Ship Design Philosophy

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments and Unusual Mountings

There are three types termed casemates, swivel, and pintel. What they have in common tends to be a limited traverse. Perhaps not the swivel.

Casemates could be an alternative configuration for bay weapons. There's no real advantage in placing this type of weapon system on a ship, since it's likely it would take more space than a bay. Since it's more internally placed, it might fool a sensor sweep, since the gun is traversed internally, and shoots out of a port or embrasure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WBG2rJZGW8

In the early part of the trench run, you'll notice that the Death Star turbolasers seem to be moving independent of the turret towers, while in a later comment, one of the pilots notes that some of the lasers are located on the surface, not that means anything except some technobabble in the script.

A pintel mount wouldn't need a separate fire control console, since it would be inherent with the weapon system. It also means you couldn't really control them remotely.

I'll term it a swivel cannon, since I think it as on one of the Treasure Island movies that it was positioned on the quarterdeck. It would be a naked bay weapon on a lazy susan.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armour and All Or Nothing

All or nothing armour concept involves identifying critical ship systems, and maximizing protection for them, while minimizing protection for non essential systems.

Ironically, in Traveller, it's actually very descriptive of the armour system used.

This could actually tie in with the battlecruiser concept, in that certain ship systems are heavily armoured, while leaving other areas significantly less protected.

Battleships are heavily armoured in general.

Dreadnoughts would not only be heavily armoured, but have the structural capacity to absorb damage from the heaviest spinal mounts.

For the ships without spinal mounts, armour could be concentrated in an armoured box configuration, which interestingly could be where the casemate weapon configuration could figure. Even if it didn't, a citadel could be built around a concentration of primary weaponry, ammunition stores, bridge, sensors, power plant and manoeuvre drive.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Armaments and Smallcraft

1. I think I've looked through six books at armed smallcraft, especially fighter, designs.

2. None of the turrets have fire control consoles

3. Fixed mountings are registered at one tonne per.

4. Fixed mountings don't have fire control consoles

5. Bay(s) have fire control console(s).

6. Bay(s) take up one fixed mounting space.

7. Drones don't have fire control consoles.

8. Turrets don't appear to have ready munitions.

9. Fixed mountings don't appear to have ready munitions.

10. Torpedoes don't have fire control consoles.

It's possible I may have missed some text in HG and Core that allows these exceptions, but if they are valid, and the authors didn't screw up the design process, smallcraft weapon systems design should become rather interesting.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Semantics

The two most popular words would seem to be the adjective star, and the noun cruiser.

You would assume that anything prefixed star would be capable of interstellar flight. And anything termed cruiser to be comfortably big. Unless the word star becomes a noun, in which case it becomes uncomfortably big.

Will there ever be a starcruiser, and what form will it take?

Having googled it, I rather like this version, which seems to have a tophull flight deck. I guess it goes somewhere between strike cruiser and attack carrier.

So a starcruiser would be trying to navigate roles performed by the heavier medium combatants.

 

[Condottiere]

Space Stations: Segue Design

Weight - one point one tonnes.

Hull - tech level eight artificially gravitated unisectional space station standard unarmoured titanium steel cylindrical hull; twenty two thousand schmuckers.

Engineering - two point seven five kilogramme factor one tenth gee tech level eight non-orbital grav drive, one thousand seven hundred fifty schmuckers; factor one five point five kilogramme power plant, thirteen thousand seven hundred fifty schmuckers; one point zero three seven five million schmuckers.

Bridge - one-ton command module, one hundred thousand schmuckers, equipped with a factor one basic tech level seven computer system, thirty thousand schmuckers, and standard electronics package.

Extras - none.

Cargo and fuel - 91.75 kilogrammes, allocated per taste.

Price - nominal 0.1685 MCr.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Semantics

The term armed merchant ship may describe a number of similar ship modifications intended for significantly different missions. The term armed merchantman is generally used.

