computers
- Thread starter Jester666
- Start date
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Jester6,
I am not really clear what you are asking, but I'll try to answer the question. I think your question is: Is the Ship's Computer Model Numbers in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) the same as the Computer Model in the Computer Design Sequence (CDS)?
Short answer: I do not feel that the SSDS Computer Model number corresponds to the CDS Computer number.
Long Answer: My view is that the Ship's Computer table, p. 263, SSDS are different from the CDS Model Numbers, p. 224. The SSDS Model number is for the minimum combined computer core, avionics, sensors, and communications) and sub-systems based on hull tonnage and TL required to run spacecraft and starships. The CDS on the other hand is, again my opinion, is based on the improvements that occur with in each class throughout the life cycle of the computer and advancements in core technology. For example: In the CDS you can build a computer as a Master Model 9 or M9, using 45000 Electromechanical Core units, but a Model/9 SSDS Ship's computer can only be built at TL 15 or above.
I hope the above helps some.
Tom Rux
I am not really clear what you are asking, but I'll try to answer the question. I think your question is: Is the Ship's Computer Model Numbers in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) the same as the Computer Model in the Computer Design Sequence (CDS)?
Short answer: I do not feel that the SSDS Computer Model number corresponds to the CDS Computer number.
Long Answer: My view is that the Ship's Computer table, p. 263, SSDS are different from the CDS Model Numbers, p. 224. The SSDS Model number is for the minimum combined computer core, avionics, sensors, and communications) and sub-systems based on hull tonnage and TL required to run spacecraft and starships. The CDS on the other hand is, again my opinion, is based on the improvements that occur with in each class throughout the life cycle of the computer and advancements in core technology. For example: In the CDS you can build a computer as a Master Model 9 or M9, using 45000 Electromechanical Core units, but a Model/9 SSDS Ship's computer can only be built at TL 15 or above.
I hope the above helps some.
Tom Rux
Pagan priest
SOC-12
In the computer design sequence, the cost and/or size goes down as TL goes up. That is not true in the Ship Design Sequence. Why?
How can the two design systems be integrated?
How can the two design systems be integrated?
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Morning Pagan priest,
My unofficial opinion, since I am a fan and fanatic at getting the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) to work, is that the CDS is for building computer systems for general use. In the Spaceship and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) the computers are being built for a specific purpose. The purpose of the computer in the SSDS is to coordinate all the functions of starships of increasing tonnage with the need to run more systems.
Another reason for the difference is that the SSDS is a modified CT Book 2: Starships and Book 5: High Guard to fit the d20 system. The CDS was developed as, in my opinion, an independent design aid.
In the THB 1st printing there was a Table for Ship's Computers in Chapter 13 that had factors for converting a CDS computer to a SSDS Ship's Compter. The method for converting volume and cost worked, unforutnately the factor for EP did not accurately convert the data.
I am working on a spreadsheet to automate the CDS. At the moment the spreadsheet works for all the specifications, as per THB first printing, except for EP. When I figure out how to get the Energy Points converted I'll post the process.
Hope the above helps.
Tom Rux
My unofficial opinion, since I am a fan and fanatic at getting the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) to work, is that the CDS is for building computer systems for general use. In the Spaceship and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) the computers are being built for a specific purpose. The purpose of the computer in the SSDS is to coordinate all the functions of starships of increasing tonnage with the need to run more systems.
Another reason for the difference is that the SSDS is a modified CT Book 2: Starships and Book 5: High Guard to fit the d20 system. The CDS was developed as, in my opinion, an independent design aid.
In the THB 1st printing there was a Table for Ship's Computers in Chapter 13 that had factors for converting a CDS computer to a SSDS Ship's Compter. The method for converting volume and cost worked, unforutnately the factor for EP did not accurately convert the data.
I am working on a spreadsheet to automate the CDS. At the moment the spreadsheet works for all the specifications, as per THB first printing, except for EP. When I figure out how to get the Energy Points converted I'll post the process.
Hope the above helps.
