Ship power plant settings
- Thread starter DFW
- Start date
I guess there might be some issues from modern (ocean going) ship design that might also be worth considering. The 1st is that typically the electrical plant in a modern ship typically isn't really sized to carry the complete electrical load of everything onboard a ship.
Mostly this is due to the fact that you typically wouldn't be running some stuff at the same time (such as both compartment heating and the air conditioning). Similarly, some stuff (like the anchoring equipment) is used so infrequently that it wouldn't make sense to size the plant assuming that they would be running all the time.
Second, on most modern ocean going ships the electrical plant is composed of several smaller units/generators, so that you can take some generators offline when not needed, and/or for overhaul.
And finally, I believe that ships will have an emergeny generator, secifically to provide minimal services when the main plant is down.
It might be of interest to see how these type issues might ply out in Traveller terms, while not trying to get too overly complicatd.
For starters perhaps it could be assumed that there is a certain minimum sized plant (based on hull size) that could maybe meet all normal requirements of space flight. When normal long range sensors or typical self defense ype weapons are needed, perhaps this notional plant size would be capable of providing that power, assuming that maybe normal lights are dimmed and fresh water regeneration (or other life support items) is slowed, etc. Additionally,it may also be possible to more or less ignore stuff like airlock recycling and typical mooring actions, as these would be assumed to only occur either infrequently or at times when oher stuff might not be on line, etc.
If a ship is meant for certain special duties such as a warship with alot of weapons and/or sensors, or a large capacity passenger ship, then it may need to increase the size of its powerplant based on some sort of rating based on the type & number of weapons and sensors or number and passage-type of the passengers carried (eg, high-passage passengers on a ship above a certain nominal amount may raise your power requirements a bit more than say a similar number of other type passengers, etc).
Finally, if the powerplant were assumed to be made up of smaller generating units then it might be simple enough to just assume that the plant can either produce full-power, 3/4 power, 1/2 power, 1/4 power, or some notional very low number (say just enough to provide minimal life support, very low lighting, just tolerable temperatures, and emergency comms/a distress beacon, etc ) assuming that the plant includes a small emergency "generator" only for use in such instances.
As suh, fuel capacity requirements for typical merchant ships can be based on assumed fuel consumption, assuming a notional power requirement (presumably its full load) while transiting to/from the jump point, perhaps a different notional power requirement while in jump (or perhaps not?), and another notional power load while docked and/or on a planets surface (which could perhaps be varied whether the planets atmosphere is breathable or not, etc). If said ship has to fire its defensive weapons, while in transit it could just be assumed that life support and other services may be lowered to allow that.
For warships then though you may have to make oher assumptions.
When considering damage, you could investigate perhaps shutting down life support completely in some parts of the ship and/or alternating between the use of maneuver drives and the weapons or sensors each combat phase to meet the lower power avialable, or something like that.
Anyway, just some thoughts.
Regards
Pat
Mostly this is due to the fact that you typically wouldn't be running some stuff at the same time (such as both compartment heating and the air conditioning). Similarly, some stuff (like the anchoring equipment) is used so infrequently that it wouldn't make sense to size the plant assuming that they would be running all the time.
Second, on most modern ocean going ships the electrical plant is composed of several smaller units/generators, so that you can take some generators offline when not needed, and/or for overhaul.
And finally, I believe that ships will have an emergeny generator, secifically to provide minimal services when the main plant is down.
It might be of interest to see how these type issues might ply out in Traveller terms, while not trying to get too overly complicatd.
For starters perhaps it could be assumed that there is a certain minimum sized plant (based on hull size) that could maybe meet all normal requirements of space flight. When normal long range sensors or typical self defense ype weapons are needed, perhaps this notional plant size would be capable of providing that power, assuming that maybe normal lights are dimmed and fresh water regeneration (or other life support items) is slowed, etc. Additionally,it may also be possible to more or less ignore stuff like airlock recycling and typical mooring actions, as these would be assumed to only occur either infrequently or at times when oher stuff might not be on line, etc.
If a ship is meant for certain special duties such as a warship with alot of weapons and/or sensors, or a large capacity passenger ship, then it may need to increase the size of its powerplant based on some sort of rating based on the type & number of weapons and sensors or number and passage-type of the passengers carried (eg, high-passage passengers on a ship above a certain nominal amount may raise your power requirements a bit more than say a similar number of other type passengers, etc).
Finally, if the powerplant were assumed to be made up of smaller generating units then it might be simple enough to just assume that the plant can either produce full-power, 3/4 power, 1/2 power, 1/4 power, or some notional very low number (say just enough to provide minimal life support, very low lighting, just tolerable temperatures, and emergency comms/a distress beacon, etc ) assuming that the plant includes a small emergency "generator" only for use in such instances.
As suh, fuel capacity requirements for typical merchant ships can be based on assumed fuel consumption, assuming a notional power requirement (presumably its full load) while transiting to/from the jump point, perhaps a different notional power requirement while in jump (or perhaps not?), and another notional power load while docked and/or on a planets surface (which could perhaps be varied whether the planets atmosphere is breathable or not, etc). If said ship has to fire its defensive weapons, while in transit it could just be assumed that life support and other services may be lowered to allow that.
For warships then though you may have to make oher assumptions.
When considering damage, you could investigate perhaps shutting down life support completely in some parts of the ship and/or alternating between the use of maneuver drives and the weapons or sensors each combat phase to meet the lower power avialable, or something like that.
Anyway, just some thoughts.
Regards
Pat
DFW said:
So squirrel power is out?? Even with the sugar-laced acorns??
Man... the squirrels had such high hopes for promotions too!