East Indiaman describes late 18th and early 19th-century sailing ships engaged in trade while carrying guns similar to contemporary warships.
Defensively Equipped Merchant Ships were civilian-manned cargo ships carrying a small number of military personnel to operate an anti-submarine gun and anti-aircraft machine guns during the world wars of the early 20th century.[1]
Auxiliary cruisers were cargo ships commissioned as naval vessels with a military crew, converted to carry the guns of a light cruiser, and sometimes used as Merchant raiders.[2]
Armed merchant cruisers were fast passenger liners commissioned as naval vessels with a military crew and converted to carry the guns of a light cruiser.[3]
Naval trawlers were fishing trawlers commissioned as naval vessels with a military crew and equipped for minesweeping or anti-submarine escort.[4]
Q-ships were small civilian ships commissioned as naval vessels with a military crew, but retaining their original appearance while carrying concealed anti-submarine weapons.[5]
Armed boarding steamers were merchant steamers converted by the United Kingdom for boarding enemy vessels.


On the theme of cruisers, we have the merchant ones. Defining them in terms of Traveller looks tricky, because of the range of tonnages and armaments.

The problem starts if government subsidies to shipping companies includes the provision for installing armaments, following the commandeering of the ship. Predreadnought, this looks viable, post dreadnought it seems an invitation to be shot to pieces by an actual cruiser, even a light one.

You can set aside one or two thousand tonnes for a spinal mount, but it seems unlikely that there's a commercial case for armouring the ship, nor equipping it for very fast manoeuvring, and then you have to take into account the time required to find a suitable shipyard, and the allocate the time, space and personnel to embed the spinal mount.

Installing bay weapons (and turrets) has to be faster, and would serve the main purpose of deterring intermediate and smaller sized raiders.

Armed merchant cruisers, presuming they are medium sized hulls, would have to be confined to support roles, as losing one by deliberately looking for trouble is not going to be worth it.

Defensively equipped merchant ships should be a default state, except for the contingent of military personnel, which would only be allocated during a war.

Auxiliary cruisers would be chosen from intermediate sized hulls, and could fill any number of support, and even in some cases, combat roles.

Armed boarding steamers, or perhaps, converted merchantmen, would be unisectional hulls, distinguish themselves from defensively equipped ships by having more offensive armament, or fulfilling a more active, rather than passive, support role.

Not quite sure what would be worth trawling for in space, but perhaps this is where the two and four hundred tonne traders come in.

Going by Weber and Clancy, a Q-ship is a civilian ship of any size, though presumably large enough to ensure it can fulfil it's assigned mission(s). I don't think you can really hide a spinal mount, or maybe more precisely, I don't see it being worth the effort to hide a spinal mount, since I suspect a deep scan would reveal it, so don't see it worthwhile to construct a Q-ship exceeding intermediate tonnages.

As for East Indiamen, going by Oberlindes' acquisition of Sparkling Distress, it might be better getting access to surplus naval cruisers, and converting them to carry cargo, then going to the trouble of trying to build one commercially.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Sword And Buckler Design

I took one look at this and thought spinal mount poking through an armoured shield that protects the rest of the ship from exposure to direct frontal fire. Could embed bays and turrets on the surface and along the edges.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Space Mototorcycle Design

When the cops pull over your Scout to give you a ticket for speeding.

Doesn't look like there's any gravitational compensation, so maybe gee three?

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Catamaran Design

While ordinary spaceships can be constructed to a catamaran configuration, it's principally associated with jump capable vessels.

While the Venture class harkens back to the earliest days of Terran interstellar exploration, the catamaran configuration is a Solomani innovation that came out of the desperate period following the Long Night, when isolated rimward human colonized systems attempted to maintain some form of communications and trade links among themselves from a barely functional industrial base.

Junkers had opensourced their engineering troika that powered the Venture class, the Jumo J00sE9, the Jumo G00sE8, and the Jumo F00sE8. With that information in their public databases, local engineers tried to replicate the Venture, but stumbled across a new configuration that was much more easier to construct.

This involved a main forty tonne module that contains the bridge and engines, plus enough fuel for a parsec jump. Two secondary modules are attached by docking clamps to the main one, and could hold fuel, cargo and/or passengers, or might even be spaceships in their own right.

With the eventual reconnection of the old trade links, more traditional configurations came back to the fore, yet catamarans have become a popular choice of starship enthusiasts who build their own starships to immerse in their hobby of transitioning through the higher dimensions.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Command Modules and Detachable Bridges

Unless it turns out to be a typographical error, paying MCr 0.8 per tonne of ship for a detachable bridge, which at a thousand tons would be MCr 800, this seems very much an overly extravagant option.

One interesting aspect is that it notes that even a one tenth gee, you can make a soft planetary landing, which is good news for a non-orbital space station.

