kilemall
SOC-14 5K
An option I have is the functional equivalent of chaffroc, acting more on the probabilities tohit DM. Alternatively, temporary ECM.
[1e] Turret Weapons - Thoughts and House Rules
- Thread starter TheDark
- Start date
An option I have is the functional equivalent of chaffroc, acting more on the probabilities tohit DM. Alternatively, temporary ECM.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Local authorities would be less worried about a sandcaster armed merchantman, than one with lasers and missiles.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I think my biggest problem is turrets are one-size-fits-all in nature within the rules. In CT up to three weapons can go in one turret but the size doesn't change, for example. I also have a problem with turrets needing to be manned normally.
On the first, it seems to me that missile, projectile, and sand weapons--that is weapons that use discrete ammunition and have to be reloaded--would require more room than energy weapons that don't need space to be reloaded. A turret with more weapons should also grow in size with the number of weapons fitted.
As for manned turrets, I find this to be almost absurd. Sure, if you have a small ship with a few turrets and no centralized fire control (meaning this sort of turret should be heavily penalized for accuracy beyond short range) you probably need somebody in the turret aiming and firing the weapons. On the other hand, any self-respecting naval vessel will have centralized fire controls, and the turrets probably don't need to be manned at all. Reloading, say missiles, is done automatically. Lasers and such don't need reloading. There's no need for a turret operator but rather there's somebody at a console essentially playing a video game of sorts operating one or many turrets. There are sophisticated sensors and a serious fire control computer tracking the target and aiming the guns. The operator is there to determine if shooting is necessary.
I also find the missiles to be badly undersized for the role they're supposed to play. I also think with discrete ammunition, particularly expensive stuff like missiles, you need to have a magazine to store them, and the size should be variable depending on how many you want to carry.
On the first, it seems to me that missile, projectile, and sand weapons--that is weapons that use discrete ammunition and have to be reloaded--would require more room than energy weapons that don't need space to be reloaded. A turret with more weapons should also grow in size with the number of weapons fitted.
As for manned turrets, I find this to be almost absurd. Sure, if you have a small ship with a few turrets and no centralized fire control (meaning this sort of turret should be heavily penalized for accuracy beyond short range) you probably need somebody in the turret aiming and firing the weapons. On the other hand, any self-respecting naval vessel will have centralized fire controls, and the turrets probably don't need to be manned at all. Reloading, say missiles, is done automatically. Lasers and such don't need reloading. There's no need for a turret operator but rather there's somebody at a console essentially playing a video game of sorts operating one or many turrets. There are sophisticated sensors and a serious fire control computer tracking the target and aiming the guns. The operator is there to determine if shooting is necessary.
I also find the missiles to be badly undersized for the role they're supposed to play. I also think with discrete ammunition, particularly expensive stuff like missiles, you need to have a magazine to store them, and the size should be variable depending on how many you want to carry.
Badenov
SOC-13
Wait, turret gunners are in the turret? That wasn't a requirement in RL when the game first came out. I've never imagined gunners were in a turret.
Well, no one said weapons were the same size. And turrets do come in different sizes in MgT1. (Dunno about 2). My assumption for CT was that all turrets were max size and were partly empty if they could fit more weapons, but chose not to. I assumed it was coincidence that the same number of certain types of weapons could fit. A dumb design choice, to be sure, but so many ships were built with turrets but not weapons, I assumed the max size was for flexibility.
Turrets didn't need to be crewed in 1979, Why would they crewed in the future?
I always assumed the turret operator sat in CIC, or the bridge on a ship small enough not to have a CIC. The rules about a gunner reloading one weapon a turn I always read as systems being heavy on safety interlocks and procedures, not physically humping ammo into a turret. Automatic loading machinery predates CT79.
I am not too shocked by the size of missiles. A 50kg missile is on an order of magnitude with a sidewinder or similar (source: Google AI summary), so it seems to me that in the future of TL9+, it should be doable.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
I tend to justify rather than revamp. As such I work backwards from the hardpoint every 100 tons requirement.
What I have visualized is three tubes radiating out from the turret location equilateral and right under the skin of the ship. The tubes can either have a three missile/sand set banked in, or a long laser exciter tube.
This is in the same crawl spaces as fuel lines, fuel tanks, control or power cables that are carefully laid out for maximum redundancy and minimal space usage.
The rest of the reserved one ton space is the fire control/loader station as defined particularly in the CT missile supplement.
Note the plasma/fusion turrets are two tons, IMO a bit larger space required for the ignition chambers.
