Belladonna-class Clippers?

[ChaserCaffey]

Since I'm always willing to choose Fire, Fusion, and Steel over whatever it is I should be doing, I'm looking to work up a design for the Reformation Coalition Belladonna class clipper. I know from Path of Tears that the clipper is based on the long spine of the Maggart class, but fully streamlined with a mission bay- but that's about it.

Was anything else ever published on the class? Are there any figures on displacement, armament, or other facilities?

Thanks!

 

[graden1]

I don't know about the Belladonna but there were a couple of ships like this in Battle Riders. The Fusilier carried a PAWS spinal mount, and the Lancer had a meson gun. Both appeared to be streamlined versions of the RC clipper, as far as I could tell.

Other than that, I've never seen any figures for streamlined clippers.

XO

 

[Dreadnought]

Chaser--

No, we never published the details of the Belladonna in TNE. Nor do I recall ever getting around to actually designing her with FF&S.

She was actually inspired by the PC's ship in my longest-running Traveller campaign, which was designed using a mix of CT and High Guard 2, with CAD deckplans, ~1:200 scale model, and everything. She was a 2000 tonner with 6 decks.

The TNE version merely borrowed her name and overall shape. The Lancer and Fusilier I believe were militarized versions of the Belladonna concept. Where Belladonna was an exploratory-style clipper, Lancer and Fusilier were warships.

Dave

 

[fredofmars]

Originally posted by David Freakin' Nilsen:
<snip>She was actually inspired by the PC's ship in my longest-running Traveller campaign, which was designed using a mix of CT and High Guard 2, with CAD deckplans, ~1:200 scale model, and everything. She was a 2000 tonner with 6 decks.<snip>

If possible, I for one would be interested in seeing the work done on this PC ship. This is a lot of work put into a design. I belive it would be much looked at and admired if published. This might be a prime thing to work into 1248; otherwise, it might be something nice to put onto a Web site somewhere. I offer to host the material on my site, and there are a number of other places (Freelance Traveller among others) that would be happy to host it. This might also be the type of material to write an article about for CoTI or JTAS (which could mean money in your pocket).

 

[Dreadnought]

Joseph--

Funny you should say that. The guy that did the CAD deckplans is Rick Boquist, best man at my wedding, AKA Captain Dick Kabuki. He also did the deckplans for the MT folio Assignment: Vigilante, one of the T2K folios, and was the designer of the visual look of the RC clippers.

I've been discussing with him the practicality of publishing some of his stuff, or some new stuff in a variety of contexts. However, I will say that Belladonna is among the loves of his life, so he will probably be pretty careful with her. Oh yeah, we made Belladonna matchbooks, ballcaps, and T-shirts as well. We were about the most hardcore Traveller campaign you could imagine.

Dave

 

[ChaserCaffey]

Originally posted by David Freakin' Nilsen:
Chaser--

No, we never published the details of the Belladonna in TNE. Nor do I recall ever getting around to actually designing her with FF&S.

She was actually inspired by the PC's ship in my longest-running Traveller campaign, which was designed using a mix of CT and High Guard 2, with CAD deckplans, ~1:200 scale model, and everything. She was a 2000 tonner with 6 decks.

The TNE version merely borrowed her name and overall shape. The Lancer and Fusilier I believe were militarized versions of the Belladonna concept. Where Belladonna was an exploratory-style clipper, Lancer and Fusilier were warships.

Dave

Fair enough, and thanks for the info. If she was the same size as the Lancer and Fusilier that would put her in the 6250-6500 dton range, which is big- but then again, if she's going to cruise to Terra (as I believe was mentioned somewhere), she'd better be big.

Oh yeah, no sleep for me tonight...

 

[kaladorn]

I haven't actually gotten to the point of getting the patch cooked up, but I'm thinking of it and giving each PC aboard her one...
The Star Wind

If you get the right kind of patch, you can turn it into ballcaps too.

 

[vutpakdi]

Originally posted by kaladorn:
I haven't actually gotten to the point of getting the patch cooked up, but I'm thinking of it and giving each PC aboard her one...

[...]

If you get the right kind of patch, you can turn it into ballcaps too.

There are a number of outfits that will turn any sort of graphic into an embroidered "thing" be it a patch or a logo on a shirt, jacket, pair of pants, or bag.

Before GenCon, I, with input from the players, came up with a logo for our PBEM game's ship. After we decided on the final look for the logo, we got a company to embroider the logo onto polo shirts (those who were interested picked their own polo shirt maker, style, color, and size).

$75 one time setup fee per logo and the shirts were in the $15-$30 range (depending on the maker and style of shirt). Nice thing about this company is that once the setup fee is paid, there is no minimum order, so, if I happen to want a jacket now, I just pay for the cost of the one jacket.

You can probably find someone locally (or on the net in Canada) to do the same thing.

Ron

 

[Falkayn]

Have you seen Erik Boielle's sketches of the Belladonna and Fusillier? They are available from this thread.

 

[Dreadnought]

Nope, Nilsen was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

Path of Tears says right here: Lancer and Fusilier are based on the Aurora (short) clipper hulls, and Belladonna is based on the Maggart (long) clipper hulls. I wrote that section, so it's a shame I can't remember it.

