1. If you wish to make that change, you have our blessing.
2. Yes, use the Rail Rider modification.
2. Yes, use the Rail Rider modification.
The Vehicle Handbook is Here!
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello Mr. Sprange,
Thank you very much for the response and clarification to my questions concerning the Increasing Dive Customization and Rail Rider/Train External Power options.
msprange said:
Thank you very much for the response and clarification to my questions concerning the Increasing Dive Customization and Rail Rider/Train External Power options.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Evening all,
I have another clarification request concerning MgT Vehicle Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Customization Electronics Communications Systems Increased Range option on p. 51.
Increased Range: Every time the Range of a communications system is multiplied by ten, its initial cost will be doubled. This can be done twice.
From the instructions I think that the range is increased by the increments of 10 and 20 times. Can the range be increased in increments other than 10 and 20?
I have another clarification request concerning MgT Vehicle Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Customization Electronics Communications Systems Increased Range option on p. 51.
Increased Range: Every time the Range of a communications system is multiplied by ten, its initial cost will be doubled. This can be done twice.
From the instructions I think that the range is increased by the increments of 10 and 20 times. Can the range be increased in increments other than 10 and 20?
snrdg121408 said:
No, 10 and then 100 times - however, this is one of those areas that a ref is completely in his rights to approach differently. If you have justification to make it 10 and 20 for a vehicle, by all means, go ahead!
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning PST Mr. Sprange,
Thank you again for the reply and clarification of the Increased Range option.
msprange said:
Thank you again for the reply and clarification of the Increased Range option.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Afternoon 1453 hours PST,
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Fire Extinguishers p. 58 clarification question concerning Cost.
"Fire extinguishers consume no Spaces and cost Cr500 per 25 Spaces the vehicle has."
If the Honey Badger installed a fire extinguisher is the cost going to be:
Cost = (8/25) x 500 = 0.32 x 500 = Cr160
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Fire Extinguishers p. 58 clarification question concerning Cost.
"Fire extinguishers consume no Spaces and cost Cr500 per 25 Spaces the vehicle has."
If the Honey Badger installed a fire extinguisher is the cost going to be:
Cost = (8/25) x 500 = 0.32 x 500 = Cr160
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello again,
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Full Galley p. 58 clarification question:
A full galley consumes 6 Spaces, plus 1 Space per 10 Travellers served. It costs Cr2000 plus Cr100 per Traveller served.
Do the instructions mean that
1. A full galley serving 1 to 9 Travellers consumes 6 spaces and cost Cr2,000
2. A full galley serving 10 to 19 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,100
Correction to item 2.
2. A full galley serving 10 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,100
3. A full galley serving 19 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,900
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Full Galley p. 58 clarification question:
A full galley consumes 6 Spaces, plus 1 Space per 10 Travellers served. It costs Cr2000 plus Cr100 per Traveller served.
Do the instructions mean that
1. A full galley serving 1 to 9 Travellers consumes 6 spaces and cost Cr2,000
2. A full galley serving 10 to 19 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,100
Correction to item 2.
2. A full galley serving 10 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,100
3. A full galley serving 19 Travellers consumes 7 spaces and cost Cr2,900
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello all,
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Operating Theatre p. 59
"Until TL7, the vehicle must remain stationary in order for the operating theatre to be used. After that, the theatre is built upon a
stabilised bed that allows it to be used while the vehicle is in motion."
Boats, ships, and submersibles large enough to have operating theaters are never stationary when underway the instructions above appear to indicate that they can not have operating theaters.
The operating theater on the boats, submarines, I served on was the Wardroom table, while the USS Simon Lake had a separate space.
MgT Vehicle Design Handbook PDF 2/21/17 Operating Theatre p. 59
"Until TL7, the vehicle must remain stationary in order for the operating theatre to be used. After that, the theatre is built upon a
stabilised bed that allows it to be used while the vehicle is in motion."
Boats, ships, and submersibles large enough to have operating theaters are never stationary when underway the instructions above appear to indicate that they can not have operating theaters.
The operating theater on the boats, submarines, I served on was the Wardroom table, while the USS Simon Lake had a separate space.
snrdg121408 said:
By my understanding, a full galley requires a minimum of 6 spaces. For every 10 people you want to serve at once, you add 1 more space. That is, 1 space for every10 people (or fraction thereof). So to feed 1 person requires 1 space. To feed 7 people also requires 1 space. To feed 11, you need 2 spaces. 19 people would also require 2 spaces.