 

[AndrewW]

Unless it turns out to be a typographical error, paying MCr 0.8 per tonne of ship for a detachable bridge, which at a thousand tons would be MCr 800, this seems very much an overly extravagant option.

Agreed, it may be that per ton of bridge rather then ship was meant.

 

[Condottiere]

It would be more in line with expectations, since a capital ship bridge costs a million a ton; except, it doesn't have independent life support listed, nor tenth gee manoeuvre drive, presumably grav, and requisite power plant.

Though that does sound like an engineering set up for a non orbital space station.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Vargr Designs

Having just recently discovered how really interesting these libertarian capitalistic walking talking dogs can be, I thought I should consider Vargr ship designs.

At some point it ticked that they don't adhere to standards, and certainly not to Imperium technical standards.

I'm sure they've discovered that the laws of hyperphysics don't allow them to transition any starship below a hundred tonnes, but other than that, why would they want to stick to some foreign formula of standardized ship sizes? Unless they find a steady stream of used, slightly scorched, Imperium spaceships flooding their second hand dealerships.

Even if the Vargr did commission a series of standard ships, changing ownership and the individual tastes of their captains and whimsies of their chief engineer would make them unique in appearance, if not in layout.

The Vargr don't believe in throwing stuff away, which means ships and parts will continually get recycled.

Which would make their systems integrators geniuses, and their engineers masters of innovation.

In fact, you could discard the old Scottish engineer archetype, and replace it with a Vargr one. Of course, unless you apprentice someone to him to learn all the ways he's altered the engines and the ship systems, you might as well scrap the ship. The advantage being, he'll get bonuses to keep the ship working when by all rights the engines cannae take it anymore.

 

[Subzero001]

Since we have "drop tanks", why not drop jump drives with said "drop tank" attached? it would activate drop away used while the bubble is forming around said ship being maintained by the power plant on the ship for jump, and ready for retrieval and reuse after a minor maintenance cycle after so many uses. This would increase trade storage space from the drive and fuel dtonage. in civilian uses, and a predecessor or parallel project to the battle raider/riders. :shock:

These can be carried by a "tow-truck / salvage" to recover distressed ships with damaged J drives. or units damaged in battle but semi safe recoverable to a mobile shipyard.

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Droppable Jump Drives

I'm not really familiar with hyperspace physics, which just happens to be entirely fictional, but you've raised a valid point, and I'll see if I can get a perspective on it.

1. Fuel allocated for the jump is used up instantly, that's why drop tanks concept works.

2. You need a fully working (or at least upto the factor invoked during transition) power plant until the ship exits hyperspace.

3. That implies that power needs to be constantly expressed in some way, and that I would suppose would have to be through an attached jump drive.

4. Otherwise, what you propose would be similar to a hypergate, in that you can slingshot the vessel into hyperspsace as long as enough energy and fuel is expended, the assumption being that the hyperbubble remains in tact and stable without any input from the vessel.

5. It's fuel that's the largest component in this equation, and by disposing of the empty tanks, the jump drive only has to push the remaining volume through the transition.

6. Unless you have a network of identical ships, you might actually want to take your jump drive with you, rather than try and calibrate a different one at destination.

 

[locarno24]

I think the idea is something akin to the hyperdrive sled from Star Wars - the thing that jedi fighters latch onto for jumps.

As a minimum, such a 'jump sled' would need:

- Drone Command Suite, non-combat remote operations only, replacing 1 Engineer (1.5 dTons)
- Jump-A j-drive (10 dTons, 10 MCr)
- Fusion-A reactor (4 dTons, 8 MCr)
- Fuel for Jump-1 for a 100 dTon ship (10 dTons)
- Fuel for the reactor for 1 week (1 dTon)
- A docking clamp able to hold a 40+ dTon small craft (5 dTons, 1 MCr)
- A Model/1 (bis) computer running Jump Control/2 (no volume, 0.245 MCr)

That's 31.5 dTons - so up it to 40 dTons - an s4 class hull - and you've got 8.5 dTons to spend on ancillary systems like a little station-keeping drive, beacon, etc, or an internal fuel processor and scoops. Theoretically, 5 dTons for aerofins, 1 dTon of fuel processors and fuel scoops makes for a capability to perform refuelling dives whilst attached to the sled, allowing you to bounce through uninhabited systems

For just over 21 MCr, that gives 60 dTon medium-weight small-craft strategic mobility, although I'm not sure the crews would be wild about spending a week at a time in the cockpit - you'd need to ensure the small craft has life support and fuel for operations for that length of time....