So Lancer & Fusilier are 144 meter spinal mounts and Belladonna is 162.

Dave

 

[Dreadnought]

There are a number of outfits that will turn any sort of graphic into an embroidered "thing" be it a patch or a logo on a shirt, jacket, pair of pants, or bag.

The advent of the computerized sewing machines makes a lot of really neat things possible, such as relatively cheap low-number patch runs. Back when we did that stuff, in the 80s, that wasn't possible. We made our own silk screens and then found companies that were able to use our screens for the hats and shirts.

The matchbooks actually were made with a little metal stamp that I still have somewhere.

Dave

 

[Uxi]

I've done stats on my FF&S page, which is in sore need of an update... but maybe as my new TNE campaign takes shape...

Might be an example you can base off of, at the very least.

 

[Uxi]

Originally posted by David Freakin' Nilsen:
Nope, Nilsen was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

Path of Tears says right here: Lancer and Fusilier are based on the Aurora (short) clipper hulls, and Belladonna is based on the Maggart (long) clipper hulls. I wrote that section, so it's a shame I can't remember it.

So Lancer & Fusilier are 144 meter spinal mounts and Belladonna is 162.

Dave

Wow... well once the longer spine Maggarts were out, what justification would there be for the destroyers being smaller and weaker? I'd imagine they STARTED as regular Aurora spines... but then would have done a Group II-Clipper and seen modification to the improved specs as they were finished.

Still... interesting to have this cleared up. Was a topic of some debate a few years back on TNE-RCES.

 

[ChaserCaffey]

Originally posted by Uxi:
I've done stats on my FF&S page, which is in sore need of an update... but maybe as my new TNE campaign takes shape...

Might be an example you can base off of, at the very least.

Thanks, that's actually very helpful! I roughed something out last night, and it looks like we actually got very close to each other.

One question- you got a length of 162 meters, which is obviously what we're shooting for, but how? I used a streamlined needle and a 6500 dton hull and came up with a (52*3)= 156 meter long hull. Does having an airframe configuration increase the length of a design?

If anyone wants to see what I came up with, drop me a PM so I don't use everyone's bandwidth. I'll be offline until tomorrow night, but I can respond then.

 

[Dreadnought]

Uxi--

Wow... well once the longer spine Maggarts were out, what justification would there be for the destroyers being smaller and weaker? I'd imagine they STARTED as regular Aurora spines...

Yes, you are correct in principle, but not as quickly as you postulate. I re-read the stuff last night and the idea was that the Lancer and Fusilier designs were begun when Aurora was the standard and so were based on that design. That's why the line appears in PoT about "it's ironic that the new longer-spined Maggart class are being delayed by the work on the destroyers based on the [original] Aurora spines." That's a paraphrase, except the bracketed "original," which I should have included in the original but did not.

You can connect the dots when you read about Belladonna, which was the ship that resulted when someone said, "waitaminnit, we've got these DDs based on the clipper spine, but now we've got longer clippers, so why don't we make better warships around the new spine?"

Now, whether the published designs support that logic I can't say right now. But from reading it can tell that my intent was that the Lancers and Fusiliers were based on the 144m spine and Belladonna on the 162m spine. If the BR counters say otherwise, we could "retcon" the PoT text.

Dave

 

[Dreadnought]

ChaserCaffey--

One question- you got a length of 162 meters, which is obviously what we're shooting for, but how? I used a streamlined needle and a 6500 dton hull and came up with a (52*3)= 156 meter long hull. Does having an airframe configuration increase the length of a design?

It's an artifact of the length multiplier for the different hull forms. You'll have to start with a fixed length of 162 (which results from the Maggart's configuration length multiplier) and then work back from that known value to the displacement.

Dave

 

[mike wightman]

So how big, in displacement tons, should each ship be?
If the Lancer and Fusilier are based off the Aurore class then is 2000-2500t in the right ballpark?
The Belladonna, being based on the Maggart should be 2750-3000t?

Or are they bigger because they are fatter/wider?

 

[Dreadnought]

Sigg--

So how big, in displacement tons, should each ship be?
If the Lancer and Fusilier are based off the Aurore class then is 2000-2500t in the right ballpark?
The Belladonna, being based on the Maggart should be 2750-3000t?

Or are they bigger because they are fatter/wider?

They are bigger because they have more permanent structure distally from the spine, i.e., "fatter, wider," but not longer. They would have been a different hull form, and that's where you get into the whole "art" of using the design system and different hull forms and length multipliers. But as I am speaking from faulty, distant memory without any materials in front of me, I had better stop talking without checking my recollections. Sometimes it's easier for me to remember courses of action that we ended up not taking than the course of action we finally settled upon.

Dave

 

[mike wightman]

Thanks Dave.

 

[Uxi]

I'm vehemently against retcons.

I've always been far more in favor of allowing them to "pan out" in-the-story-in-the-setting. IOW, Lancer-II and Fusilier-II would quite soon be in production and Lancer-I/Fusilier-I would be pretty much limited to a 10-ship or so, run.

A spreadsheet with the FFS2 hull forms lets you tailor the dimensions to match your goals. Wonderful thing, spreadsheets.