Tom Rux
There is a chart on page 224 of THB that doesnt line up with the star ship/ spacecraft design sequences listed minimum on p256; which lists minimum computer levels for each type of ship tonnage, whereas the chart afore mentioned seems to superceed these minimums ie a model 0 Expert computer has far more EP output than a Master, Advanced or Basic of a higher model number.
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Jester6,
I am unclear about what you are asking, but I will try to give you an answer.
The Required Computer column of the Manufactured Hulls table on p. 256 is not, in my opinion, refering to the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) Computer Type and Model table on p. 224. Further the actual annotation should be Model/1 vice Model 1 since the minimum Flight Avionics sub-computer, Flight Avionics table p. 263, for a displacement of 1 to 600 dtons is a Model/1 Ship's Computer (THB 1st printing) or Processing Power (THB 2nd printing) also on p. 263 of the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS). Also a Ship's Computer is actually made up of 4 computers each required to meet or exceed, a 1000 CPU Output, Total PP of 28, and a Max PP of 11. The Main or core system shares Processing Power with the Flight Avionics, Sensors, and Communications computer sub-sytems. To get a SSDS Model/1 Ship's Computer requires at least CDS Master Model 1 with a CPU Output of a minmum of 4,000 units. 1,000 each for the Core, Flight Avionics, Sensors, and Communications. You could substitute any CDS Computer Type and model provided that the system provides meet the Total/Max PP for a SSDS Model/1 and a CDS Master Model 1 CPU Req of 1,000, Total/Max PP of 21/11.
You are correct that an Expert Computer Model 0 is more powerful than any model of computer type Basic, Advanced, or Master.
As mentioned in an earlier post the SSDS Ship's Computer/Processing Power Table on p. 263, EP is an direct import from the Computer Models Table, p. 26, of CT Book 5: High Guard. The CDS was apparently designed separately from the SSDS Ship's Computer Design Sequence steps and did not get cross-checked to ensure that the two sections were compatible. I think I may have mentioned I am in the process of developing a spreadsheet to aide in CDS design. The major glitch I am having is EP being a lot higher for a CDS designed Ship's Computer, otherwise I think the spreadsheet can be used to design computers. When I or someone else figures out a fix for the CDS to SSDS computer problem the spreadsheet will go out for testing and hopefully made available to the T20 Traveller community.
Tom Rux
I am unclear about what you are asking, but I will try to give you an answer.
The Required Computer column of the Manufactured Hulls table on p. 256 is not, in my opinion, refering to the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) Computer Type and Model table on p. 224. Further the actual annotation should be Model/1 vice Model 1 since the minimum Flight Avionics sub-computer, Flight Avionics table p. 263, for a displacement of 1 to 600 dtons is a Model/1 Ship's Computer (THB 1st printing) or Processing Power (THB 2nd printing) also on p. 263 of the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS). Also a Ship's Computer is actually made up of 4 computers each required to meet or exceed, a 1000 CPU Output, Total PP of 28, and a Max PP of 11. The Main or core system shares Processing Power with the Flight Avionics, Sensors, and Communications computer sub-sytems. To get a SSDS Model/1 Ship's Computer requires at least CDS Master Model 1 with a CPU Output of a minmum of 4,000 units. 1,000 each for the Core, Flight Avionics, Sensors, and Communications. You could substitute any CDS Computer Type and model provided that the system provides meet the Total/Max PP for a SSDS Model/1 and a CDS Master Model 1 CPU Req of 1,000, Total/Max PP of 21/11.
You are correct that an Expert Computer Model 0 is more powerful than any model of computer type Basic, Advanced, or Master.
As mentioned in an earlier post the SSDS Ship's Computer/Processing Power Table on p. 263, EP is an direct import from the Computer Models Table, p. 26, of CT Book 5: High Guard. The CDS was apparently designed separately from the SSDS Ship's Computer Design Sequence steps and did not get cross-checked to ensure that the two sections were compatible. I think I may have mentioned I am in the process of developing a spreadsheet to aide in CDS design. The major glitch I am having is EP being a lot higher for a CDS designed Ship's Computer, otherwise I think the spreadsheet can be used to design computers. When I or someone else figures out a fix for the CDS to SSDS computer problem the spreadsheet will go out for testing and hopefully made available to the T20 Traveller community.
