• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Air Raft TL

gchuck

SOC-12
Knight
Curious what the consensus is on Air raft TL's.

So new Scout ships are built at TL 15. Cool.

Previous models built at lower TL's, have similar tech Air rafts 'attached' to the particular hull. I'm treating A/R's as 'standard' equipment for all Type S ships.

So...do these things wear out? Or are the sky's of the 3I filled with TL 9 or higher A/R's?

If they are periodically replaced, i.e. destroyed in a first contact, crashed, or what ever, in the line of duty, does your TL 12 Type S get a brand new TL 15 A/R, or are you told to go to X and poke around the salvage yard, and pick out an appropriate TL hulk that will be refurbished for you?

At Cr 600k, its not an inexpensive piece of equipment.

Comments? Concerns? Catcalls?
 
Maybe you have to trek to a suitable industrial (or high pop?) world to purchase a proper tech replacement? At least if the IISS determines that a replacement is warranted and sends you a voucher to cover part of the cost . . .
 
So new Scout ships are built at TL 15. Cool.
The Classic Traveller Supplement 9 Fighting Ships suggests much lower TLs for the Type S and X-Boat. I personally feel this supplement was created with errors and I treat basic Scout vessels as TL-13 and they have remained there since Arbellatra ordered the creation of the X-Boat Service after the end of the Civil War. I have Scout Bases throughout the Imperium as able repair all basic TL-13 Scout ships, including being able to replace lost air/rafts. I have Scout Waystations as able to repair TL-15 Scout vessels and replace their vehicles. If no Scout Base or Waystations are present, then for easy access to new vehicles, the world should be Industrial and at the appropriate TL. Lower TL and Population levels, especially Non-Industrial worlds, are going to reduce (or eliminate) the possibility of acquiring the desired vehicle. Acquiring and using a lower TL air/raft aboard a higher TL Scout ship is possible, although the paperwork may be annoying and it may cause odd looks during repairs or annual maintenance.


I'm treating A/R's as 'standard' equipment for all Type S ships.
I do the same, but any crew repeatedly ordering new air/rafts due to losses caused by whatever circumstances may soon find themselves permanently assigned to ground duties. (Sounds like there is a story or background in there.)


So...do these things wear out?
Realistically, they would wear out. However, I'm not sure I'd care to track the lifespan of every vehicle on a ship, as to me that leads to tracking the lifespan of every piece of gear and tool on the ship.


Or are the sky's of the 3I filled with TL 9 or higher A/R's?
On Capital/Core/Core, 100km south of Cleon City, Eniri Enkudu lands in the parking field of Air/Rafts 'R US. He enters and begins to search through the field of thousands of junked air/rafts, looking for more parts at good prices to finish assembling the custom grav cart at home for junior, so he can take to the skies as soon as he can get a license and get out of dad's hair.
 
Air/rafts cost too much to be scrapped, and too useful to be discarded, assuming you keep up with the annual one tenth of a percent maintenance fee.
 
I've always assumed that the scout shop itself is TL12 and theXboat is TL13. Scout ships are built at the lowest TL possible. The higher the TL the harder they are to service.
 
The scout in LBB2 is a TL9 design, carrying a TL8 air/raft.

The scout detailed in S7 and S9 is also given a TL of 9 if you look in the book.
 
... and in MT & TNE the Scout is TL-15, in T5 and MgT the Scout is TL-12.

Presumably they are all versions of the Type S specification? Pick any version you like, they are all canonical.
 
I don't have time to design one, it would be curious what the differences are between a TL 9 100 ton ship with J2 and a TL 15 100 ton ship with J2.

I'd like to think that the TL 15 ship would have a bit more room for cargo, and perhaps better armor just from materials and such.

What SHOULD happen is that the TL 15 Scout should be identical to the TL 9 Scout, but 20% cheaper.
 
I don't have time to design one, it would be curious what the differences are between a TL 9 100 ton ship with J2 and a TL 15 100 ton ship with J2.

In the LBB2 system, the only system that allows J-2 at TL-9, there would be no difference whatsoever since ships don't have a TL.

In later, more detailed, systems the TL-15 version would generally be both cheaper and more capable.

Example, LBB5:

TL-11:
Code:
SC-12222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 40,9         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                           TL=11
                          Cargo=19 Fuel=22 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   19        51,1
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             1          100            
Configuration       Cone               2                     11  
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,1
                                                                 
Jump Drive                             2    1       3        12  
Manoeuvre D                            2    1       5         3,5
Power Plant                            2    1       6        18  
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      22            
Purifier                                    1       7         0,0
                                                                 
Bridge                                      1      20         0,5
Computer            m/1bis             R    1       1         4  
                                                                 
Staterooms                                  4      16         2  
                                                                 
Cargo                                              19            
                                                                 
Empty hardpoint                             1       1            
                                                                 
Nominal Cost        MCr 51,13            Sum:      19        51,1
Class Cost          MCr 10,74           Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 40,90


