Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Hulls and Aluminium

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw

Bill details the engineering choices underlying the design of a beverage can He explains why it is cylindrical, outlines the manufacturing steps needed to created the can, notes why the can narrows near it lid, show close ups of the double-seam that hold the lid on, and details the complex operation of the tab that opens the can.

Heatshielding for atmospheric landing?

 

[baithammer]

Spaceships: Armaments, Spinal Mounts, and Weapon of Choice

If you scale downwards, you have a large bay that with the same ball bearing that is less effective, and requires being a lot more closer to the target.

Speaking of which, one reason to favour weapon tweaks instead of straight forward shrinkage, is that you want that extra distance between you and the target; if the planet is safe enough to bombard at medium and short ranges, you can accomplish your objectives with a lot smaller weapon systems. Arguably, you could make that same argument for the particle accelerator, even at half damage.

Could be more of a psychological effect.

The railgun spinal by virtue of being a spinal weapon does far more damage over a greater area then any of the bay weapons. ( Mass Driver bays are more useful than the railgun bays in this task.)

 

[Condottiere]

No, I'm quite willing to add another three thousand tonnes to get a greater effect.

AT this point, it's more about trying to figure out if at factor one which is a better choice, a particle accelerator (with half damage at ground level) or a railgun.

 

[baithammer]

For a bombardment ship, the railgun.

For Multi-role, the particle spinal.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Life Support

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2hbtj5Mh8k

Space is a hostile place, in this episode we will look at what you need to survive in it, dispels some myths about it, and get into the specifics of how much air, water, power, and other things you need and how to get them.

1. Never give up, never surrender.

2. Chicken soup.

3. Talking allowed.

4. Eight watts of power for carbon dioxide scrubbing, per person.

5. Thousand joules per litre of water treated.

6. Hundred litres one watt?

7. Hamster wheels at two rotations per minute, two hundred and twenty four metres radius, fourteen hundred metres circumference.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments, Spinal Mounts, and Not Quite

What you do is cluster thirteen hard points on the nose, and install fixed mounts.

In the centre, a beam laser, mostly acting as a target designator; maybe two sandcasters.

Spread around this in three tiers, and tweaked with increased range and energy efficiency, thirty six laser drills.

In theory, zero tonnage, just a tad under ten million bucks, one hundred nine energy points and if fired in unison, how much potential damage?

 

[baithammer]

Fixed mounts still require hard points and at least as written in mgt 2ed don't get the benefit of double / triple mounts.

So you'd end up with a beam laser, 2 x sandcasters and 10x laser drills with the drills having a -3 DM / adjacent range with sandcasters that can only be employed in the front arc. ( Arcs are important for fixed mounts through a buried rule note.)

However, some spacecraft, particularly small craft
such as fighters, have fixed weapon mounts and must
actually point towards the target they are engaging. In
this instance, it is important to keep track of where a
spacecraft is pointing.

 

[Condottiere]

Actually, they do.

The question that haunts me, is if quad turrets then allow four weapon systems per hard point.

 

[baithammer]

Quads give rise to the 2d6+6 Pulse Laser turret which gives better odds at penetrating Armour 15.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In theory, zero tonnage, just a tad under ten million bucks, one hundred nine energy points and if fired in unison, how much potential damage?

The intent of the rules, as explained by Nerhesi during beta, is that each mount (hardpoint/firmpoint) is grouped, so 36 laser drills mounted on 12 fixed mounts on 12 hardpoints are grouped into 12 batteries of 4D+8 damage.

Unfortunately RAW does not say that...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The question that haunts me, is if quad turrets then allow four weapon systems per hard point.

Yes, but quad turrets live in the perpetual twilight of being in the rules, but probably not in the OTU, according to unofficial side-information like this forum.

 

[Condottiere]

They did include at least tractor beams and particle beams on Imperium warships, from that chapter.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments, Spinal Mounts, and Not Quite

Specific to laser drills, and in this case extended range variants, this should be a sustained duration weapon, which means anyone unlucky enough to fly in front of it during that specific round is going to get fried.

The beam laser would mark the exact centre of the blast area.

You can scale it.

You only need one gunner, and it easily could be the pilot, or pass it to a targetting programme that beeps when the nose lines up with the target.

It's not an efficient use of hardpoints as a bay weapon system, but tonnage is free, though if you made each one one eighth of a tonne, it would be nine and three eighths.

 

[baithammer]

The range only goes up to close from adjacent and your still constrained by the hardpoints which are required for any type of weapon mount. Further, as mentioned before fixed mounts RAW don't allow more than a single weapon to be mounted so your reducing the higher weapon density, range and accuracy for a very limited arc weapon.

Vehicles 2ed states the minimum size for a spaceship weapon is 1 space or 0.25t, which lines up with a large turret having the capacity for three spaceship weapons + crew. Honestly, fixed mounts should take up displacement and turrets should add an additional displacement. ( 2t would be a good point and quad should have a further +1t)

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The range only goes up to close from adjacent ...

Quite, and that makes the laser drill rather pointless, except possibly for light fighters (or ground support?).

Further, as mentioned before fixed mounts RAW don't allow more than a single weapon to be mounted ...

No:

Up to three weapons may be mounted on a fixed mount...

 

[baithammer]

No:

Up to three weapons may be mounted on a fixed mount...

Ugh, keep crossing up firmpoints / hardpoints.

 

[Condottiere]

It's strange, despite the new template, I have trouble keeping track of stuff as well.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Tail landers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3_Voh7NgDE

How To Do A Hoverslam - Things Kerbal Space Program Doesn't Teach.

If you're landing a rocket then waiting to the last minute slamming on the brakes actually saves fuel over slower, more considered approaches to landing.


Gravitic motors don't need to be economical, but commercial ships seem to like factor ones, so microfactor rockets to give an additional boost during take off and landing, maybe.

 

[baithammer]

It's strange, despite the new template, I have trouble keeping track of stuff as well.

Mostly too much fluffy bits in with the mechanics, could be fixed with giving the fluff first then providing a clear mechanics only block at the end.

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Virtual Crewing and Bridge Optional

Parsecage varies, but let's take the esample of a two hundred tonne starship:

Ten tonne bridge costs one million schmuckers, and need at least a factor one computer worth thirty kay schmuckers.

The virtual crew replaced would be:

. Captain - autonomous programme
. Pilot
. Astrogator
. Sensor Operator - translating exterior sensor information for the Captain, Pilot and Astrogator
. Engineer
. Steward
. Mechanic
. Internal Security Officer

You'd need a factor two computer to simultaneously run a jump programme factor one and a five man virtual crew, which of course can exchange the subprogrammes depending on the operation the starship is carrying out.

The minimal programme per five somewhat competent crew members is a megacredit. The immediate capital layout difference is a hundred and thirty thousand schmuckers deficit, versus salaries, a superfluous ten tonne bridge volume, crew staterooms, crew escape capsules.