Retrofit Times

cheeplives

Mongoose
Anyone have any sources of how long it would take to retro-fit a craft's Power Plant or Drives? Book 2 mentions Construction Times, but nothing for modifying an existing ship.

Thoughts/suggestions?
 
Percentage of tonnage, double it, then use that percentage of the construction time for that sized ship?

So a 200 ton ship, with 40 ton drives would be... 40% of 29 weeks: 11.6 weeks
 
barnest2 said:
Percentage of tonnage, double it, then use that percentage of the construction time for that sized ship?

So a 200 ton ship, with 40 ton drives would be... 40% of 29 weeks: 11.6 weeks
Seems reasonable... at least as a good starting point. Thanks!
 
There are some figures in Trillion Credit Squadron. I think it was 10% of original construction time for a minor repair/refit and 25% for a major repair/refit. This is from memory, though, and may be wrong.


Hans
 
Refit times should be related somehow to what's being done. Some replacements can be done quite quickly if the vehicle is designed to accomodate things. In the army field mechanics can pull an engine and totally replace it with a new engine of the same type in less than an hour. I've seen video's where a WW2 jeep is totally taken apart and reassembled literally in minutes.

So depending on the type of starship you have, where the enginers and power plant are located and other factors (like are you replacing like-for-like, or totally revamping the power plant), then its possible to quickly do the repairs.

And a well-designed vessel will take into account future work and, for example, route power and control cables away from say the roof of the vessel so you can at a later point cut the roof, lift out the engine, drop the new one in and then weld it back together.
 
Greetings

HMS Cottesmore and HMS Dulverton (originally Hunt Class Mine Counter-Measure Vessels (MCMVs) then converted to patrol vessels in 1997 were converted back to full minehunting capability for use by the Lithuanian Navy (as Skalvis and Kursis) - this was asserted to be an 18-month, multi-million pound project (newspaper article April 2010). The regeneration involved a full upgrade of the ships’ command and control and weapons systems, the installation of new engines (2 Diesel Caterpillars), chilled water and the installation of a new mine hunting system using remotely operated underwater vehicles (ROV). This - apparently - effectively results in two virtually rebuilt vessels.

To give a feel of the size of the vessels the Lithuanian Armed Forces quotes the refitted vessels as having:

Length - 60 metres
Width - 10 metres
Draught - 3.5 metres
Displacement - 645 tons
Maximum speed - 15 knots
Crew-up to 40 persons.
The vessels are driven by 2 diesel CATERPILLAR type engines.
The ships are armed with 40mm BOFORS artillery guns, MG 3 machine-guns.
Mine detection and classification sonar S2193 and underwater mine inspection and destruction robots K-STER are used for mine searching and clearing operations.
EOD divers can be implemented for specific underwater tasks.

So a major refit / complete overhaul for two 645 ton ships can take 18 months. How this transfers into YTU is up to you ...

Regards
 
Thanks kusten

I'd add a few months onto that if you're going to refit in open space - vacc suits will slow things down a bit and they'd have a 360 degree arc of hull to replace if they did any changes to it. The modular design mentioned earlier would be a standard military design feature, I think, as would redundant power and control lines sent along different routes (in case of combat damage).

If you take those into account and also take into account the ease with which such modules could be removed if the armour plating was fitted with such refits in mind, you might be looking at a month or two, tops, depending if you're talking 24-hour work schedules and if you have the supplies in stock already (or if you have sufficient to be doing the work you need to at any given moment and additional supplies come in on time).
 
phavoc said:
...And a well-designed vessel will take into account future work and, for example, route power and control cables away from say the roof of the vessel so you can at a later point cut the roof, lift out the engine, drop the new one in and then weld it back together.

Spoken like a user and not a mechanic :)

Granted you do caveat your statements but in the real world that is seldom the case. More often simply servicing many parts of a complicated machine requires serious dis-assembly of parts not related to the area of interest. I've long suspected designers and engineers of collusion in making the mechanic's job as difficult as possible, increasingly so over the years. Used to be lots of room for access in an engine bay, and routine work was a breeze. Now you have to practically (or actually) remove and /or partly dis-assemble the engine to do anything beyond changing the fluids and filters. And sometimes the filters aren't that easy.

The days of quickly and easily field stripping and reassembling the original jeep are long gone. For one thing the replacement is a lot bigger and heavier. No doubt the military does design with a mind to quicker service but you don't see that in civilian designs.

As for cutting up huge sections of hull to remove drives from a starship, I see several problems with that being the method. Structural integrity, jump grid (if you use that), and fuel buffer (if you use that) off the top. More likely (and the way I've drawn a few) the drives will be disassembled and removed in pieces through the thruster hole(s). So if you need to replace the jump drive, first you have to dis-assemble the maneuver drive and remove it (at least one thruster unit), then dis-assemble the related power plant(s) and remove it through the thruster space, before finally being able to dis-assemble the jump drive and remove it through the power plant area and out the thruster space. Then put it all back together by reversing that. A procedure that will take considerably more time than the original installation which was probably a matter of building the hull around the drives.