TL-15:
Code:
SC-12222R1-000000-00000-0       MCr 31,3         100 Dton
bearing                                            Crew=1
batteries                                           TL=15
                          Cargo=27 Fuel=22 EP=2 Agility=2

Single Occupancy                                   27        39,1
                                     USP    #     Dton       Cost
Hull, Streamlined   Custom             1          100            
Configuration       Cone               2                     11  
Scoops              Streamlined                               0,1
                                                                 
Jump Drive                             2    1       3        12  
Manoeuvre D                            2    1       5         3,5
Power Plant                            2    1       2         6  
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2      22            
Purifier                                    1       3         0,0
                                                                 
Bridge                                      1      20         0,5
Computer            m/1bis             R    1       1         4  
                                                                 
Staterooms                                  4      16         2  
                                                                 
Cargo                                              27            
                                                                 
Empty hardpoint                             1       1            
                                                                 
Nominal Cost        MCr 39,13            Sum:      27        39,1
Class Cost          MCr  8,22           Valid      ≥0          ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 31,30
 
I've always assumed that the scout shop itself is TL12 and theXboat is TL13. Scout ships are built at the lowest TL possible. The higher the TL the harder they are to service.
If you're using Classic Traveller High Guard 2, there is a break point for the power plant between TL-12 and TL-13.

At TL-12, it's 3 * PP-n in dTons; for a 100 dTon Scout, that's 6 dTons and 18 MCr.

At TL-13, it's 2 * PP-n in dTons; for a 100 dTon Scout, that's 4 dTons and 12 MCr, for 6 MCr saved per ship and 2 more dTons to work with. If there are about 20,000 Scouts in service in the Imperium, then the discounted savings will be 6 MCr * 20% = 4.8 MCr per ship, or 96 BCr total. Annual maintenance will be saved on every ship, too.

At TL-15, costs of building the Scout Ship fleet and annual maintenance would be even lower when power plants go to 1 * PP-n in dTons. I don't have a way handy of calculating whether it's more expensive to upgrade all Scout Bases to repair and maintain at TL-15 (as well as retrain all personnel) than the savings from building Scouts and X-Boats at TL-15 (instead of greater costs at TL-13 and even greater costs at TL-12 and below). I just rule that since the X-Boat Service was built when I peg the Imperium's maximum at TL-13, then TL-13 is where Scout Bases were built, and so Scout Ships, X-Boats, X-Boat Tenders (and my 200 dTon Heavy Scout and 300 dTon Far Scout) are all TL-13 to match, and no one has updated those Scout Bases or ships since then.

In the other construction systems, I'm not sure.
 
In the LBB2 system, the only system that allows J-2 at TL-9, there would be no difference whatsoever since ships don't have a TL.
To be more precise, a given drive's capability and efficiency do not vary by TL, only the maximum drive size available varies by TL.
In later, more detailed, systems the TL-15 version would generally be both cheaper and more capable.
Yep. Different technology upgrade paradigm. LBB2 is "bigger is better, and higher TL allows building bigger," HG is "higher TL is always better in any size".
 
As an aside, IMTU all air/rafts come enclosed as standard. It's on the same principle as modern automobiles are enclosed: to guard against weather effects.
I also IMTU it that IISS and military ones are able to be pressurized and sealed against multiple atmospheres and various types of warfare.
 
As an aside, IMTU all air/rafts come enclosed as standard. It's on the same principle as modern automobiles are enclosed: to guard against weather effects.
I also IMTU it that IISS and military ones are able to be pressurized and sealed against multiple atmospheres and various types of warfare.

Just use the same gravitic bubble that holds your coffee stable in mid air to sheet away the water and wind from the open canopy.
 
First, you might want to clarify as to what you mean by air raft. In looking at the way the air raft is depicted in Supplement 7: Traders and Gunboats, on page 24, the overhead image of the "Empress Marava", you have two different vehicles depicted. The overhead shot shows a vehicle of 3 meters by 4.5 meters in width and length occupying the air raft compartment. The first two 1.5 meter squares show nothing, the remaining four 1.5 meter squares show a single seat in each square, fulling occupying the volume of the vehicle.

On the other hand, the air raft shown in the side bar is quite different. The forward third of the vehicle shows what appears to be a closed compartment surmounted by a large wind screen. The approximate middle third of the vehicle shows two entry doors into the personnel compartment. The rear third of the vehicle is another apparently closed compartment, whether this is for limited cargo or part of the propulsion and life unit is unknown. The side bar image agrees with the air raft depicted from the side in The Traveller Book.

A couple of things are immediately apparent. The total floor area of the vehicle in standard 1.5 by 1.5 meter decks squares is six squares. The side shot shows a vehicle of perhaps 1.5 meters in height, giving a total volume of six 1.5 meter cubes, which would equate to a volume of 1.5 Traveller Displacement tons. That is far less than the listed 4 tons, presumably of volume in Traveller dTons. Now, you could allow for more than 1.5 meters in height, as the air raft in the overhead shot occupies a 3 meter by 4.5 meter compartment, and allowing for standard ship overhead, that would bring the volume occupied up to 3 Traveller dTons. That is again less than the 4 tons listed.

