Shipyard Construction Rate

[Condottiere]

Originally, it also included electrical current.

I would guess that might have been eliminated, so that you don't have to shunt power to the hull.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Probably by default of the technologiocal level stated the spacecraft was constructed at.

But if no benefits (or penalties) are attached to that (for the hull), it could be stainless steel.

HG pg 12 "All hulls start with armour Protection +0, although this can be improved upon." So I am guessing that the armor +0 is armor of whatever TL the hull is. Titanium Steel, Crystaliron, Bonded Superdense, etc...

 

[Condottiere]

I guess we could do some reverse engineering, as to actual thickness.

You have the Striker formula, and I would suppose we'd need to take groundscale weapon systems, and see how much damage they currently actually inflict on a spacecraft hull, with zero factor protection.

 

[MasterGwydion]

I guess we could do some reverse engineering, as to actual thickness.

You have the Striker formula, and I would suppose we'd need to take groundscale weapon systems, and see how much damage they currently actually inflict on a spacecraft hull, with zero factor protection.

I just figured that the writers figured that Armor +0 was a negligible amount of space.

 

[Geir]

One good thing about MegaTraveller is that they set the default Armour for a hull at 40 (maybe more or less depending on TL -not planning to dig it up - but nowhere near 0). With a strict reading of current rules, that's Armour 4 in current Highguard, so much like the issue with a g-bike rider having ten times the amount of damage absorption capacity than a g/bike, there are some problems with the interface between personal/vehicle/starship combat values.

I think I got convinced that using the 'round down' approach, I could assume a personal scale Amour Protection value of 9 for starship hulls, but I'm not sure that logic holds up cleanly. Both vehicles and robots have a default Protection value. The Core book has Cover assumed values (which don't match actual vehicles). The Boarding chapter in High Guard'22 implies you need 50 points of damage to "hole" an unarmoured hull, but that's cumulative, not Protection-reduced, so it's a different (slightly incompatible) thing. And just making it armoured (without specifying a value) doubles the 'Holed' number (hmm). And then the Companion gives Protection values for 'steel hatch' and 'steel blast door' at 8 or 12. Maybe there's also something or other buried in the Mercenary books, but I don't recall.

Anyway, I could agree with the assumption that an Armour 0 hull on a spacecraft is of whatever hull material the same TL Armour is, especially since vehicle (and robots, but I copied vehicle logic for that) Amour default values increase with TL. But though the materials may improve, the Protection of a ship hull might not, because they might be able to make a ship just as sturdy with thinner hi-tech walls.

(Okay that was a longish post that resolved nothing)

 

[Condottiere]

In theory, changing the material of the hull would change the default cost, even if the armour factor remains zero.

 

[MasterGwydion]

One good thing about MegaTraveller is that they set the default Armour for a hull at 40 (maybe more or less depending on TL -not planning to dig it up - but nowhere near 0). With a strict reading of current rules, that's Armour 4 in current Highguard, so much like the issue with a g-bike rider having ten times the amount of damage absorption capacity than a g/bike, there are some problems with the interface between personal/vehicle/starship combat values.

I think I got convinced that using the 'round down' approach, I could assume a personal scale Amour Protection value of 9 for starship hulls, but I'm not sure that logic holds up cleanly. Both vehicles and robots have a default Protection value. The Core book has Cover assumed values (which don't match actual vehicles). The Boarding chapter in High Guard'22 implies you need 50 points of damage to "hole" an unarmoured hull, but that's cumulative, not Protection-reduced, so it's a different (slightly incompatible) thing. And just making it armoured (without specifying a value) doubles the 'Holed' number (hmm). And then the Companion gives Protection values for 'steel hatch' and 'steel blast door' at 8 or 12. Maybe there's also something or other buried in the Mercenary books, but I don't recall.

Anyway, I could agree with the assumption that an Armour 0 hull on a spacecraft is of whatever hull material the same TL Armour is, especially since vehicle (and robots, but I copied vehicle logic for that) Amour default values increase with TL. But though the materials may improve, the Protection of a ship hull might not, because they might be able to make a ship just as sturdy with thinner hi-tech walls.

(Okay that was a longish post that resolved nothing)

It helped Me so it wasn't a complete waste of time.