So, again by my understanding, a full galley to serve 10 people would require 7 spaces (6 for the galley, 1 for the people) and cost Cr3,000 (Cr2000 for the base galley, +Cr100 per person). A galley for 19 people would require 8 spaces (6 base, 1 for the first 10 people, then 1 more for the other 9 people) and cost Cr3,900 (Cr2000 for the base, +Cr100 per person).
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello Jerra,
Thank you for the response and based on the mini-galley requirements that 2 Spaces serve up to 5 Travellers the pattern and another correction to my original entry appears to be that the full galley requires 6 Spaces that serves up to 10 Travellers.
Life Support clearly indicates that it consumes 1 Space for every 20 people (or part of) on board the vehicle the full galley does not have the same instructions clearly stated which again appears to mean that every additional 10 Travellers and 1 Space and 10 x 100 = Cr1,000 to the cost.
Of course I am probably out to lunch and to cover all bases in my spreadsheet I will have your understanding and mine unless Mr. Sprange or other Mongoose Publishing staff or Forum Moderator provides other information.
Jeraa said:
Thank you for the response and based on the mini-galley requirements that 2 Spaces serve up to 5 Travellers the pattern and another correction to my original entry appears to be that the full galley requires 6 Spaces that serves up to 10 Travellers.
Life Support clearly indicates that it consumes 1 Space for every 20 people (or part of) on board the vehicle the full galley does not have the same instructions clearly stated which again appears to mean that every additional 10 Travellers and 1 Space and 10 x 100 = Cr1,000 to the cost.
Of course I am probably out to lunch and to cover all bases in my spreadsheet I will have your understanding and mine unless Mr. Sprange or other Mongoose Publishing staff or Forum Moderator provides other information.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning PST,
I've built a spreadsheet for light ground vehicles using the Honey Badger example without rounding the cost is Cr50,436. Using the Mass Production instruction of rounding to the nearest Cr1,000 my cost matched the listed one on MgT Vehicle Handbook p. 11 Step 7 and matches the price shown on the Vehicle Record Sheet p. 12. I must have done something wrong since I usually fail to match cost, but I'm happy that I appear to have at least gotten one right.
Looking at the Badger's Vehicle Record Sheet p. 12 and the Fury Helicopter Gunship p. 103 there are entries for Autopilot, Comms, Nav, Sensors, Camo, and Stealth. The Badger has the six items are listed in the Traits/Equipment while the Fury has them next to the section listing TL, Skill, Agility, Speed, range, Crew, Passengers, Cargo, Hull, Shipping and Cost.
Which style of record sheet formatting is preferred?
Probable Errata on the Badger's record sheet p. 12 versus the information provide in Step 2, p. 8, of the example.
Step 2 second sentence: "As we said before, we want it to carry four Travellers, so that will need 4 Spaces."
Vehicle Record Sheet:
Crew: 1
Passengers: 5
Passengers should be changed from 5 to 3.
I've built a spreadsheet for light ground vehicles using the Honey Badger example without rounding the cost is Cr50,436. Using the Mass Production instruction of rounding to the nearest Cr1,000 my cost matched the listed one on MgT Vehicle Handbook p. 11 Step 7 and matches the price shown on the Vehicle Record Sheet p. 12. I must have done something wrong since I usually fail to match cost, but I'm happy that I appear to have at least gotten one right.
Looking at the Badger's Vehicle Record Sheet p. 12 and the Fury Helicopter Gunship p. 103 there are entries for Autopilot, Comms, Nav, Sensors, Camo, and Stealth. The Badger has the six items are listed in the Traits/Equipment while the Fury has them next to the section listing TL, Skill, Agility, Speed, range, Crew, Passengers, Cargo, Hull, Shipping and Cost.
Which style of record sheet formatting is preferred?
Probable Errata on the Badger's record sheet p. 12 versus the information provide in Step 2, p. 8, of the example.
Step 2 second sentence: "As we said before, we want it to carry four Travellers, so that will need 4 Spaces."
