Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

1. M5 - One of the advantages of this true type of modular construction is that each hull can be separately tested before certifying it for the navy, bypassing the usual shakedown cruise, which I don't recall really comes up in this game.


2. Torpedo warhead - replace it with an ortillery mass driver ball shot (I assume it's a ball, could it be a bullet?), which at half a ton makes the torpedo 2 tons in weight and probably is a lot cheaper than other warheads. Damage presumably 12D6.


3. Suicide drone warhead - same with this kamikaze craft, even though this requires both to connect with the target and make a kinetic kill.

 

[Condottiere]

Drones and Sixty ton Smallcraft

Do sixty ton plus Smallcraft need two drones to operate flight controls?

 

[sideranautae]

1. M5 - One of the advantages of this true type of modular construction is that each hull can be separately tested before certifying it for the navy, bypassing the usual shakedown cruise, which I don't recall really comes up in this game.

Modular construction doesn't obviate the need for shakedown cruises.

 

[Condottiere]

Each module is tested separately, so that any problems can be easily localized and fixed, which doesn't require the other components to remain idle, much like in a PC problem areas can easily be identified and replaced, with the problematic component either fixed by a DIY enthusiast or returned to the manufacturer.

 

[sideranautae]

Each module is tested separately, so that any problems can be easily localized and fixed,

Then, once hooked up they need a shakedown cruise because the weak points are where everything attaches. If only you could read shakedown reports from new subs...

You'd be singing a VERY different tune. :lol:

 

[Condottiere]

Submarines pretty much have all their components within a single hull, or single double hull.

 

[sideranautae]

Submarines pretty much have all their components within a single hull, or single double hull.

It is FIRST assembled in individual modular fashion in INDIVIDUAL parts of the hull that are SEPARATE from the other parts of the hull. Then, all those pieces of hull (with the modular parts) are connected.

Like I said, your tune would be completely different if you understood that process and could read the reports. Not important for you to know as it isn't like the game is real life.

 

[Condottiere]

You do realize the M5 is a series of single hulls connected together with docking clamps?

 

[Condottiere]

sE Jump Drive


TL8
15 tons; 11.25 MCr

TL9
7.5 tons; 7 MCr.

TL10
7.125 tons; 7.7 MCr.

TL11
6.75 tons; 5.25 MCr.

TL12
5.625 tons; 14 MCr.

 

[Condottiere]

sE Fusion Power Plant: Jump capable

It seems a rather simple exercise to reconcile smallcraft and Adventure class fusion power plants, the difference seems to be 0.1 tons in favour of the smallcraft engines at 0.5 MCr., which may be the superfluous super charger needed to flood the Jump Drive with that burst of energy to pierce the veils of hypered dimensions.

TL8
3.125 tons; 5.5 MCr.

TL11
2.5 tons; 5.5 MCr.

TL15
1.875 tons; 11 MCr

 

[Condottiere]

sE Gravitic Drive

1. There's nothing to compare this to, so you have to take it as printed.

2. I don't recall seeing any specific reference as to when the various acceleration stages are technically available, so I'll assume it starts at TL8, though the chances are it's really TL9.

TL7
5 tons; 6 MCr.

TL8
2.5 tons; 4 MCr.

TL9
2.375 tons; 4.4 MCr.

TL10
2.25 tons; 5 MCr.

TL11
1.875 tons; 8 MCr.

 

[Reynard]

In a way they did address the issue. The design rules say a certain tonnage can hold certain components and perform a certain way with them, even MegaTraveller. K.I.S.S. and don't read 'but it didn't say we couldn't' into everything.

Unlike older editions, they added clamp rules for dragging other ships in tandem into jump and that is now canon for Mongoose Traveller and that's fine by me. Explained all those battle riders hanging on the outside of dispersed battle tenders. The rules also remind us that each Jump drive in that Scorescout configuration would operate a little differently than the others disastrously so mega ships are addressed. Ten undersized small craft power plants don't function as the correct spaceship plant.

 

[Condottiere]

1. Clamps - Mongoose wasn't comprehensive, especially considering some of those battle riders were supposed to be 50KT.

2. Arms - Which could be extended to this feature, since a two ton limit limits the usability.

3, sE PP Jump Capable - Surprisingly, whether this was an accident or deliberately thought out, it was easy to isolate the difference between an Adventure class power plant and a smallcraft one, so I think I've hit a home run on this one.

4. Jump Shuttling - Seems a basic case of having the required jump drives and sufficient power capacity to extend the jump bubble to take attached tonnage with them into a transition successfully.

 

[GypsyComet]

Unlike older editions, they added clamp rules for dragging other ships in tandem into jump and that is now canon for Mongoose Traveller and that's fine by me. Explained all those battle riders hanging on the outside of dispersed battle tenders.

