Book2 designed Xboats

[boomslang]

But being in MT, TNE, and T4 does makes 168:00±16:48 canon for the OTU, whether or not it's canon for non-OTU CT campaigns.

Only for versions of the OTU that come after CT's version. Nothing from later canon necessarily retcons back into the CT OTU, which is at most agnostic regarding later rulesets (HEPlaR, et cetera). The OTU is in fact different depending on the version of Trav under consideration, cf. Emperor Dulinor I.

And since this is a CT thread on a CT board, CT is all that's germane to the topic at hand -- namely, how Xboats work in the CT OTU... and whether can they be 'fixed' within the CT canon without resorting to handwaving or House Rules...

:alpha:
mega:

 

[Foxroe]

ObThisThread: the Xboat system begins to fall apart if it can't stick to a regular schedule -- the tenders don't know when to be where for Breakouts, that becomes a real problem with Pilots routinely coming out of Jump relying on vacc suit life supp & Fast Drug to save their lives, then it's impossible to schedule the logistical support at Way Stations because the Boss Dusters have no way to model the movement of the assets spread across the network, and so on and so on...

I think that this is the necessary truth. If one wants to keep as close to "canon" as possible, and within the boundary of the B2 rules, then the 100-ton Xboat can only have 10 tons of PP fuel... just enough for the duration of the jump. After precipitating from jump-space, the pilot would need to "rig for reduced electrical" (to coin a phrase from the Navy), and rely on battery power until the tender could arrive. The tender would HAVE to be close by, so it MUST now the break-out coordinates/time. All of this needs to be true to satisfy "canon" as closely as it can be, and to ensure that interstellar communication is as efficient as possible... at least IMTU.

Otherwise, a 150-200 ton Xboat works best, even if it is a bit expensive.

-Fox

 

[far-trader]

Otherwise, a 150-200 ton Xboat works best, even if it is a bit expensive.

True enough IF you're talking Book 2 design...

The big problem, of which perhaps the X-Boat is the most glaring example, is that no attempt was made to "fix" the designs when the design rules changed.

So we have the X-Boat Book 2 1st ed model, that works under those rules.

Once Book 2 2nd ed rolled out the design was invalid. Nobody fixed it which is what should have been done. Instead it was just copied and everybody wondered "how the hell does that work".

Then along comes Book 5 (also with 1st and 2nd ed with their own irreconcilable differences) and even the Book 2 2nd ed designs are invalid. Yet again they aren't fixed. Instead Book 5 says "hey you can build ships two entirely different and incompatible ways, and you can even mix and match elements from the two different systems". Yeah, that's a Good Idea(tm) :nonono:

When Book 5 came out it should have said one of two things:

1 - Throw away the designs and rules for design in Book 2, they are no longer canon.

2 - Book 5 design and ships built with it are an alternative rules set not for use in the OTU.

Just my opinion of course. But how much productive time could have be saved, and endless arguments about canon avoided, if only...

Anyway, fwiw, you can also design a very sensible and not too background breaking 100t X-Boat conforming ship in HG. You even get a maneuver drive and weapon.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi, I kind of disagree...

Hi,

Overall I don't really have any problems with having two different space ship design systems. In the real world, there are somewhat different rules for designing and building naval ships and merchant ships, and if you tried to design a similar ship to the two different rule sets you would probably come up with somewhat different final designs, but both would be valid.

With respect to Traveller though, instead of the rules being separated between military and commercial designs, they more seem to be separated into;

• a small/modular ship system where design options are somewhat limited and basic controls, drives, and such all come in set discrete sizes (eg Book 2), and
• a system where the rules are geared more toward specializing the components like basic controls, drives and such to the size of each ship design, larger designs are possible, and there are more design options (eg book 5)

As such, one way of looking at things is that the Book 2 rules reflect a simplified design methodology requiring only a limited amount of high-tech engineering suited to simple ships and smaller shipyards while the Book 5 rules are more suited to both larger and/or more complex designs.

However, that doesn't mean that you can't use Book 5 rules for small ships or that you can't use some of the modular components from Book 2 in vessels in ships otherwise based on Book 5 rules.

A kind of real world analogy might be to look at commerical and military ship designs during WWII, where some escort warships were built to commercial rules in smaller yards using commercial type engines and structural practices but incorporating some military features etc. However, other similar escorts were built in other yards to military standards with military type engines etc. Although both types of vessels were somewhat similar and fulfilled similar roles, the vessels built to commercial standards had some differences from those designed to the military standards, and vice versa. However both were viable designs.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Regards

PF

 

[boomslang]

Otherwise, a 150-200 ton Xboat works best, even if it is a bit expensive.