But on a more serious note... that's actually an interesting statement. We know according to the books that you can get grav lift belts. They have extrmely small power sources, and, of course, don't last that long. So it makes you wonder what the actual power requirements would/could be.
phavoc said:
Well, the power required to accelerate 10meters/sec/sec. Start with a newton.
In other words, quite a bit if you are keeping a 1G "field" throughout the entire inhabitable part of the ship. Also, you will be more susceptible to detection by ships operating densitometers...
DFW said:
Yeah, but even around say a planet the range of densitometer is pretty pretty negligible. You had said in your 'Fleet Jumps' post that
DFW said:
Your normal active sensors would have detected the ship waaayyy before that. A ship skulking around is going to be as far away as possible from their target if they are running dark. I don't any densitometer is going to pick them up. 3000km is just about point-blank range for starships. I'd hate to be a sitting duck running on a fuel cell and a prayer.
phavoc said:
How about explosive power generation to instantly charge jump capacitors? Its not MgT, but there are stats in the old FF&S 1 for them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_generator
Electrodynamic tether for ships orbiting a world with a magnetic field to charge caps?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether
Another case where Traveller's technology is ... underwhelming. Today'sphavoc said:
best gravimeters (no gravitics, just primitive TL 7/8 real world technology)
can detect variations of 1 nanogal* under Earth conditions, and would ha-
ve an even better resolution under space conditions with their fewer dis-
turbances. Compared to what we already have, Traveller's densitometers
are pure steamtech.
* 0.000000001 of 1 gal, 1 gal = 1 cm/s/s, Earth's surface gravity = 980 gal
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
Well yes, but a densitometer is not just a local area sensor. It functions at considerable range OR with very fine detail.
The original MT version could do both, being a Star Trek Super Sensor with one weakness: artificial gravity blinds densitometers. If mounted on a ship a densitometer needs to be shielded or mounted externally, while even the best cannot discern internal details under the effects of artificial gravity.
The people with real world sensor experience immediately noted that this would make a densitometer a near foolproof detector and targetter in space combat: enemy ships are always going to be a DOT on a densitometer scan, and if they turn off their grav to avoid that you can instead watch the crew (some of the denser things on a ship) run around inside the hull, tell if the power plant is running by watching fuel flows, and other amazing feats. All well beyond visible ranges.
TNE pulled back on the densitometer a bit. You CAN do medical scans with one, watching blood flow, scanning for tumors (or bullets), watching heartbeats and lungs, etc. But only if the range is very close (similar to scanning machines of this sort now) and the subject isn't moving too much. Extended to longer range, the need for the subject to be still relative to the sensor continues to apply, while the sensitivity of the sensor will drop with range. Want to scan a dead ship? Pull alongside and *park*, and scan away. A live ship with internal gravity will still be detectable from farther away as the Grav DOT effect is still present, but even that will get lost well within a planetary diameter. This is still my prefered version of the densitometer, as it doesn't break the space opera vibe of Traveller too badly.
The original MT version could do both, being a Star Trek Super Sensor with one weakness: artificial gravity blinds densitometers. If mounted on a ship a densitometer needs to be shielded or mounted externally, while even the best cannot discern internal details under the effects of artificial gravity.
The people with real world sensor experience immediately noted that this would make a densitometer a near foolproof detector and targetter in space combat: enemy ships are always going to be a DOT on a densitometer scan, and if they turn off their grav to avoid that you can instead watch the crew (some of the denser things on a ship) run around inside the hull, tell if the power plant is running by watching fuel flows, and other amazing feats. All well beyond visible ranges.
TNE pulled back on the densitometer a bit. You CAN do medical scans with one, watching blood flow, scanning for tumors (or bullets), watching heartbeats and lungs, etc. But only if the range is very close (similar to scanning machines of this sort now) and the subject isn't moving too much. Extended to longer range, the need for the subject to be still relative to the sensor continues to apply, while the sensitivity of the sensor will drop with range. Want to scan a dead ship? Pull alongside and *park*, and scan away. A live ship with internal gravity will still be detectable from farther away as the Grav DOT effect is still present, but even that will get lost well within a planetary diameter. This is still my prefered version of the densitometer, as it doesn't break the space opera vibe of Traveller too badly.
phavoc said:
DFW said:
Those "variations" were of extremely minutes waves. A ship causing a 1G "hole" is another matter. But, I keep forgetting that MGT, in general, has sensors that are underwhelming even at TL 6. Much less TL's where there is interstellar travel. So, yes other sensors will pick you up 1st. Good IR ones will nail you out to at least 3 A.U.
Personally if I'm gonna drive the enemy batty I'd release thousands of very small probes that could provide you with IR targets all over the system. Then you'd have thousands of false positives to run down. A bit like the original aluminum snow used against radar.
History has shown us that pretty much every offensive system gets countered with a defensive one. It's always been a question of how fast do you need to come up with a defensive one. And a few, like defense against torpedoes, sometimes never seem to get really addressed very well.
History has shown us that pretty much every offensive system gets countered with a defensive one. It's always been a question of how fast do you need to come up with a defensive one. And a few, like defense against torpedoes, sometimes never seem to get really addressed very well.
The aluminum snow worked comparatively well because the aircraft whichphavoc said:
used that method did not have to rely on radar themselves. Distributing
thousands of (convincing) fake infrared targets all over the system would
mean that the one who distributed them can turn off his own infrared sen-
sors just as well.
DFW said:
Maybe yes, maybe no. Obviously the same concepts today would scale with tech, just as would variations on how to spoof such things.
It's a bit grandiose to say it couldn't be done when history has proven that statement incorrect on just about every human endeavor.
GypsyComet
Emperor Mongoose
An important parameter in the case of spoofing is time. How long does a decoy need to work?
