Ship Crew - sensor operators

iggy42

Banded Mongoose
Hi All,

HG mentions the referee can assume 1 sensor operator per 1,000 of ship (pg. 28) & there is the Sensor station (pg. 39) to accomodate additional operators.

Should sensor operators be addional to the listed crew requirements (pg. 21) or are they assumed to be included?

I was planning on adding them but note that none of the example ships list them separately (appreciate most of the ships are designs from previous versions of HG).

Any thoughts?
 
Since we have next to no bridge crew, I add extra sensor operators.

I generally assume they can work in the bridge, so I only add sensor stations on small craft or if I add many operators.
 
iggy42 said:
Should sensor operators be addional to the listed crew requirements (pg. 21) or are they assumed to be included?

Additional crew.

iggy42 said:
I was planning on adding them but note that none of the example ships list them separately (appreciate most of the ships are designs from previous versions of HG).

Well, most are from S9 Fighting Ships actually.
 
iggy42 said:
Hi All,

HG mentions the referee can assume 1 sensor operator per 1,000 of ship (pg. 28) & there is the Sensor station (pg. 39) to accomodate additional operators.

Should sensor operators be addional to the listed crew requirements (pg. 21) or are they assumed to be included?

I was planning on adding them but note that none of the example ships list them separately (appreciate most of the ships are designs from previous versions of HG).

Any thoughts?

I've house ruled that there is one station (configurable to any type of bridge function) per every 5 tons on a standard starship (100+ ton ship) bridge (putting the number between 2 and 12 depending on bridge size). According to pg 39 of HG, you can add additional stations at 1t & 0.5MCr each. I took the reference on pg 28 as a general guideline when designing a ship. If you want to follow that, you still need to provide the physical stations for the sensor operators.
 
Thanks all,

I agree that bridge crew are lacking so there aren't really the crew available to assign as sensor ops.

Like the house rule of 1 station per 5 tones of bridge - may adopt.

"Well, most are from S9 Fighting Ships actually." - true, and I have that supplement tucked away somewhere.
 
Some bridge space includes space for basic sensors, control interfaces and some miscellaneous stuff.

In a ten tonne bridge, one work station will certainly be devoted to sensors, out of four or five.
 
On most of my smaller ships, I assume the Turret gunner stations are on the bridge too. I don't like the Star Wars idea that you have to be at the turret to fire it. Modern ships don't do that.

For larger ships, I assume a Fire Control area where all the weapons/shield operators are located and can be commanded. Some of the sensor operators would be located there to.

Crew has always been a bit fuzzy in Traveller, except for Engineering and Steward. Even within Engineering, what is the skill requirement for Engineering, Mechanics, Electronics and Gravitics?
 
I have always assumed civilian ships like a Free Trader that adds a turret as an afterthought lacks centralised fire control, so the gunners control the turrets locally, in the turret.

Purpose built warships have centralised fire control so the gunners sit in workstations in a Gunnery Room, next to the Action Information Centre (or Bridge on a small ship).

In other words civvies use the LBB2 model, whereas military ships use the LBB5 model.
 
Then bridges would just be composed of add-on workstations.

And apparently, sixty tonnes can easily control anything.
 
AnotherDilbert said:
I have always assumed civilian ships like a Free Trader that adds a turret as an afterthought ....
Except are they an "afterthought"? Don't you have to build in the hard point when the ship is built? Then couldn't the space to carry the right wires already be in place as well? I worked in a building where the whole floor was built on raised flooring so they could change the computers around at will without breaking into walls etc. Just a thought.

But I also admit the image of Han and Luke in the gun turrets is also a cool one. :mrgreen:
 
-Daniel- said:
But I also admit the image of Han and Luke in the gun turrets is also a cool one. :mrgreen:

Yes, I thought one of my players was going to cry when I informed him that he and the other gunners all sat in a room in front of a computer screen firing their weapons, not spinning in a turret on the outside of their ship. :)
 
AnotherDilbert said:
I have always assumed civilian ships like a Free Trader that adds a turret as an afterthought lacks centralised fire control, so the gunners control the turrets locally, in the turret.

Purpose built warships have centralised fire control so the gunners sit in workstations in a Gunnery Room, next to the Action Information Centre (or Bridge on a small ship).

In other words civvies use the LBB2 model, whereas military ships use the LBB5 model.

That's an excellent point and a good distinct ctuon between militry and civilian ship designs. Smaller military ships, say 400 tons or under, may also follow civilian design s and leave out central fire control because space is at such a premium in small ships. But larger shils would have that. For the rare larger armed civilian ships, like a liner, it too may adopt the military idea of central fire control.
 
phavoc said:
That's an excellent point and a good distinct ctuon between militry and civilian ship designs. Smaller military ships, say 400 tons or under, may also follow civilian design s and leave out central fire control because space is at such a premium in small ships. But larger shils would have that. For the rare larger armed civilian ships, like a liner, it too may adopt the military idea of central fire control.
Good point. The size, or in other words available space, might be driving this more than the designation of "Military" vs "Civilian". The smaller a ship, the more they follow particular norms. I could see that real easy. :D
 
Back
Top