Teaser: J-3 500 ton Trasnport/freighter 1e Build.

[wbnc]

I have finally gotten the software I needed to setup and layout my oh so long delayed "Ships of Gold" project. with any luck it will e ready to go within a week or so depending on a few last touch ups, and putting the art in place.

Here's a teaser...I will apologize for the deck plans ahead of time. they are my weak point...assume these are more for orientation advertisement purposes..such as the maps of a cruise ship on the back of the flyer in your stateroom.

500 ton T-91 "Steadman" Class Freighter
Manufactured by the same consortium as the T-21 Intersystem Hauler, the Steadman is unusual for the design firm. It is long ranged, with attention to the appearance and comfort of the vessel. Designed to run profitably over three parsec routes, where shorter ranged vessels are unable to travel. The T-91 are slower and less agile than many vessels Its primary role is to bridge gaps in local clusters and service worlds a bit more remote than the jump-1, Jump-2 vessels in use can reach at an acceptable cost.
The Steadman is not intended as a passenger liner with only a hand full of staterooms. The cargo load of the Steadman is a bit smaller than average for a 500 ton vessel but it carries enough cargo for the ship to operate at a profit. The Steadmans cargo capacity and range make it a popular vessel for larger merchants in more remote areas. However, its lack of Staterooms sometimes limits its popularity with various companies who enhance their income by transporting passengers.
The Sleek styling of the Steadman has resulted in several being converted to Yacht, or show pieces for a corporate fleet. They are fitted with additional luxuries, and enhanced furnishings as well as larger more comfortable staterooms. These vessels are found transporting VIPs and celebrities instead of carrying paying passengers and cargo.

 

[Spartan159]

Very interesting, very interesting indeed. *yoink*

 

[-Daniel-]

I like the way the outside looks quite a bit. Very nice. Very clean lines.

I look forward to the completed project, sounds like there will be a lot of good stuff to be found. :mrgreen:

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Nice, solid engineering. This is the performance I would want for a player ship!

But would it really be profitable? The operating margin looks slim even if the ship is full. Probably works better as a Yacht?


I think MgT assumes streamlined ships have wings for aerodynamic lift. A simple box would not be streamlined, but partially streamlined.

.., streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), ...

The deck plans looks good, nice schematics. No need for photo-realism for deck plans.
I have two problems with the deck plans. The passengers are not separated from the crew, the passengers have access to the bridge through a single iris valve. That makes hijacking easy? I would prefer two bulkheads between passengers and the bridge.
The cargo hold and crew space are not symmetrical, hence a loaded ship would be unbalanced? We could reduce thrust on one side of the ship to compensate, but that seems wasteful?

 

[-Daniel-]

I think MgT assumes streamlined ships have wings for aerodynamic lift. A simple box would not be streamlined, but partially streamlined.

.., streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), ...

You might want to look at the Type-S Scout, Type-A Free Trader, System Defense Boat, and Empress Marava Far Traders among others. MgT clearly does not assume wings are required to be "streamlined". They could have them, like the Serpent Class Scout, but they are not required to have wings to be Streamlined. :wink:

 

[wbnc]

Very interesting, very interesting indeed. *yoink*

oh this is a freebie I have much more in the book.....much more, freighters tankers to ships small craft utility pods, drones, fighters merc ships...NPCS sample ships, plot seeds all the good stuff.

I like the way the outside looks quite a bit. Very nice. Very clean lines.

I look forward to the completed project, sounds like there will be a lot of good stuff to be found. :mrgreen:

a week or two at most ad all 180+ pages will be ready..inserting my art and tweaking a few things as we speak.

Nice, solid engineering. This is the performance I would want for a player ship!

But would it really be profitable? The operating margin looks slim even if the ship is full. Probably works better as a Yacht?


I think MgT assumes streamlined ships have wings for aerodynamic lift. A simple box would not be streamlined, but partially streamlined.

.., streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), ...

The deck plans looks good, nice schematics. No need for photo-realism for deck plans.
I have two problems with the deck plans. The passengers are not separated from the crew, the passengers have access to the bridge through a single iris valve. That makes hijacking easy? I would prefer two bulkheads between passengers and the bridge.
The cargo hold and crew space are not symmetrical, hence a loaded ship would be unbalanced? We could reduce thrust on one side of the ship to compensate, but that seems wasteful?

Thanks that's the sort of stuff I like to get back... it's definitely a niche ship, for very particular routes as a standard commercial vessel. as I have it described it does get converted into a Yacht, or private working boat fairly often.

I was trying to put as much space in one location as possible for the cargo bay, also for people who want to repurpose it there is one side that is not lined with passenger areas so they can open up the side walls for cargo hatches or small craft bays. I tried to make it something that could be easily modified by people who wanted range and speed for other than cargo runs.

I'll look at how I can lay it out to put a solid hatch between the passenger deck and the bridge.

As for the shape, it's streamlined for low resistance, not lift. I gave it a narrow cross section and longer length to reduce the effects of cross winds and prevent it fro spinning if it got hit by a sudden gust from the side. I did a set of suggested rules for lifting body shapes in a sidebar, so there is a difference between a low drag body and a lifting body.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I think MgT assumes streamlined ships have wings for aerodynamic lift. A simple box would not be streamlined, but partially streamlined.

.., streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily), ...