Vehicle Record Sheet:
Crew: 1
Passengers: 5
Passengers should be changed from 5 to 3.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Afternoon PST,
I'm reviewing the vehicle record sheets in my Vehicle Handbook PDF which has me trying to understand some of the weapon entries one is for magazines and magazine costs. Another is about linked weapons
The Vanguard Air Superiority Fighter's, Vehicle Handbook PDF 2e p. 78, has four heavy machine guns installed with the weapons table listing for the heavy machinegun having a 600 round magazine and a magazine cost of 400.
From Central Supply Catalog 2e p. 130 a heavy machinegun is 0.1 tons, with a 100 round magazine that has a magazine cost of Cr400.
Shouldn't the magazine cost for 600 rounds be Cr2,400?
The Vanguard illustration has a similar look to the WW II P-51 which means that when the pilot activates the firing mechanism all four heavy machineguns and the two autocannons would be throwing out rounds converging on a point down range.
The two autocannons are probably linked to fire at the same time and more than likely could be selected to fire separately from the heavy machine guns or at the same time.
Based on the historical Mustang and other aircraft my image is that there are two heavy machineguns in each wing. The two autocannons might be in the wings or they might be in the Vanguard's nose concentrating their fire.
Technically the four heavy machine guns are "linked" to fire together every time pilot activates the trigger. However since I'm guessing there are two in each wing they should have damage of 4D +4 in the table.
If the autocannons are in the nose then technically they are "linked" and should be 6D +6 and if one is installed in each wing the table's listing is correct.
Based on reality which the linked rule appears to be based on aircraft weapons when mounted on the same side should follow the lined weapons instruction.
I'm reviewing the vehicle record sheets in my Vehicle Handbook PDF which has me trying to understand some of the weapon entries one is for magazines and magazine costs. Another is about linked weapons
The Vanguard Air Superiority Fighter's, Vehicle Handbook PDF 2e p. 78, has four heavy machine guns installed with the weapons table listing for the heavy machinegun having a 600 round magazine and a magazine cost of 400.
From Central Supply Catalog 2e p. 130 a heavy machinegun is 0.1 tons, with a 100 round magazine that has a magazine cost of Cr400.
Shouldn't the magazine cost for 600 rounds be Cr2,400?
The Vanguard illustration has a similar look to the WW II P-51 which means that when the pilot activates the firing mechanism all four heavy machineguns and the two autocannons would be throwing out rounds converging on a point down range.
The two autocannons are probably linked to fire at the same time and more than likely could be selected to fire separately from the heavy machine guns or at the same time.
Based on the historical Mustang and other aircraft my image is that there are two heavy machineguns in each wing. The two autocannons might be in the wings or they might be in the Vanguard's nose concentrating their fire.
Technically the four heavy machine guns are "linked" to fire together every time pilot activates the trigger. However since I'm guessing there are two in each wing they should have damage of 4D +4 in the table.
If the autocannons are in the nose then technically they are "linked" and should be 6D +6 and if one is installed in each wing the table's listing is correct.
Based on reality which the linked rule appears to be based on aircraft weapons when mounted on the same side should follow the lined weapons instruction.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning PDT,
Vehicle Handbook p. 92 ACHILLES-CLASS FRIGATE clarification request.
1. The Equipment Section has two Sensor systems listed. The Achilles is a wet Navy asset and I believe that one sensor system is for surface/air search and the other is for underwater search, a.k.a. SONAR.
Do I have the two sensor systems identified correctly?
If no, then please let me know what the second sensor system is used for?
If I am correct that one system is searching for surface/air contacts and the other for submerged contacts I would like to submit an errata recommendation.
Add "Underwater" to the second Sensor System entry om p. 92.
Vehicle Handbook p. 92 ACHILLES-CLASS FRIGATE clarification request.
1. The Equipment Section has two Sensor systems listed. The Achilles is a wet Navy asset and I believe that one sensor system is for surface/air search and the other is for underwater search, a.k.a. SONAR.
Do I have the two sensor systems identified correctly?
If no, then please let me know what the second sensor system is used for?
If I am correct that one system is searching for surface/air contacts and the other for submerged contacts I would like to submit an errata recommendation.
Add "Underwater" to the second Sensor System entry om p. 92.
The second sensor system is indeed for underwater use, and the lasers do indeed use the turrets.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning Mr. Sprange,
Thank you for confirming that the ACHILLES-CLASS FRIGATE's second sensor system is SONAR.