 

[MasterGwydion]

In theory, changing the material of the hull would change the default cost, even if the armour factor remains zero.

Maybe in FFS it does but thankfully, not it MgT2...

 

[phavoc]

I was thinking about the build rate today and I realized that a one-size fits all is the wrong way to look at it. Building slips / yards capacity and rates are predicated upon their specialization - meaning you aren't going to build small ships on a large-ship slip / yard. Example - AJ & Sons builds ships up to 1,000 tons. Doddering & Stuttering builds ships in the 10k Dton to 50k Dton range. And Stupendous yards builds 100k and greater dreadnoughts for the Imperial Navy.

COULD AJ & Sons build 1,000 Dton modules? Sure, it's possible, but unlikely since they build entire ships. It would probably be unlikely they would build 10 100 Dton ships simultaneously. Just like Doddering isn't going to bother with building 200 Dton free traders. And Stupendous isn't going to bother to build 600 Dton subsidized liners.

Shipyards should still operate with the same logic they always have - they will have sweet spots on what they build. It makes more sense to stand up a new yard to build ships that greatly differ from their normal process than trying to change your workforce's skills and experience to building something entirely different.

IF you wanted to get down to that level then you'd see shipyards at three different Class A starports doing things differently - Planet A wouldn't necessarily build ships up to a million Dtons, but Planet B might, whereas Planet C could be somewhere in the middle. I know what the rules say, but they are looking at things from a very high level and applying a generic description to everything. Which, when you get into generic UWP's and generic starport descriptions thats a reasonable expectation. And this is where even somewhat careful game system building comes into play over random dice rolls.

Is that going to work for everyone? No, not really. Doesn't mean its not possible or practical. Plenty of games and systems have found a balance between specificity and details.

 

[Condottiere]

Depends on your order book.

The interstellar scale of potential spacecraft construction, is probably under appreciated in Traveller.

 

[phavoc]

Depends on your order book.

The interstellar scale of potential spacecraft construction, is probably under appreciated in Traveller.

It really doesn't. Are Ford-class carriers built in Pascagoula, MS? Or Columbia class SSBNs built there? Ingalls builds LHA-class ships, but not full up carriers. Ford-class carriers only fit in a handful of drydocks, so lets toss that one out. A Columbia class is smaller than a destroyer or LHA, so why are they only built in very specific locations if the order book is full (or full enough)?

Those look to be 737 (or possibly 787's - can't tell from the angle). Boeing has major final assembly facilities in two locations - WA state and SC. The SC plant builds the 787, but not the 737. Even with it's challenges Boeing has a large number of aircraft on it's order books. Starships are going to be at least as complicated as aircraft. Specialization and experience still play a major role in manufacturing complex items like starships.

 

[MasterGwydion]

I was thinking about the build rate today and I realized that a one-size fits all is the wrong way to look at it. Building slips / yards capacity and rates are predicated upon their specialization - meaning you aren't going to build small ships on a large-ship slip / yard. Example - AJ & Sons builds ships up to 1,000 tons. Doddering & Stuttering builds ships in the 10k Dton to 50k Dton range. And Stupendous yards builds 100k and greater dreadnoughts for the Imperial Navy.

COULD AJ & Sons build 1,000 Dton modules? Sure, it's possible, but unlikely since they build entire ships. It would probably be unlikely they would build 10 100 Dton ships simultaneously. Just like Doddering isn't going to bother with building 200 Dton free traders. And Stupendous isn't going to bother to build 600 Dton subsidized liners.

Shipyards should still operate with the same logic they always have - they will have sweet spots on what they build. It makes more sense to stand up a new yard to build ships that greatly differ from their normal process than trying to change your workforce's skills and experience to building something entirely different.

IF you wanted to get down to that level then you'd see shipyards at three different Class A starports doing things differently - Planet A wouldn't necessarily build ships up to a million Dtons, but Planet B might, whereas Planet C could be somewhere in the middle. I know what the rules say, but they are looking at things from a very high level and applying a generic description to everything. Which, when you get into generic UWP's and generic starport descriptions thats a reasonable expectation. And this is where even somewhat careful game system building comes into play over random dice rolls.