You'd be surprised.

You can build the circa-200-dton B2 J-4 Couriers for slightly over MCr120 apiece in quantity, depending on if and how you arm them.

The strictly-by-B2-except-for-fuel-load Type X under consideration here will run you just under MCr102 apiece in quantity, plus MCr28 each for the 1/10 of a Type XT it takes to support a 10-Xboat squadron.

You can actually save money by losing the drifting ice cream cones and going with proper (if short-maneuver-legged) courier starships, increased fuel usage notwithstanding.

Perhaps the IISS Commo Branch has excellent lobbyists in the Moot...

 

[Foxroe]

You'd be surprised.

You can build the circa-200-dton B2 J-4 Couriers for slightly over MCr120 apiece in quantity, depending on if and how you arm them.

The strictly-by-B2-except-for-fuel-load Type X under consideration here will run you just under MCr102 apiece in quantity, plus MCr28 each for the 1/10 of a Type XT it takes to support a 10-Xboat squadron.

You can actually save money by losing the drifting ice cream cones and going with proper (if short-maneuver-legged) courier starships, increased fuel usage notwithstanding.

Perhaps the IISS Commo Branch has excellent lobbyists in the Moot...

A purely 2nd edition LBB2/TTB Xboat:

100-ton, custom, not-streamlined hull MCr10
Jump-B, PP-B MCr36
50 tons of fuel (1 jump-4 and 1 week ops) MCr0
Bridge MCr0.5
Model/4 computer MCr30
1 stateroom MCr0.5
============================================
Total MCr77
With 1% architect fee and 90% bulk discount MCr70.07


A purely 2nd edition LBB2/TTB Xboat Tender:

1000-ton, custom, not-streamlined hull MCr100
Jump-H, Man-H, PP-H MCr176
150 tons fuel MCr0
Bridge MCr5
Model/3 computer MCr18
10 staterooms MCr5
20 low berths MCr1
3 hardpoints MCr0.3
3 single turrets* MCr0.6
3 beam lasers* MCr3
60 tons cargo MCr0
629 ton receiving bay MCr0
============================================
Total MCr308.9
With 1% architect fee and 90% bulk discount MCr281.099
(* may vary or not be installed at all)

By your assumption of 10 Xboats to one tender, that's MCr98.18 per Xboat... which is ~18% cheaper than the sole 200-ton versions. That difference will add up considering the size of the OTU Imperium...

And besides, what's wrong with ice cream cones!

-Fox

 

[boomslang]

A purely 2nd edition LBB2/TTB Xboat:

[snip]

OK, I'll buy those numbers, I was probably using a too-old edition; IIRC the BBB (the "last" edition of the BT rules) has numbers more like you got, but I'm not home right now to look them up and crunch them. And you mean Drives-B, not Drives-D (which may be where my own back-of-the-envelope calculations went off the rails, now that I think of it...)

But don't put the weapons into the class cost for the XT; the tradition is to do them aftermarket, since some hulls will be unarmed. You'll also probably want to buy streamlining for the tender, to keep options open for local fueling.

 

[Foxroe]

[snip]

OK, I'll buy those numbers, I was probably using a too-old edition; IIRC the BBB (the "last" edition of the BT rules) has numbers more like you got, but I'm not home right now to look them up and crunch them. And you mean Drives-B, not Drives-D (which may be where my own back-of-the-envelope calculations went off the rails, now that I think of it...)

But don't put the weapons into the class cost for the XT; the tradition is to do them aftermarket, since some hulls will be unarmed. You'll also probably want to buy streamlining for the tender, to keep options open for local fueling.

Doh! <smacks forehead> Yeah, B-drives, not D-drives... I'll edit that... and you're probably right about the after-market weapons. I was just looking for a reasonable max-cost version of the tender.

-Fox

 

[boomslang]

I was just looking for a reasonable max-cost version of the tender.

Having slept on it now, that's probably something that bears a close look; if we go with the fuel-light B2 version of the Type X, we should also work out in precise detail the strictly B2 Type XT to go with it; if the costs hold down, the Xboat system may be justified on practical terms as an alternative (or at least a supplement for time-critical dispatches) to traditional Mail service.

Which would be a nice thing to have calculated out, and might justify the deployment of similar systems outside of the OTU 3I...