Well, unlike CT and MT, anyway. External docking clamps have been a thing since TNE, as has figuring drive performance on the current displacement of the docked bits. The RC Clippers were built around the concept.

 

[Condottiere]

Power Plant Fuel

1. Capital ship power plants have a stated fuel consumption of two thirds tonnage of the power plant in question.

2. This actually works out for the Adventure class generic alphabet power plants, if you minus off a ton before calculating it out.

3. For smallcraft, this tangents out, much like the inexplicable increase of tonnage for the higher powered power plants, but still consistent at sE 2.4 tons and sK 3.9 tons at 1.5 tons and 2 tons, respectively.

4. Well, more or less. The sE plant should really consume only 1 ton of fuel, if you minus off a ton and times that by two thirds.

5. As for the rest, the next edition should consider a revision of smallcraft power plants.

 

[Condottiere]

Power Plant Fuel Efficiency: Alphabets

1. Out of curiousity, I deconstructed the latter half of the smallcraft alphabet power plants, to see if I could isolate any reason why they weren't in line with the expected size over power produced.

2. The stage jumped from 0.3 to 0.6 tons, but surprisingly, the fuel consumed lessened.

3. That extra 0.6 tons cut fuel consumption in half, if you calculated that from a the base two tons from sK which was staged at ten times 0.3 tons, to an additional one ton fuel consumption, with the next ten times 0.6 tons.

4. If you extrapolate that, that means if you double the size of any given alphabet fusion power plant, minus one ton, your fuel consumption is cut by half.

 

[Condottiere]

Jump Drives: Reconciling Capital and Adventure Classes

1. Legally, the smallest Capital class Jump Drive is forty tons.

2. If you divide forty tons by seven percent, you get 5.714285714285714, or 5.7 tons.

3. This is well outside the five tons overhead in Adventure class Jump Drives.

4. This may well indicate that if you maintain that five tons, you can build Capital class Jump Drives below the forty tons threshold.

5. If one percent is five tons, that means you can construct a ten ton Jump Drive factor one for a five hundred ton starship,

6. Extrapolated a little further, you could construct factor one Jump drives for hundred tons (six tons), two hundred tons (seven tons), three hundred tons (eight tons), and four hundred tons (nine tons).

 

[Condottiere]

Venture Class

1. I don't recall if Grav Drives need exhaust vents.

2. If they don't, then they could be positioned anywhere, much like Jump Drives.

3. This useful, as in a saucer shaped hull, they can all be placed centrally, balancing out the weight, and removing the danger of lopsiding if forward momentum is cut.

4. Also, if the drives are widely separated, this brings up the question how to position the power plants, since you'd have to make arrangements for extended power cables.

5. If not, there's the possibility to place them on opposite edges and maybe allow them to swivel, which would improve their manoeuverability.

6. Unless, grav drives create omnidirectional gravitational fields, in which case they don't need exhaust vents, but separating them into two modules would still increase manoeuverability.

 

[sideranautae]

Venture Class

1. I don't recall if Grav Drives need exhaust vents.

Only reaction drives require that. Power plant probably has a coolant exhaust vent.

 

[phavoc]

Venture Class

1. I don't recall if Grav Drives need exhaust vents.

2. If they don't, then they could be positioned anywhere, much like Jump Drives.

3. This useful, as in a saucer shaped hull, they can all be placed centrally, balancing out the weight, and removing the danger of lopsiding if forward momentum is cut.

4. Also, if the drives are widely separated, this brings up the question how to position the power plants, since you'd have to make arrangements for extended power cables.

5. If not, there's the possibility to place them on opposite edges and maybe allow them to swivel, which would improve their manoeuverability.

6. Unless, grav drives create omnidirectional gravitational fields, in which case they don't need exhaust vents, but separating them into two modules would still increase manoeuverability.

I don't recall anything stating that the maneuver drive has exhaust or any kind.

However, every starship illustration I can recall, and every deckplan that I've seen, has the M-drive at the rear of the ship, or in drive pods pointing towards the rear. This anecdotal evidence would seem to indicate that starship grav drives "thrust" in some way, and therefore should be treated like standard engines. Also, when you are in N-space and thrusting towards a target, travel times have always been computed as 50% constant acceleration, then 50% deceleration in order to arrive at your target in a relative motionless state. So one could assume that the grav drive "pushes" against something, or operates in a similar manner as a reaction drive. Keep in mind that reactionless drives aren't what Traveller has for maneuver drives. You keep your momentum until it is otherwise cancelled or altered.

Grave vehicles, on the other hand, do not have the same appearance. Their locomotion does seem to be omnidirectional. But vehicles operate only where gravity is present. You can't take your air/raft say from Terra to Luna because there is no gravity to be manipulated.

So unless it's stated explicitly elsewhere, I would go with the logical assumption that starship grav drives operate in a similar manner as reaction drives and they need to be placed in such a manner that thrust is towards the rear.