You might want to look at the Type-S Scout, Type-A Free Trader, System Defense Boat, and Empress Marava Far Traders among others. MgT clearly does not assume wings are required to be "streamlined". They could have them, like the Serpent Class Scout, but they are not required to have wings to be Streamlined. :wink:

The Type S etc. are classic LBB2 designs. CT did not imply that streamlined necessarily included lifting bodies, but MgT does. If we design for MgT, shouldn't we use MgT definitions?

The Serpent is a complete aircraft (airframe in MT, aerofins in MgT) so should have lifting bodies and control surfaces for increased manoeuvrability.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I'll look at how I can lay it out to put a solid hatch between the passenger deck and the bridge.

How about placing the entire life support section forward in two decks, behind / under the bridge? The cargo hold would be a regular shape and the crew and passengers could be separated on different decks, with the only access to the bridge from the crew deck?

 

[wbnc]

I'll look at how I can lay it out to put a solid hatch between the passenger deck and the bridge.

How about placing the entire life support section forward in two decks, behind / under the bridge? The cargo hold would be a regular shape and the crew and passengers could be separated on different decks, with the only access to the bridge from the crew deck?

how does this look???

 

[AnotherDilbert]

how does this look???

Um, I assumed the cargo hold was two deck high? With the bridge on the top deck? If so the cargo hold is now a nightmare of shifting floor and ceiling heights?


I meant letting the centre and rear parts of both decks be one big cargo hold. All the crew and passenger areas in the forward part of both decks. That way the hold would be easily packed and symmetry (and balance) maintained.


Perhaps a separate entrance to the living area of the ship? Going through the cargo hold is a bit unpractical? It is escape pods having outside access, right?

 

[wbnc]

how does this look???

Um, I assumed the cargo hold was two deck high? With the bridge on the top deck? If so the cargo hold is now a nightmare of shifting floor and ceiling heights?


I meant letting the centre and rear parts of both decks be one big cargo hold. All the crew and passenger areas in the forward part of both decks. That way the hold would be easily packed and symmetry (and balance) maintained.


Perhaps a separate entrance to the living area of the ship? Going through the cargo hold is a bit unpractical? It is escape pods having outside access, right?

on moment please....let me go fire up the pain program...

 

[wbnc]

Take three in the crowdsource deck plan series

rearranged the starerooms, split the crew, captains and owners cabins to the upper deck,passenger cabins to the lower deck

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Looks good! The ship is safe and the passengers do not have to mix with dirty spacers...

 

[wbnc]

Looks good! The ship is safe and the passengers do not have to mix with dirty spacers...

Thanks,.

and it still ahs lots of room for modification and alterations. with a two deck deep hold small craft and utility modules can fit inside nicely.

 

[-Daniel-]

I think MgT assumes streamlined ships have wings for aerodynamic lift. A simple box would not be streamlined, but partially streamlined.

You might want to look at the Type-S Scout, Type-A Free Trader, System Defense Boat, and Empress Marava Far Traders among others. MgT clearly does not assume wings are required to be "streamlined". They could have them, like the Serpent Class Scout, but they are not required to have wings to be Streamlined. :wink:

The Type S etc. are classic LBB2 designs. CT did not imply that streamlined necessarily included lifting bodies, but MgT does. If we design for MgT, shouldn't we use MgT definitions?

I am, you are adding a requirement not stated in the rules as written. The very fact they have listed the wings as a separate item in the existing ships means they intend us to continue to use Streamlined as it has always been used. Be that as it may, I think the design as presented fits well within the norm for Traveller and does reflect the use as shown by many the examples they present.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I am, you are adding a requirement not stated in the rules as written. The very fact they have listed the wings as a separate item in the existing ships means they intend us to continue to use Streamlined as it has always been used. Be that as it may, I think the design as presented fits well within the norm for Traveller and does reflect the use as shown by many the examples they present.

MgT1: "streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily)"
I can't see this as anything but RAW requires aerodynamic lift for streamlined ships.

"Aerofins: Extendible aerofins improve a spacecraft’s manoeuvrability in atmosphere only."
I interpret this as extra control surfaces for manoeuvrability, not wings for lift.

This is RAW in MgT1. I didn't make it up.

 

[-Daniel-]

I am, you are adding a requirement not stated in the rules as written. The very fact they have listed the wings as a separate item in the existing ships means they intend us to continue to use Streamlined as it has always been used. Be that as it may, I think the design as presented fits well within the norm for Traveller and does reflect the use as shown by many the examples they present.

MgT1: "streamlined (a wing, disc or other lifting body allowing it to enter the atmosphere easily)"
I can't see this as anything but RAW requires aerodynamic lift for streamlined ships.

"Aerofins: Extendible aerofins improve a spacecraft’s manoeuvrability in atmosphere only."
I interpret this as extra control surfaces for manoeuvrability, not wings for lift.

This is RAW in MgT1. I didn't make it up.

It is a single comment taken out of context. The Rule regarding streamlining is clear: "Streamlining a ship increases the cost of the hull by 10%. This streamlining includes fuel scoops which allow the skimming of unrefined fuel from gas giants or the gathering of water from open lakes or oceans. Streamlining may not be retrofitted; it must be included at the time of construction." Page 106 MgT 1e. No restriction about must have wings or aerofins. And the fact they site many examples in the ship designs as Streamlined that do not have wings or aerofins in their specs also seems to support the idea that wings are not needed. Regardless, you do what you wish I am done with this because it is now a distraction to a wonderful thread about a great streamlined ship.

I can't wait to see the final outcome.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It is a single comment taken out of context.

It's the definition of what "streamlined" means in MgT. The rule you quote is the cost for including it. Both are RAW.

Aerofins are optional.