Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > Classic Traveller

Classic Traveller Discussion on the granddaddy of them all, Classic Traveller!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old October 15th, 2007, 09:18 AM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default CV and CVL Pods

The following pods are available for the Hercules class fleet tugs:

400 ton CVL pod. 400 tons, Power-B, 10 tons fuel, streamlined, 16 staterooms, 205 tons cargo, 120 ton vehicle bay for 12 fighters (Hellcats, Starfires or Buffalos), 4 triple beam laser turrets. Crew of 13 pilots, 12 flight crew, 4 gunners. MCr 86.4 + cost of fighters.

600 ton CV pod. 600 tons, Power-C, 10 tons fuel, streamlined, 30 staterooms, 194 tons cargo, 240 ton vehicle bay for 24 fighters (Hellcats, Starfires or Buffalos), 6 triple beam laser turrets. Crew of 25 pilots (including 1 CAG), 24 flight crew, 6 gunners. MCr 132.6 + cost of fighters.

The CVL and CV pods are attempts to provide operational flexibility to the fleet’s logistics assets. The idea is that in an emergency, fleet tugs can quickly be converted into carriers. Given the fact that the fleet tugs are always in short supply, it seems unlikely that they would be used in this role except in emergencies. Fleet carriers often use the CV and CVL pods to deliver fighter squadrons to bases.

Add to the description of the Hercules Tugs:

The SS Hesperus class commercial tug is a civilian version of the Hercules class. The main difference (ironically) is that the Hesperus class has 6 hardpoints instead of 3, so Hesperus class commercial tugs are often better armed than their naval counterparts.

The Commonwealth Navy provides construction plans for many of its logistics ships for free to licensed Commonwealth commercial operators. This allows commercial interests to cut construction costs and provides the Commonwealth Navy with a reserve merchant fleet equipped with familiar ship designs. The Starship Architect’s Guild routinely protests this practice, to no avail.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old November 20th, 2007, 02:29 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default IMS Beagle Survey Ship

IMS Beagle

(Others in class: Endeavor, Atlantis, Nina, Santa Maria, Trinidad, Resolution, Discovery, Nautilus)

Type: Survey Cruiser
Displacement: 600 tons, Streamlined
Empty Cost: MCr 516.8 + Slow Pinnace
Drives: Jump, Maneuver and Power-R, giving Jump-4 and Maneuver-4.
Electronics: Computer Model-4
Fuel: 360 tons
Staterooms: 12
Low Berths: 0
Cargo: 135 tons (+31 tons cargo in Slow Pinnace)
Vehicle Bay: 40 tons
Typical Vehicles: 1 40 ton Slow Pinnace (31 ton cargo capacity; usually pre-loaded).
Armament: Typical armament is 4 triple beam laser turrets. The ship has 8 hardpoints and could be fitted with up to 8 turrets.
Special Features: These ships have 20 tons of scientific equipment installed (value MCr 15) which allow them to completely map and analyze planets, stars and other celestial bodies. Also included is a small, but comprehensive biochemical laboratory. Ship also contains a 10 ton machine shop that can fabricate most TL11- machinery (value MCr 5).

Crew:
Captain
XO/Pilot
Navigator
Doctor
Chief Engineer
Assistant Chief Engineer
3 Engineer's Mates
4 Gunners
10 Scientific Personnel

The Beagle class survey ship is the Survey Service's standard survey cruiser. Typical missions include surveying new worlds, studying stellar phenomena and exploration. The ships are known for their ruggedness; in space combat they get a saving throw of 6+ to avoid a missile or laser hit (9+ on 1d10). A number of Beagle class cruisers have been lost. Most notably, Eagle disappeared on a survey mission 80 years ago. Over the years, it has been sighted (usually at extreme range) throughout the Rim and is now known as the “Flying Dutchman of the Rim”.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old November 28th, 2007, 01:18 AM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default IMS Galahad Heavy Tug

IMS Galahad

(Others in class: Gawain, Ector, Bors, Robin, Lancelot, Kay)

Type: Heavy Tug
Displacement: 800 tons, Streamlined
Empty Cost: MCr 549.4 + Slow Pinnace
Drives: Jump, Maneuver and Power-W, giving Jump-5 and Maneuver-5 unloaded.
Electronics: Computer Model-5
Fuel: 500 tons
Staterooms: 6
Low Berths: 0
Cargo: 12 tons
Vehicle Bay: 20 tons
Typical Vehicles: 1 20 ton launch
Armament: The ship has 4 hardpoints and could be fitted with up to 4 turrets.
Special Features: Docking stations for up to 10 ships or pods.