Tom Rux
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Jester6,
You are welcome and thank you for your wish that I can get my spreadsheet to work. The computer design spreadsheet on falkayn.com was created by Jeff Sandmeier. My first attempt at a CDS spreadsheet was sent to Hunter, which I discovered had some major problems. Jeff Sandmeier's spreadsheet at least gets you started at designing a computer. Again thank-you for your reply and wishes on my latest CDS spreadsheet.
Tom Rux
You are welcome and thank you for your wish that I can get my spreadsheet to work. The computer design spreadsheet on falkayn.com was created by Jeff Sandmeier. My first attempt at a CDS spreadsheet was sent to Hunter, which I discovered had some major problems. Jeff Sandmeier's spreadsheet at least gets you started at designing a computer. Again thank-you for your reply and wishes on my latest CDS spreadsheet.
Tom Rux
Yeah the two systems do not mesh very well. If you look at the software section the Jump program requires a large number of CPU points. If you then compare this with the ship standard designs you will find that most of the ships capable of more than jump-1 cannot run the program on the computers they have installed.
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Marvo,
I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that a computer designed using Computer Deisgn Sequence (CDS), aside from the EP issue, cannot run a Jump program.
The Spacecraft & Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) Ship's Computers Table (THB 1st printing) or Processing Power Table (THB 2nd printing) p. 263 Computer Model Number is not the same as the CDS Computer Type and Model listed on p. 224. The Model number referred to in the table on p. 224 is an indication of what generation or modification number of the computer type Basic, Advanced, Master, or Expert. When a computer type is originally is introduced the model is 0 and each increase in Processing Power changes the model to the next level.
A computer designed with the CDS can run any Jump program listed on the tables provided they meet the Processing Power requirements. Max PP is for Skill programs and is the total number of skill program Processing Power that can be used. According to the Jump Drive Table, THB p. 265, at TL 13 the maximum jump is 4 parsecs. Next, we look at the Processing Power Table and see that a Model/4 Ship's Computer requires a minimum CPU Output Processing Power of 49. Of the 49 PP a Maximum of 12 Skill based programs can be running at one time. Moving along to the CDS Jump Program, p. 232, the Jump 4 program requires 41 PP and adding a Generate program brings the PP total to 42. Looking at the Computer Type and Model Table, p. 224, shows that a Master Model 4 meets the minimum processing power requirement, with some processing power available to run additional programs while preparing to jump. The selection for a Ship's Main Computer ranges from a CDS Master Model 4, ideally Model 5, to an Expert Model 7.
The best, in my opinion, CDS computer design that fits a Main Computer Model/4 would be an Master Model 9. My reasoning is based on the SSDS idea that a ship's main computer is actually four computers: the core which shares processing power with flight avionics, sensors, and communications sub-systems. In each of these systems, from my understanding of the CDS, each requires, if they are all Model/4 systems, a 10,000 CPU Output. This means that the Core requires a CPU Out of 40,000, which if using an Advanced Synaptic requires 4,000 (40,000/10) units. Of course any Expert system up to Model 7 would also work as a TL 13 Ship's Main Computer.
Hopefully, the above has helped in showing that the CDS can design a starship computer that can meet the Jump program requirements.
I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that a computer designed using Computer Deisgn Sequence (CDS), aside from the EP issue, cannot run a Jump program.
The Spacecraft & Starship Design Sequence (SSDS) Ship's Computers Table (THB 1st printing) or Processing Power Table (THB 2nd printing) p. 263 Computer Model Number is not the same as the CDS Computer Type and Model listed on p. 224. The Model number referred to in the table on p. 224 is an indication of what generation or modification number of the computer type Basic, Advanced, Master, or Expert. When a computer type is originally is introduced the model is 0 and each increase in Processing Power changes the model to the next level.