I have the turret hardpoint definition tied to hull hits, which covers all those line/cable/hose subsystems usually overlooked in most damage systems. The fewer hardpoints, the more resilient the ship is to hull damage since there aren’t weapon tubes interfering with structural and cable redundancy. So the default Type A with one hardpoint for instance is tougher than a custom two hardpoint design.
Similarly I allow more than 1 hardpoint per 100 tons with a drastic impact on hull value, making the ship more fragile to those hits. The main example of this is the Terran missile boat from Imperium, chock overloaded with missiles for its cost but very fragile.
Or, no hardpoints but full volume costs, more resilient but far less general space available. But that would be a rare choice, as most ships being built for combat would employ bay weapons that eschew cable crawl space use and go bigger with explicit large volume.
Fixed mount weapons such as those on small craft also can avoid the hardpoint hull penalty but require dedicated agility to bring them to bear, like a spinal weapon.
What I have visualized is three tubes radiating out from the turret location equilateral and right under the skin of the ship. The tubes can either have a three missile/sand set banked in, or a long laser exciter tube.
This is in the same crawl spaces as fuel lines, fuel tanks, control or power cables that are carefully laid out for maximum redundancy and minimal space usage.
The rest of the reserved one ton space is the fire control/loader station as defined particularly in the CT missile supplement.
Note the plasma/fusion turrets are two tons, IMO a bit larger space required for the ignition chambers.
I have the turret hardpoint definition tied to hull hits, which covers all those line/cable/hose subsystems usually overlooked in most damage systems. The fewer hardpoints, the more resilient the ship is to hull damage since there aren’t weapon tubes interfering with structural and cable redundancy. So the default Type A with one hardpoint for instance is tougher than a custom two hardpoint design.
Similarly I allow more than 1 hardpoint per 100 tons with a drastic impact on hull value, making the ship more fragile to those hits. The main example of this is the Terran missile boat from Imperium, chock overloaded with missiles for its cost but very fragile.
Or, no hardpoints but full volume costs, more resilient but far less general space available. But that would be a rare choice, as most ships being built for combat would employ bay weapons that eschew cable crawl space use and go bigger with explicit large volume.
Fixed mount weapons such as those on small craft also can avoid the hardpoint hull penalty but require dedicated agility to bring them to bear, like a spinal weapon.
Last edited:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Badenov, the CT missile supplement definitely gives us a picture of ammo humper, including just how big the missile canisters are and how many canisters can fit in that local fire control space.
You are being perfectly logical in your approach and no reason not to continue your definition, but at least from a RAW perspective folks aren’t mad to talk about humping being a thing. If nothing else the deck plans have the humper space pretty consistently from that period.
You are being perfectly logical in your approach and no reason not to continue your definition, but at least from a RAW perspective folks aren’t mad to talk about humping being a thing. If nothing else the deck plans have the humper space pretty consistently from that period.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
I doubt anyone can actually explain how one tonne turrets work.
Especially, if you include upto four weapons systems, ready ammunition, and one gunner workstation.
I chalk it down to hammerspace.
Especially, if you include upto four weapons systems, ready ammunition, and one gunner workstation.
I chalk it down to hammerspace.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
Doesn't mean it can't incorporate aspects of both. Traveller for the most part does try to follow science and engineering rather than simply using handwavium and PFM as its basis.1. You are absolutely correct.
2.This is a game, not a simulation.
I just assumed the turrets are different sizes on the outside of the hull, but the internal volume needed for fire control systems and such doesn't change.
CT K'kree has remotely operated turrets because the My Little Murderponies can't handle that much enclosure, requiring 2 tons of internal volume instead of 1. It's not MgT, but I figure that (along with their massive space requirements for staterooms) could be applied in MgT1 as modifications to their ship design process.
CT K'kree has remotely operated turrets because the My Little Murderponies can't handle that much enclosure, requiring 2 tons of internal volume instead of 1. It's not MgT, but I figure that (along with their massive space requirements for staterooms) could be applied in MgT1 as modifications to their ship design process.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
One tonne is standard, across the universe.
Variant being the five tonne barbette, which seems to have more than enough space, going by missiles, five launchers plus twenty five ready ammunition is probably three tonnes.
Variant being the five tonne barbette, which seems to have more than enough space, going by missiles, five launchers plus twenty five ready ammunition is probably three tonnes.
TNE handles this issue adroitly. The ship doesn't have a turret, it has a socket, which the turret goes into. It's a common emplacement point that a variety of things can be placed, a turret being the most common thing. But anything that needs power and can fit could get plugged into one of these.
Perhaps an emergency life pod launcher, a package of science instruments. Maybe a REALLY NICE beer fridge.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 5K
It wasn't an explicit requirement, but kind of assumed in LBB2, like Star Wars...