Crew:
Captain
XO/Pilot
Navigator
Doctor
Chief Engineer
Assistant Chief Engineer
4 Engineer's Mates

The Galahad class heavy tug is a tug and is also equipped to transport non-jump capable ships. It can use the standard pods of the Hercules class tugs, but is often used to deploy system defense boats and monitors. It takes about an hour to dock a ship with the Galahad and program the drive computers. The Galahad class is the only tug capable of transporting the massive 4000 ton Gigantic class SDBs and the equally large 4000 ton Carpathia class monitors. As these ships form the backbone of Commonwealth defenses for high value systems, the Galahads are in high demand.

Each vessel is equipped with cranes and tow cable fittings to allow them to tow pods and much larger ships. A Galahad can tow ships up to 4200 tons additional displacement. Up to 10 standard “short” (400 ton) and “tall” (600 ton) cargo pods can also be towed (any mix is allowable). The tug’s jump and maneuver ratings drop when towing ships or pods:

Total Mass Being Towed/Transported – Jump or Maneuver Rating
Up to 200 tons – 5
201 to 1200 tons – 2
1201 to 4200 tons – 1

TugRon 6, consisting of IMS Gawaine and IMS Kay is experimenting with the "battle rider" concept. Each ship carries 4 800 ton Katana class SDBs. Exercises have been inconclusive as to whether this is a superior strategy. Given the fact that the Commonwealth Navy is stretched thin, pressure is mounting in the Admiralty to return TugRon 6 to logistics service.

Note on nomenclature. A System Defense Boat (SDB) is a non-jump capable warship used to defend planetary systems. A Monitor is a heavily armed warship with a very low jump capability (usually Jump 1).

Last edited by tbeard1999; November 28th, 2007 at 01:23 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old December 4th, 2007, 09:20 PM
PFVA63 PFVA63 is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 987
Gallery : 4
PFVA63 Citizen
Default CV Indefatigable

Hi,

I only recently had a chance to start taking a closer look at your designs here and had some thoughts/comments.

With respect to the CV Indefatigable, I tried to recreate your design and came close asuming that the staterooms you mention are half sized staterooms, but I was just a little off your totals. Specifically I come up with a total cost of 1168MCr and 17 dt left over. A couple things that were not clear to me are;
  • did you provide any fuel for your fighters and ship's boats? LBB2 suggests the Ship's Boats have a fuel capacity of 9dt and some typical LBB2 vessels like the Type Y Yacht and Type C Cruiser provide an allowance in their hull's for additional fuel for their small craft equal to the fuel tank capacity of the small craft. For a warship, with fighters, which may undertake numerous routine sorties per ship deployment, it seems like the fighters might consume alot of fuel. Additionally, its not fully clear how much fuel your fighters use.
  • Does the Commodore have any additional staff assigned to him?
  • Does the Commodore have his own Flag Bridge or some place from which to perform his duties as the Battlegroup Commander?
  • Is there anyone assigned to perform duties as an air traffic controller and/or landing signal officer type function for the fighters?

In addition to the above, as others have posted, although its not clear if there are any specific restrictions in LBB2 on how rapidly you can launch fighters, in LBB5 there appears to be a limit of 1 fighter/small craft per turn for every 10,000 dt of the ship's hull unless the ship has a dispersed structure (which would preclude having it streamlined) or if it has a launch tube, which would be 25 times the largest small craft to use it and cost 2000Cr / dt (which in your case would appear to be 25 * 20 = 500dt & 1MCr.

Alternately I believe the GURPS Traveller: Interstellar Wars (GT:IW) suggests a size of about 44 dt for a launch tube.

Finally, as I posted on that other thread, in GT:IW they indicate that you can house vehicles and small craft in bays sized exactly the same size as the small craft, but this would mean that you'd aonly be able to do maintenance on the parts of that small craft that you could access internally from within the small craft. Conversely, if you want to put your small craft into a space where you could walk around it and access all pats of it, you would need to house it in a hangar bay sized roughly twice the size of the craft. As such if you were to use a rule along these lines, then for your 60 10dt fighters you would need 1200dt, in place of the 600dt you appear to be currently providing

Since I would assume that fighters are relatively small (as you appear to suggest on your other thread) and it may be highly desirable to be able to access all parts of the craft while in the hangar for maintenance issues, as well as to be able to repair battle damage, etc providing a hangar a fiar bit larger than the size of the actual craft would seem to be a reasonable idea to me, and having it be 2x the size of the craft inside may not be that bad a guesstimate for sizing.

Ifm I did my math right, if you were to modify your assumptions for your Traveller Universe to provide a second "Command Bridge" onboard for the Commodore, space for 6 additional crew to act as the Commodore's staff and provide an air traffic controller/landing officer for the fighters, increase the size of the hangar to twice the size of the fighters carried, and provide about 4 dt of fuel per storage fighter then my estimates come out that you would have to cut the fighter complement just about in half.