 

[Condottiere]

Starships: Jump Sled

Okay, if I misinterpreted that, let me have another go:

The minimum hardware that we need for a clean transition would be:

1. Hundred tonnes of volume

2. Cramped bridge at seven point five tonnes.

3. Ship computer, inherent.

4. Jump drive, smallest legal aA, ten tonnes at tech level nine, seven point five at tech level twelve, fourteen of fifteen, depending on your interpretation

5. Power plant aA, four tonnes at tech level eleven, three tonnes at tech level fifteen

6. Drone pilot won't care about the cramped bridge, and you could discard the one tonne air lock and the one tonne ship's locker, assuming they were not scaled in the cramping

7. Ten tonnes of jump fuel, and you should have two weeks of power plant fuel, just in case, for warming up and the possibility of an extended stay in hyperspace

8. Docking clamp could be a single five tonner, or three one tonners

9. So it could range between thirty eight point five tonnes, to thirty one tonnes at tech level fifteen

 

[Subzero001]

thanks for the reply's.

I based my ideas off this " http://www.clockworksky.net/rp_traveller/rp_tr_jump_drive_thoughts.html " website :mrgreen:

for instance if I had barges with maneuver in-system drive etc for the trade items, the jump drop drives to jump, after the use it drops off and ballistics moves to a recovery and reuses area say near a gas giant with a flicker gas refinery from http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?t=40371 to renew and prep for next use.

thx again...

 

[Condottiere]

Drop Drives
TL 9 and above

An extension of the Drop Tank concept in which not just the fuel is external to the starship, but also parts of the Jump Drive. In particular, the Jump Drive fusion reactor is external to the ship, though the rest of the Jump Drive remains part of the ship. The external reactor is connected to the starship and charges the Jump Drive energy storage crystals before disconnecting, at which point the starship can jump. This is similar to the way drop tanks are used to charge the Jump Drive and are then dropped.

Because of how they work, this type of Jump Drive is also known as a 'Dump Drive'. As for ships that depend entirely on drop tanks, Drop Drive ships are very dependent on the presence of infrastructure to provide the energy they need to Jump, even more so than Drop Tank-dependant ships as they, at least, can use fuel bladders if required.

On the other hand, large concerns such as Megacorporations might like them because they allow a much higher utilisation of the expensive Jump Drive reactors than the less than once a week usage of the built-in type. This may be more of a factor than a saving on cargo space, as for a Far Trader-sized ship only a few kl of cargo space may be gained by using this approach.

Of course, because they are used much more frequently drop drives require more maintenance than the normal Jump Drive reactors, but given that they are likely to be located in stable, well-developed systems this may not be considered a problem.

The only potential problem with Drop Drives is the need to move the ship more than 100 diameters from the Drop Drive reactor before it goes into Jumpspace. Given that zuchai crystals can hold charge for at least two hours before starting to degrade this should not be an issue.

Maybe a jump grid, if all the jump drive has to do is punch a hole into hyperspace, and whatever residual energy charge just circulate in the grid, boosted by the power plant.

But I think that the jump drive is something that you actually want to take along.

 

[Condottiere]

Spaceships: Torpedo- And Dive-Bomber Concept

While torpedo-bombers seem a rather quaint term for the torpedo boat, it suits the Solomani view of a more dynamic focus on smallcraft carriers playing a more decisive factor in naval battles.

The Solomani also introduce a new smallcraft subvariant they term dive-bombers. The primary difference between torpedo- and dive-bombers is the variant of ordnance they carry, and the range that they release it.

While I don't see any stated acceleration on torpedoes, but I'll presume it's ten gees, which will provide a clean release from the torpedo-bomber, at the range of it's choosing.

Ortillery torpedoes do have the same speed as multi-warhead missiles, which is eight gees. Since they have to be released within close or adjacent range, dive-bombers tend to have an approach speed as fast as possible, meaning that it would be somewhat higher than eight gees. That might create problems with a normal release, as the torpedo would be travelling slower than the dive-bomber, so the bomb release is angled slightly away from the direction of approach, thus the appearance of the ortillery torpedo falling into it's target, while the craft pulls away.