My apologies for the turret question I did a brain lapse and overlooked the Weapons entry block.
However, this does bring about a question for the fixed mounted torpedoes, long range anti-air missiles, and Minigun anti-missile system.
Why are they fixed mounted?
The depiction of the frigate's long range anti-air missile resembles a USN Terrier twin rail launcher which could rotate and elevate/depress the rails.
Torpedo launchers are routinely capable of rotating in an arc from a few degrees left/right of the bow/stern and 90 degrees of the ship's centerline.
The minigun anti-missile system appears to be similar to the USN Phalanx Close-In Weapon System which is what basically amounts to a turret.
msprange said:
Thank you for confirming that the ACHILLES-CLASS FRIGATE's second sensor system is SONAR.
My apologies for the turret question I did a brain lapse and overlooked the Weapons entry block.
However, this does bring about a question for the fixed mounted torpedoes, long range anti-air missiles, and Minigun anti-missile system.
Why are they fixed mounted?
The depiction of the frigate's long range anti-air missile resembles a USN Terrier twin rail launcher which could rotate and elevate/depress the rails.
Torpedo launchers are routinely capable of rotating in an arc from a few degrees left/right of the bow/stern and 90 degrees of the ship's centerline.
The minigun anti-missile system appears to be similar to the USN Phalanx Close-In Weapon System which is what basically amounts to a turret.
First off, the Anti-Missile System is not strictly a weapon, though it can be used as such - it is assumed it has a 360 degree arc.
As for missiles and torpedoes, it is assumed that while they fire from a fixed mount (think of the vertical racks of missiles you see on some ships, for example), they will guide themselves to the target in any direction.
Note that this is a way to do it, not the way to do it!
As for missiles and torpedoes, it is assumed that while they fire from a fixed mount (think of the vertical racks of missiles you see on some ships, for example), they will guide themselves to the target in any direction.
Note that this is a way to do it, not the way to do it!
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning PDT Mr. Sprange,
Being retired military and growing up as an USAF brat I learned that the Anti-Missile System (AMS) is a weapon because its function is to hopefully destroy a specific type of threat called a missile at a safe distance from the vehicle.
Where is the Mini-gun AMS located on the frigate's hull that will allow 360 degrees for the firing arc?
If the AMS is is located on the frigate's deck the arc is restricted by the superstructure in just about every direction. One of the small issues that showed up during the Phalanx system development was that the system had a tendency to shot holes in the ship's smoke stack or other structure that got in the way.
Sticking the AMS on a mast above everything else would allow the weapon to fire in a 360 degree arc, but then it would have an increased chance of being knocked out of action early in combat.
The frigate's illustration appears to show a twin rail missile launcher system that based on real weapon that IIRC is still in use and is not a Vertical Launch System (VLS) that is used on ballistic missile submarines, a number of fast attack submarines and surface ships to launch cruise missiles.
If the illustration had not shown the twin rail missile launcher I would have guessed that the frigate's long-range Anti-Air Missile (AAM) system was a VLS. Drawing the VLS deck hatches would I think appear to be hopefully a couple of relatively clear small squares and a larger number of lines indicating the 15 missiles located on the deck in place of the twin rail launcher.
The USN Patrol Torpedo Boat, RN/USN Motor Torpedo Boat, and the German S-boat are good examples of fixed mounted torpedo tubes which are aligned and slightly angled off the bow for a surface ship. The reason is that this method provides the smallest silhouette while running into launch range.
Submarines have fixed mount torpedo tubes and even with today's smart weapons are routinely pointed in the general direction of the target's path of travel.
Here is a clip of surface ship launching a practice torpedo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8wMIcgcqas
This is a link to a picture of another torpedo launcher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_32_Surface_Vessel_Torpedo_Tubes#/media/File:Mark_32_surface_vessel_torpedo_tube.jpg
Yes, I know the rules have been simplified to make play faster and easier, but I wish somethings like weapon systems based on existing technology were kept in the game universe.
Thank you for the clarification even if my knowledge causes me to understand the design system from a different view point.
msprange said:
Being retired military and growing up as an USAF brat I learned that the Anti-Missile System (AMS) is a weapon because its function is to hopefully destroy a specific type of threat called a missile at a safe distance from the vehicle.