Additionally, if you were to outfit the ship with a launch tube to speed up fighter deployment, then;
  • based on the LBB5 High Guard Rules you might have to cut the total number of fighters to 12, or
  • based on GT:IW you might get away with about 28 fighters onboard.

Anyway, these are just some thoughts to consider for your Traveller Universe.

Regards

PF

Last edited by PFVA63; December 4th, 2007 at 09:22 PM.. Reason: Fixed the bullets
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old December 4th, 2007, 09:34 PM
PFVA63 PFVA63 is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 987
Gallery : 4
PFVA63 Citizen
Default BB Virginia

Hi,

I also took a look at the BB Virginia class data that you provided. The main thing that leaps out at me here is that in Your Traveller Universe you appear to allow for turrets and bays on the same tonnage. This appears to be different than the other systems I'm use to. Specifically, although you have indicated that you are not using LBB5 it is sometimes helpful to look at other rule sets to see how they address similar issues, and in that book it indicates that one hardpoint is allowed per 100dt of hull not otherwise allocated to weapons and provides an example that appears to suggest that this is calculated as follows;

#of turrets allowed = (total displacement - displacement of spinal mount - # of bays * 1000 ) /100

On your ship however you appear to allow 25 - 100 dt bays and 50 turrets on a 5000 dt hull. Its not fully clear to me how much surface area of the hull the 25 x 100dt bays will take up and how much space will be left for fitting the turrets, etc. It would be really interesting to see a sketch of ehat you have in mind here.

Regards

PF
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old December 5th, 2007, 07:27 AM
PFVA63 PFVA63 is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 987
Gallery : 4
PFVA63 Citizen
Default One other thought on CV Indefatigable

Hi,

There was one other thought I had on your carrier that I forgot about. Seeing that you have such a large number of pilots onboard for the fighters, have you given any thought to providing space for something like a "ready room" or something similar?

Regards

PF
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old December 5th, 2007, 11:24 AM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PFVA63 View Post
Hi,

There was one other thought I had on your carrier that I forgot about. Seeing that you have such a large number of pilots onboard for the fighters, have you given any thought to providing space for something like a "ready room" or something similar?

Regards

PF
Theoretically, such facilities are subsumed within the stateroom tonnage. If you look at GDW's starship plans, 4 ton staterooms consume only 3 tons of space. The remainder is galleys, lounges, corridors, etc. Candidly, this doesn't really seem like enough space. 2 staterooms will require at least 1 ton of hallway (assuming that their access door is on the narrow end of the stateroom), leaving only 1 ton for additional fittings. I've always assumed that the hull sizes are *useable* tonnage and contain around 20% waste tonnage. So a 100 ton hull actually has about 120 tons displacement.

Also, IMTU, there are a variety of collapsible fixtures that can be carried in the cargo holds of ship. So spare cargo space can be converted for use by crews. The Indy class carriers have a lot of tonnage devoted to cargo, maintenance facilities, and maintenance crews, since I envision them as "black space" ships (i.e., designed for extended duration missions). A "blue space" ship would need far less cargo tonnage, since it would be designed to operate from nearby bases. By comparison, a "blue space" carrier could probably carry another 30 fighters -- 50% more than the Indy's.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old December 5th, 2007, 12:17 PM
tbeard1999's Avatar
tbeard1999 tbeard1999 is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Tyler
Posts: 2,705
Gallery : 0
tbeard1999 Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PFVA63 View Post
Hi,

I also took a look at the BB Virginia class data that you provided. The main thing that leaps out at me here is that in Your Traveller Universe you appear to allow for turrets and bays on the same tonnage. This appears to be different than the other systems I'm use to. Specifically, although you have indicated that you are not using LBB5 it is sometimes helpful to look at other rule sets to see how they address similar issues, and in that book it indicates that one hardpoint is allowed per 100dt of hull not otherwise allocated to weapons and provides an example that appears to suggest that this is calculated as follows;

#of turrets allowed = (total displacement - displacement of spinal mount - # of bays * 1000 ) /100

On your ship however you appear to allow 25 - 100 dt bays and 50 turrets on a 5000 dt hull. Its not fully clear to me how much surface area of the hull the 25 x 100dt bays will take up and how much space will be left for fitting the turrets, etc. It would be really interesting to see a sketch of ehat you have in mind here.

Regards

PF
I omitted the "no turrets on bay tonnage" rule because it was fussy. I assumed that a ship with weapon bays will always carry the maximum number of turrets, so I believe that reduced the nominal number of weapons in a bay to account for the turrets.

