Starship Budgets

[mancerbear]

So I've had a thought that I'd like to float. As we know, in the real world, when the military commissions a new vehicle, it must meet and not exceed a budget. I'm thinking how we can incorporate that into a Traveller game with vehicle construction, especially military vehicles. So, say the Imperium wants to introduce a new battlecrusier, it needs to decide on a budget for it. PErhaps we can have some sort of table to roll on to find that budget, then during the design phase, we can't go over that budget. That would mean some design cuts to fit the budget, leading to vehicles that may not be exactly optimal, but perhaps a tad more "realistic", so to speak. Thoughts?

 

[Infojunky]

Check out Trillion Credit Squadron... An adventure in Navel procurement and combat...

 

[mancerbear]

Check out Trillion Credit Squadron... An adventure in Navel procurement and combat...

Thanks for that. I certainly will

 

[Reynard]

Wait, the real world never exceeds a budget? I think Traveller should reflect the real world with a roll whose effect level determines how, percentagewise, over budget a project goes. This needs to be rolled as a last step because you never hear what it will be until long after projects are underway and it's too late to halt.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Considering how corrupt governments are now, I'd expect the Imperium to be even more so. Makes acquiring money for building fleets more interesting.

 

[Franbo]

I think that from a realism perspective military procurement generally results in under-delivering and over-spending when designing and delivering "new" weapon systems. It is exceedingly rare for the first delivery run to be the final version (and often the "good" version doesn't occur until an additional spending round after the weapon systems have seen real action - mock testing is rarely as useful as expected however well designed the test program was thought to be).

The inherent political capital that goes into major purchasing decisions almost inevitably results in individuals being "tied" and emotionally invested into projects that with an entirely rational perspective should have been canned rather than had more funds allocated when the inevitable "unexpected" problems materialise.

I like the idea of designs that are not "perfect" due to initial budgetary constraints, but would expect what is actually delivered is likely going to be even worse than the starting design.

 

[Condottiere]

The research and development aspect is missing, as recent events for the LCS, Zumwalt, Osprey, Lightning and any number of other vehicles demonstrate how much money can disappear down a black hole.

Or in our case, the Kinunir.

 

[Reynard]

There's an idea! Use the Old ships option on page 136 MRB to reflect an inherent defect in the entire ship line due to budget cuts in design or manufacture.

 

[mancerbear]

I agree that budgets go over all the time in the real world (I used to work for Defence in here Australia and a procurement officer and eventually fleet manager, so know all to well about these things), but often, budget blowouts occur because of inflation and and rising costs, so designs are designed to meet a target budget, but then often exceed those budgets due to unforeseen circumstances. Not sure how to replicate this in Traveller, except with the previously suggested roll for percentage of amount over budget.

 

[DivineWrath]

There's an idea! Use the Old ships option on page 136 MRB to reflect an inherent defect in the entire ship line due to budget cuts in design or manufacture.

What does MRB stand for?

 

[dragoner]

There's an idea! Use the Old ships option on page 136 MRB to reflect an inherent defect in the entire ship line due to budget cuts in design or manufacture.

What does MRB stand for?

The core rule book it looks like.

 

[DivineWrath]

So MRB is shorthand for the Mongoose Traveller Core Rulebook? Not a shorthand I would come up with...

 

[Infojunky]

So MRB is shorthand for the Mongoose Traveller Core Rulebook? Not a shorthand I would come up with...

Ok, I have been told that Mongoose prefers TMB as the TLA for reffering to the Traveller Main Book....

 

[Reynard]

And the thread goes spiraling into a tangent because Mongoose Rule Book came to mind at that moment...

 

[DivineWrath]

Sorry. I had to ask what MRB was since I couldn't figure out what it stood for.

I'm perfectly fine if this thread gets back on topic now.

 

[Condottiere]

As regards individualizing classes or ships, GDW's Man 'o' War had cards with upgrades randomly distributed. In Spacecraft Options, weapons can be customized.

I'm sure with some thought something similar could be developed.

 

[locarno24]

Wait, the real world never exceeds a budget? I think Traveller should reflect the real world with a roll whose effect level determines how, percentagewise, over budget a project goes. This needs to be rolled as a last step because you never hear what it will be until long after projects are underway and it's too late to halt.

I was going to say...

But yes, essentially you have three choices if you've clearly not got the budget to complete a piece of design work:
1) Reduce the scope (i.e. the capability of the finished design)
2) Extend the design period (allowing you to draw on the next budget cycle for the design activity)
3) Commit more money (over and above what you'd planned to spend on design in this budget cycle).

Most times, military programmes end up doing some combination of 1 and 2, although (1) is more normally invoked in the manufacturing stage by reducing the number ordered, rather than scaling down the capability requirements for each unit at design.

If you wanted to throw in some assumptions to make design more 'realistic', then yes, hard budget limits are one thing you could use.

Another is a requirement for some unused space - less relevant for the 3I, I guess, with it's glacially slow tech development, but most naval ships will be designed on the assumption that they'll undergo at least one major refit and upgrade programme during their service life, and hence the assumption that sensor fits will increase in size by a dTon or two each, that you'll end up carrying 10% more small craft and fighters (or fighters which are significantly larger), or that there may be a decision to convert some cargo space into additional magazine space (hence putting them next to one another would be good), etc, etc.

 

[Condottiere]

I don't recall if you can cut a ship in two and weld some extra sections in the middle.

 

[locarno24]

Depends on the design of the ship.

Theoretically, yes - it just depends what you're going to be severing when you cut it.

There will come a point where you're going to have to reattach so many critical systems (ammo feeds, life support, etc, as well as just cables), structural elements and armour plate (especially the latter - if it can take a direct hit from an atomic weapon it's going to be an absolute bugger to cut or weld!) that it's more trouble than it's worth.

In traveller terms, you also have the issue that physically extending the ship will degrade its performance, whereas changing equipment within the hull (and hence not requiring a larger drive) won't.

 

[Condottiere]

Depends a great deal on whether you encounter some form of bottleneck, whether production or political.

If you're lumbered with an Naval Arms Limitation Treaty, where you can only build replacement ships after a considerable period of time, mid-life refurbishment might allow hollowing out the hull and installing modern equipment.

Or, as in the probable case of the Russians, you no longer have the industrial base to build large hulls, so you refurbish old ships.