Is that going to work for everyone? No, not really. Doesn't mean its not possible or practical. Plenty of games and systems have found a balance between specificity and details.

I figure since there is no mechanical difference between two shipyard, then the differences between them are whatever the Referee says they are. That shipyard only builds ships in the 100 to 600 ton range. Sorry. You will have to go somewhere else to get your Mercenary Cruiser built. As long as that is still true if they return to that shipyard later, it makes perfect sense to Me. Can't buy a new Ferrari at the Ford dealership... Or a semi-truck for that matter.

 

[Condottiere]

As I recall, it's cheaper to have a spacecraft operate as an airliner.

Then you have satellites and other space monitoring platforms.

Then you have insystem transports.

What is a brake on interstellar tourism?

The cost of passages.

 

[Anstett]

Shipyards should still operate with the same logic they always have - they will have sweet spots on what they build. It makes more sense to stand up a new yard to build ships that greatly differ from their normal process than trying to change your workforce's skills and experience to building something entirely different.

IF you wanted to get down to that level then you'd see shipyards at three different Class A starports doing things differently - Planet A wouldn't necessarily build ships up to a million Dtons, but Planet B might, whereas Planet C could be somewhere in the middle. I know what the rules say, but they are looking at things from a very high level and applying a generic description to everything. Which, when you get into generic UWP's and generic starport descriptions thats a reasonable expectation. And this is where even somewhat careful game system building comes into play over random dice rolls.

Is that going to work for everyone? No, not really. Doesn't mean its not possible or practical. Plenty of games and systems have found a balance between specificity and details.

This does tie back to the Starport details thread. We already have 3 Spaceport types (type F) that have the same designation but match up with different Starport types. (A, B, C).

One thing that I do think is different than a wet navy shipbuilding (or aircraft) is space. Once reason there is specialization is that the space to build a super tanker overwhelms most coastal port areas that could be used for commerce. Or Boeing with multiple football (either kind) fields under cover.

In space you you can spread out as far as you want, to be anywhere in a system you want. Part of a ship yard can be out near the gas giant for raw materials, another part near the main world, another near the belt, etc. So you can build different types of ships in each area, each run by a different company with different specialties.

Space is big.

 

[phavoc]

This does tie back to the Starport details thread. We already have 3 Spaceport types (type F) that have the same designation but match up with different Starport types. (A, B, C).

One thing that I do think is different than a wet navy shipbuilding (or aircraft) is space. Once reason there is specialization is that the space to build a super tanker overwhelms most coastal port areas that could be used for commerce. Or Boeing with multiple football (either kind) fields under cover.

In space you you can spread out as far as you want, to be anywhere in a system you want. Part of a ship yard can be out near the gas giant for raw materials, another part near the main world, another near the belt, etc. So you can build different types of ships in each area, each run by a different company with different specialties.

Space is big.

There are pretty sizable ship building locations around the world. Theimitation today isn't space but demand and the desire to make them profitable (though the Chinese have Subsidized their ship building operations for decades for non-business reasons). Western yards are forced to make a profit, so their footprint has been shrinking.

Boeing moved assembly out of WA state due to unionization more than anything else. Cost was a result of unionization. Of course now their SC plant has a much higher rate of defects than their WA plant (sadly WA is catching up due to management numbskullness).

Maybe in a few years they'll be able to get their acts together.

As for in-system industry, I think it's always been quite possible to have a multitude of industries in-system rather than import from out-system. That's actually been a gap for a long time - the lack of details in the published materials for the rest of the system. It's been basically the main world, maybe some gas giants, and nothing else. DGP did start turning out detailed systems and including it in some of their modules.

A system is big as you said. I'm sure most industrialized systems with high tech and high pop have stations, colonies and bases strewn throughout a system to support the primary planet. Some planets will disdain the industrial clutter and put it in orbit or on another planet(s) or moons - and of course let the little people live there. Movies like Outland, or book series like Sten make sense.

 

[Condottiere]

Boeing got cannibalized by McDonald Douglas.

Airbus, for all intents and purposes, is a European Union conglomerate.

As far as I can tell, Lockheed is the military industrial complex.

It's hard to tell with the Russians, but I think their consolidated aerospace industry will shortly get outsourced to China, especially if sanctions stay on semi permanently.