphere only, giving a +2 DM to all Piloting checks made in an atmosphere. Aerofins take up 5% of the ship’s tonnage, and cost MCr0.1 per ton. The DMs for atmospheric operations (see page 137 core rulebook) still apply.
 
I agree with WBNC - I figure the Streamlined or Partially Streamlined hull shape allows for planetary landings and the Aerofins provide additional control, but not really enough lift to make enough difference to thrust.
 
Rikki Tikki Traveller said:
I agree with WBNC - I figure the Streamlined or Partially Streamlined hull shape allows for planetary landings and the Aerofins provide additional control, but not really enough lift to make enough difference to thrust.

wait....someone agreed with me..got to get a screen cap of this....:D

with any luck, or some polite prompting during playtests. this detail will be addressed in future releases.
 
Back
Top