Optionally on some merchants the procedure may be done through the cargo bay (via hatch or wall removal) and out the cargo hatch.

What I'm saying is retrofit time will vary by design (size generally) and the part(s) involved (complication). And it could very easily be longer that the build time for the whole ship. Just look at how quickly a car is assembled on a modern auto production line, compared to even some of the simpler maintenance time on parts buried deep in the engine :)

So, make it up :) Let the story dictate. If you have an adventure you're dying to use, then that is how long the player's ship is laid up. Or work up a simple formula to generate a base estimate if you want some consistency and expect it to happen more than once.
 
far-trader said:
phavoc said:
...And a well-designed vessel will take into account future work and, for example, route power and control cables away from say the roof of the vessel so you can at a later point cut the roof, lift out the engine, drop the new one in and then weld it back together.

Spoken like a user and not a mechanic :)

Granted you do caveat your statements but in the real world that is seldom the case. More often simply servicing many parts of a complicated machine requires serious dis-assembly of parts not related to the area of interest. I've long suspected designers and engineers of collusion in making the mechanic's job as difficult as possible, increasingly so over the years. Used to be lots of room for access in an engine bay, and routine work was a breeze. Now you have to practically (or actually) remove and /or partly dis-assemble the engine to do anything beyond changing the fluids and filters. And sometimes the filters aren't that easy.

The days of quickly and easily field stripping and reassembling the original jeep are long gone. For one thing the replacement is a lot bigger and heavier. No doubt the military does design with a mind to quicker service but you don't see that in civilian designs.

As for cutting up huge sections of hull to remove drives from a starship, I see several problems with that being the method. Structural integrity, jump grid (if you use that), and fuel buffer (if you use that) off the top. More likely (and the way I've drawn a few) the drives will be disassembled and removed in pieces through the thruster hole(s). So if you need to replace the jump drive, first you have to dis-assemble the maneuver drive and remove it (at least one thruster unit), then dis-assemble the related power plant(s) and remove it through the thruster space, before finally being able to dis-assemble the jump drive and remove it through the power plant area and out the thruster space. Then put it all back together by reversing that. A procedure that will take considerably more time than the original installation which was probably a matter of building the hull around the drives.


Optionally on some merchants the procedure may be done through the cargo bay (via hatch or wall removal) and out the cargo hatch.

What I'm saying is retrofit time will vary by design (size generally) and the part(s) involved (complication). And it could very easily be longer that the build time for the whole ship. Just look at how quickly a car is assembled on a modern auto production line, compared to even some of the simpler maintenance time on parts buried deep in the engine :)

So, make it up :) Let the story dictate. If you have an adventure you're dying to use, then that is how long the player's ship is laid up. Or work up a simple formula to generate a base estimate if you want some consistency and expect it to happen more than once.

My experience is on the military vehicle side. I have personal experienc with Army track vehicles. And yeah, you can't do a jeep dis-assemble these days (though that's by design, not cause you can't - jeeps where designed to a different standard). But I've had mechanics pull and replace a 500hp diesel engine in less than an hour - that's a full, complete removal of the engine and assembly, putting the new one in and tightening the bolts and adding fluids and firing the puppy back up). Aircraft also have the ability to relatively quickly remove engines and replace them with different (but the same) ones. It's not unheard of for smaller vehicles.

But you are correct, and I alluded to it as well, size does matter. CAN one do this? Yes. It's been done before. But you can't do a quick engine change in a 40,000 DWT merchant ship. And they don't design them for that sort of thing because its not common. But if they really wanted to (or used say Russian engines) and knew they would be replacing the power plants on a relatively regular and frequent basis, then yeah, I believe they would make it as easy as possible. Umm, well could at least. I don't always understand the "logic" of mechanical engineers designing things that are a pain in the ass to service. But then again they don't bother with it.
 
phavoc said:
I don't always understand the "logic" of mechanical engineers designing things that are a pain in the ass to service. But then again they don't bother with it.

I still hold to the opinion that, if you made Engineers do the actual maintenance work themselves, the devices they design would be one hell of a lot better designed. I find that with some of the PCs from the larger companies or the laptops - some are pretty decent designs - easy to swap out components and replace parts... others are nightmares. I've even seen laptops where I had to do a partial disassembly of the lower half of a laptop, just to remove the screen.
 
BFalcon said:
phavoc said:
I don't always understand the "logic" of mechanical engineers designing things that are a pain in the ass to service. But then again they don't bother with it.

I still hold to the opinion that, if you made Engineers do the actual maintenance work themselves, the devices they design would be one hell of a lot better designed. I find that with some of the PCs from the larger companies or the laptops - some are pretty decent designs - easy to swap out components and replace parts... others are nightmares. I've even seen laptops where I had to do a partial disassembly of the lower half of a laptop, just to remove the screen.

TOTALLY agree with that one. I remember the first HP computers in retail.. idiots cut the motherboard in half to stack upon each other. And guess where they installed the memory slots?
 
Back
Top