Where is the Mini-gun AMS located on the frigate's hull that will allow 360 degrees for the firing arc?
If the AMS is is located on the frigate's deck the arc is restricted by the superstructure in just about every direction. One of the small issues that showed up during the Phalanx system development was that the system had a tendency to shot holes in the ship's smoke stack or other structure that got in the way.
Sticking the AMS on a mast above everything else would allow the weapon to fire in a 360 degree arc, but then it would have an increased chance of being knocked out of action early in combat.
The frigate's illustration appears to show a twin rail missile launcher system that based on real weapon that IIRC is still in use and is not a Vertical Launch System (VLS) that is used on ballistic missile submarines, a number of fast attack submarines and surface ships to launch cruise missiles.
If the illustration had not shown the twin rail missile launcher I would have guessed that the frigate's long-range Anti-Air Missile (AAM) system was a VLS. Drawing the VLS deck hatches would I think appear to be hopefully a couple of relatively clear small squares and a larger number of lines indicating the 15 missiles located on the deck in place of the twin rail launcher.
The USN Patrol Torpedo Boat, RN/USN Motor Torpedo Boat, and the German S-boat are good examples of fixed mounted torpedo tubes which are aligned and slightly angled off the bow for a surface ship. The reason is that this method provides the smallest silhouette while running into launch range.
Submarines have fixed mount torpedo tubes and even with today's smart weapons are routinely pointed in the general direction of the target's path of travel.
Here is a clip of surface ship launching a practice torpedo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8wMIcgcqas
This is a link to a picture of another torpedo launcher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_32_Surface_Vessel_Torpedo_Tubes#/media/File:Mark_32_surface_vessel_torpedo_tube.jpg
Yes, I know the rules have been simplified to make play faster and easier, but I wish somethings like weapon systems based on existing technology were kept in the game universe.
Thank you for the clarification even if my knowledge causes me to understand the design system from a different view point.
snrdg121408 said:
Unless you are using ASROC-torpedoes, which would be able to be fired in a 360 degree arc. However having not seen the illustration your question could still be valid.
Smaller-ships mounting Phalanx or similar class weapon systems typically mount them aft so they have a rough 180 degree sweep. Ships that mount multiple still don't have 360 degree firing arcs. If ships are aware of incoming attacks they would normally turn to bring their weapons to bear (so sneak attacks can be quite deadly, assuming you can get your missiles close enough to be undetected in the first place).
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello phavoc;
I did a search on ASROC which brought up the Naval Weapons site http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMUS_ASROC.php. The system I remember is pictured as a type of box launcher and the newest system is the vertical launch type.
The vertical launch system in my opinion fits MgT Vehicle Handbook's definition for a fixed mount.
The launcher in the ASROC link and the twin rail launcher shown on the MgT Vehicle Handbook Achilles frigate on p. 92 I'm sure are not fixed mounts, however I'm not sure what mount type to select.
Update:
Nuts, I forgot about the Phalanx part but I remember seeing what I think was a Phalanx on a carrier that was close to the stern and slightly lower than the flight deck. I'll have to look through some of my books and online to see where they stuck them through the years.
Thank you for the reply.
phavoc said:
I did a search on ASROC which brought up the Naval Weapons site http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMUS_ASROC.php. The system I remember is pictured as a type of box launcher and the newest system is the vertical launch type.
The vertical launch system in my opinion fits MgT Vehicle Handbook's definition for a fixed mount.
The launcher in the ASROC link and the twin rail launcher shown on the MgT Vehicle Handbook Achilles frigate on p. 92 I'm sure are not fixed mounts, however I'm not sure what mount type to select.
Update:
Nuts, I forgot about the Phalanx part but I remember seeing what I think was a Phalanx on a carrier that was close to the stern and slightly lower than the flight deck. I'll have to look through some of my books and online to see where they stuck them through the years.
Thank you for the reply.
snrdg121408 said:
Yeah, earlier destroyers and cruisers had a dedicated 8 (or 10) cell launcher mounted forward. Today everything is going VLS.
Nimitz class carriers have, I think, 4, phalanx launchers mounted, 2 forward and 2 aft. I know there's been a push to put the RAM (rolling airframe missile) launcher in some of the same sponsoons. The RAM's are able to intercept cruise missiles as well, just further away.