Then the air raft is listed at having a 4 ton cargo capacity. Now, this clearly is not in terms of Traveller dTon volume, but must be in terms of mass. Either way, given either the overhead or side images, where is this cargo carried? There is no room internally for it. Therefore, it must be the maximum slung cargo that can be carried. That in turn implies sling cables and cable anchors on the air raft to attach them too, with the cables being long enough so that the can be attached to the cargo pallet or container when the raft is grounded.

Oh, and by the way, no forward propulsion units are shown anywhere, unless that is what is housed in the rear compartment of the side image.

Now, trying to come up with a weight of the air raft, what we have to work with are the dimensions, 3 meters by 4.5 meters by roughly 1.5 meters. That gives us a floor area of 13.5 meters or 145 square feet. I apologize, but my brain, and my reference materials, are still working with English units. Looking at the 1953 manual for U.S. Army vehicles, I find a few that would work for comparison.

First, the good old Army jeep, at 11 feet long and 5 feet wide, one Jeep would cover 55 square feet, approximately. So three Jeeps placed sideways would occupy about the same volume as one air raft. Each Jeep would weight 2450 pounds, so three Jeeps would weight 7350 pounds, or 3.33 Metric Tons. Although that would include the power plants and drive trains for 3 Jeeps, which might be more weight than the power plant of the air raft. It does make for a first cut, though.

Then there is the Cadillac 3/4 ton Metropolitan Ambulance. At 7 feet wide and 20.5 feet long, it has a ground area of 143.5 feet, quite close to the air raft's 145 feet. It is just under 2 meters tall, so it is a bit taller than the 1.5 meters we are assuming for the air raft. We do have only one power plant and drive train when it comes to weight, and the ambulance is fully enclosed. The empty weight of the ambulance is 5720 pounds, or 2.6 Metric tons. This might be closer to the weight of the air raft, although it is fully enclosed. Perhaps you could view this as the weight of an enclosed air raft, with the un-enclosed air raft weighing closer to 2 metric tons. Now, the ambulance does have a 3/4 short tons cargo capacity, but that is nowhere near the 4 Traveller ton capacity of the air raft. As the 4 tons capacity of the air raft cannot possibly refer to Traveller dTons, one must assume that it refers to mass. I am not sure where you are going to put 4 mass tons of cargo in the air raft as depicted.

Given what we have to work with, it is a conundrum that is not easily solved.
 
Four ton truck:
640px-Diamond_T_truck_of_the_Royal_Dutch_Army.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_T_4-ton_6x6_truck

Incidentally it's about 4 Dt: 7.3 × 2.4 × 2.9 m ≈ 51 m3 ≈ 3.6 Dton.
 
I always found the classic Air/Raft, as illustrated, rather in error. I envisioned something more like a pickup--a cab forward, probably 3 seated per row, with a large cargo bay or platform behind.
 
First, you might want to clarify as to what you mean by air raft. In looking at the way the air raft is depicted in Supplement 7: Traders and Gunboats, on page 24, the overhead image of the "Empress Marava", you have two different vehicles depicted. The overhead shot shows a vehicle of 3 meters by 4.5 meters in width and length occupying the air raft compartment. The first two 1.5 meter squares show nothing, the remaining four 1.5 meter squares show a single seat in each square, fulling occupying the volume of the vehicle.

What do we know?
LBB3 said:
Air/Raft (8) Cr600,000, 4 tons. A light anti-gravity vehicle which uses null-grav modules to counteract gravity for lift and propulsion. An air/raft can cruise at 100 kph (but is extremely subject to wind effects), with some capability of higher speed to about 120 kph. An air/raft can reach orbit in several hours (number of hours equal to planetary size digit in the UPP); passengers must wear vacc suits and interplanetary travel in an air/raft is not possible. Range in time or distance on a world is effectively unlimited, requiring refueling from a ship's power plant every ten weeks or so. An air/raft can carry four persons plus four tons of cargo. The air/raft is unpressurized and usually open-topped.

An air/raft is a 4 tonne vehicle that can carry 4 people plus 4 tonnes of cargo, where tonne is definitely metric (mass) ton. It might be open-topped or it might not. It takes 4 Dton (8 squares) to garage it aboard a starship.


The illustrations with one seat per 1.5 m square are clearly schematic only. The passenger compartment of a compact car is about 1.5 m cubed and seats four or five people.

The vehicle shown (two by three squares) is short but very wide by our standards. At 3 m wide a single bench seat would comfortably seat 4 people.


I always found the classic Air/Raft, as illustrated, rather in error. I envisioned something more like a pickup--a cab forward, probably 3 seated per row, with a large cargo bay or platform behind.
Agreed, I would suggest a reasonable arrangement would be seating for four people in a single row in the first two squares, leaving the rear four squares for cargo. The power and propulsion system is probably a slab forming the bottom of the vehicle, so no hood. Basically something like a regular van or pickup with the hood cut off, but much wider.
 
Back
Top