A lot of assumptions go into what a bay actually is and these assumptions have a profound effect on the surface area required. For instance, are beam weapon bays *really* a bunch of small beam projectors? Or are they one large projector that acts like a bunch of small ones? Are missile bays missile racks, or are they vertical launch systems? Etc. So I took the easy way out and didn't worry about it.

Since LBB2 (and High Guard) have no surface area data, I did not add surface area to my rules. As noted in other posts, I wanted to allow dedictaed warships, but I wanted to keep existing designs valid. The most straightforward way to do that, it seemed to me, was to simply add new systems in the form of weapons bays.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old December 5th, 2007, 08:31 PM
PFVA63 PFVA63 is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 987
Gallery : 4
PFVA63 Citizen
Default Smaller Warships

Hi,

Looking over your smaller warships I have become very confused.

Specifically, taking the ANZAC Corvettes as an example you appear to show 12 crew plus 13 Marines but only 9 staterooms and 14 low berths. From your write up it appears that you intend for the Marines to be kept in low berths until needed. This brings to mind a couple questions.
  • First, what low passage rules have you assumed and how do you envision the resussitation of the Marines as being handled, such as how much time will they need before becoming fully combat ready and what resources will they need? Specifically, is there any space allocated to the Marines once they are taken out of low passage to allow them to recouperate, gear up, and wait until they deploy?
  • Second, since there are only 9 staterooms I assume that some of these are double occupancy (4dt) staterooms as opposed to the 2dt single occupancy rooms that it appears you used on the CV Indefatigable. Is this correct?

Additionally, as with your other designs, it appears that no additional fuel is carried onboard for the small craft. Is this correct?

Finally, one minor correction I noted is that you list crew as 11, but show a total of 12.

Regards

PF
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old December 5th, 2007, 08:52 PM
PFVA63 PFVA63 is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 987
Gallery : 4
PFVA63 Citizen
Default Some additional Thoughts on Bays

Hi,

I'm not fully sure I understand what you mean by "fussy" with regards to bays. I suppose alot may depend on what you envision a bay to be. Currently, I've been thinking that thay are probably something like a MEKO or STANFLEX module on some modern warships, where you have a standard size unit that can be dropped into a standard sized opeing in the ships deck. These MEKO or STANFLEX modules can contain VLS missile tubes, 3in or 5in guns, or other items.

For Traveller, assuming standard deck plan square sizes 1.5m x 1.5m x 3.0m tall, a unit 5 squares (7.5m) wide by 5 squares (7.5m) long by 2 high (6m) would be 50dt, and the opeing required in the hull to drop them in would be 56.25 sq m. Or two of these units side by side would by 100dt with a required deck opeing area of 112.5 sq m. As such for your ship the 25 100dt bays would require openings in the hull surface of 2812.5 sq m, which seems pretty substantial. For reference a sphere 5000dt in volume would be about 25.3m in radius and would have a surface area of 8112 sq m (I believe). thus these bay openings would account for about 35% of the surface area of the sphere and 50% of the total internal volume.

Beyond the questions on volume and area requirements there is also a question on how the weapons are powered as so many weapons on one hull raises questions on what their power draw must be.

One thing I have always tried to do in Traveller, is that even if I am using one set of rules, if I can't find an answer in them, I will try and see if I can find something in other Traveller rule sets, other non-Traveller rule sets, or even something analogous from present day that I can use as a model to do a sanity check with and try and come up with something I can use in the system that I am using. As such II would probably do things a little differently than what you are using in your Traveller Universe, but I suspect that that isn't too uncommon, and everyone pretty muchly plays things the way they like, so who's to say what is right or wrong.

Anyway, have fun.

Regards

PF

[Edit] PS. Looking back over my posts I realize that I may have left something out in the discussions. Basically, there are two things that concern me about the BB Virginia class concerning the bays and it may not be clear from my previous posts. First, the BB Virginia appears to have 25 100dt bays on a 5000dt hull, which is at least 5 times as many as you might expect under other rule sets, which led to my comments on how much volume and hull surface area these items will consume. The other issue is that the ship mounts a full array of 50 turrets. In general, most Traveller rulesets allow for 1 turret per 100dt of hull, they make reductions to this if other weapons are also fitted. For example, I provided a formula derived from LBB5 previously, and in GT:IW they just assume that a 100dt bay will displace 10 turrets, while a 50dt bay would displace 8 turrets.

For the ship sizes in question in this thread I could maybe almost kind of see some merit in the argument about not wanted to reduce the number of turrets just because a bay is fitted if a limit of 1 bay per 1000dt were used, but the combination of a full 50 turrets and 25 100dt bays just seems so unbalanced to me, not to mention the issues I noted about powering concerns. Anyway, just some thoughts/clarifications etc I wanted to add [End Edit]

Last edited by PFVA63; December 5th, 2007 at 09:32 PM.. Reason: Left out something
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010- Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.