E.g.:
S7, p25:
Far Trader: Gunner workstation in the turret, not enough workstations on the bridge:
I never assumed the gunners were anywhere else but the turret, at least for small civilian ships. A CIC is something a larger naval vessel, something like the Kinunir, had.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 5K
Turrets take no known space.
In CT the required fire control took 1 Dt, hence you could add a turret to a predesignated hardpoint and reduce some random cargo space to house the fire control equipment.
In MgT2 the turret socket takes 1 Dt, the turret itself an unknown (and insignificant) amount of space outside the ship.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Since space is at a premium onboard a starship, it should have to be stated, not assumed.
Otherwise, a quad turret with a gauss gun, missile launcher, sandcaster, and since we've run out of ammunition bearing weapon systems, a laser, would need to provide for a four weapon systems, the gunner's workstation, a tonne of canisters, a tonne of missiles, and a tonne of gauss slugs.
Otherwise, a quad turret with a gauss gun, missile launcher, sandcaster, and since we've run out of ammunition bearing weapon systems, a laser, would need to provide for a four weapon systems, the gunner's workstation, a tonne of canisters, a tonne of missiles, and a tonne of gauss slugs.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
1,000kg of ordnance fits in a corner.
1,000kg of gauss ammunition, 1,000kg of 50kg missiles is 20 missiles. sand canister is around the 100 per 1,000kg isn't it?
1,000kg of gauss ammunition, 1,000kg of 50kg missiles is 20 missiles. sand canister is around the 100 per 1,000kg isn't it?
Badenov
SOC-13
For counterpoint: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-54_mk45.php
Fully automatic, remotely controlled (from elsewhere in the ship, not from outside the ship), designed in 1968, first in service 1971, so on the cusp of TL 6-7. Call it a new development for TL7 because previous turrets did have crews.
Fully automatic, remotely controlled (from elsewhere in the ship, not from outside the ship), designed in 1968, first in service 1971, so on the cusp of TL 6-7. Call it a new development for TL7 because previous turrets did have crews.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I lean towards that there should be more thought put into the various weapons that go into "turrets" and how much space they take up as a result.
For example, a laser turret--a single mount for simplicity--really needs no turret whatsoever. It could simply be a lens that is movable in the side of the hull with the necessary power feed, etc., between it and a fire control station and the power source. The FC station could be dedicated or part of some other control point, like on the bridge operated by the pilot, navigator, sensor operator, etc. That would be a function of the level of fire control used.
Plasma and fusion weapons would be more problematic. You need the projector for these along with a way to create the necessary plasma. That could get roomy PDQ.
Missiles could vary depending on how they're packaged. The equivalent of a VLS system without reloads would be more compact than a moving launcher with a loading system and room for human intervention in this process. Sand would be the same way. Why bother with a turret at all? Simply but the canisters in a fixed launching rack on the exterior of the ship (possibly streamlined on the hull if necessary) in positions were, when launched they create the necessary cloud of protection. That is, similar to chaff launchers on a plane today.
You really don't need a dedicated human operator for these most of the time. They could be reloadable from inside or only so from the exterior of the ship for example.
For example, a laser turret--a single mount for simplicity--really needs no turret whatsoever. It could simply be a lens that is movable in the side of the hull with the necessary power feed, etc., between it and a fire control station and the power source. The FC station could be dedicated or part of some other control point, like on the bridge operated by the pilot, navigator, sensor operator, etc. That would be a function of the level of fire control used.
Plasma and fusion weapons would be more problematic. You need the projector for these along with a way to create the necessary plasma. That could get roomy PDQ.
Missiles could vary depending on how they're packaged. The equivalent of a VLS system without reloads would be more compact than a moving launcher with a loading system and room for human intervention in this process. Sand would be the same way. Why bother with a turret at all? Simply but the canisters in a fixed launching rack on the exterior of the ship (possibly streamlined on the hull if necessary) in positions were, when launched they create the necessary cloud of protection. That is, similar to chaff launchers on a plane today.
You really don't need a dedicated human operator for these most of the time. They could be reloadable from inside or only so from the exterior of the ship for example.
Badenov
SOC-13
Sand could absolutely be launched the way chaff is launched today, from fixed bearing launchers, though I will accept that it needs a 'hardpoint', whatever specific form that takes. As far as VLS launchers, I think 50- and 100-ton missile bays fulfill that role. A single volley VLS? A bay with one volley of ammo feeding it. I imagine a missile turret something like this double missile 'turret' example: (Edit: Service dates: 1976-2005.)