A computer designed with the CDS can run any Jump program listed on the tables provided they meet the Processing Power requirements. Max PP is for Skill programs and is the total number of skill program Processing Power that can be used. According to the Jump Drive Table, THB p. 265, at TL 13 the maximum jump is 4 parsecs. Next, we look at the Processing Power Table and see that a Model/4 Ship's Computer requires a minimum CPU Output Processing Power of 49. Of the 49 PP a Maximum of 12 Skill based programs can be running at one time. Moving along to the CDS Jump Program, p. 232, the Jump 4 program requires 41 PP and adding a Generate program brings the PP total to 42. Looking at the Computer Type and Model Table, p. 224, shows that a Master Model 4 meets the minimum processing power requirement, with some processing power available to run additional programs while preparing to jump. The selection for a Ship's Main Computer ranges from a CDS Master Model 4, ideally Model 5, to an Expert Model 7.
The best, in my opinion, CDS computer design that fits a Main Computer Model/4 would be an Master Model 9. My reasoning is based on the SSDS idea that a ship's main computer is actually four computers: the core which shares processing power with flight avionics, sensors, and communications sub-systems. In each of these systems, from my understanding of the CDS, each requires, if they are all Model/4 systems, a 10,000 CPU Output. This means that the Core requires a CPU Out of 40,000, which if using an Advanced Synaptic requires 4,000 (40,000/10) units. Of course any Expert system up to Model 7 would also work as a TL 13 Ship's Main Computer.
Hopefully, the above has helped in showing that the CDS can design a starship computer that can meet the Jump program requirements.
Thanks Tom.
I took a look at it the way you describe and it does work like that. However, I think this is a bit complicated. It would be nice to have a common starship computer configurations table as a guide. My campaign assumes that pretty much every ship has some kind of customisation and I think that computer upgrades would be one of the most common. On the common ships I assume that there are several variations to each one straight out of the shipyards. i.e. similar to modern day cars. So you might have a 200 Ton Far Trader SEC (Super Extra Computer)
I took a look at it the way you describe and it does work like that. However, I think this is a bit complicated. It would be nice to have a common starship computer configurations table as a guide. My campaign assumes that pretty much every ship has some kind of customisation and I think that computer upgrades would be one of the most common. On the common ships I assume that there are several variations to each one straight out of the shipyards. i.e. similar to modern day cars. So you might have a 200 Ton Far Trader SEC (Super Extra Computer)
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Narvo,
Thank-you for your response to my post and you are welcome for any assistance I can provide on the CDS. I have taken a lot of time studying the Computer Design Sequence (CDS), only because many other people said the system was broken. The CDS does work, with the exception of EP in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS). The first printing of the THB had a table for Ship's Computers in Chapter 13. Unfortunately, all but 3 of the systems are describing the computer core without any programs. Yes, the CDS is just as complicated as the Vehicle Design Sequence (VDS) and the SSDS.
I think I have mentioned that I have a MS Excel spreadsheet that appears to actually automate the CDS. Unfortunately, I am having trouble with the Ship's Computer EP and coverting to the SSDS Model/#.
Thank-you for your response to my post and you are welcome for any assistance I can provide on the CDS. I have taken a lot of time studying the Computer Design Sequence (CDS), only because many other people said the system was broken. The CDS does work, with the exception of EP in the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS). The first printing of the THB had a table for Ship's Computers in Chapter 13. Unfortunately, all but 3 of the systems are describing the computer core without any programs. Yes, the CDS is just as complicated as the Vehicle Design Sequence (VDS) and the SSDS.
I think I have mentioned that I have a MS Excel spreadsheet that appears to actually automate the CDS. Unfortunately, I am having trouble with the Ship's Computer EP and coverting to the SSDS Model/#.
Originally posted by Marvo:
Thanks Tom.
I took a look at it the way you describe and it does work like that. However, I think this is a bit complicated. It would be nice to have a common starship computer configurations table as a guide. My campaign assumes that pretty much every ship has some kind of customisation and I think that computer upgrades would be one of the most common. On the common ships I assume that there are several variations to each one straight out of the shipyards. i.e. similar to modern day cars. So you might have a 200 Ton Far Trader SEC (Super Extra Computer)
Michael Taylor
SOC-13
If I may add, the starship design sequence (SDS), based on High Guard and CT Book 2, is based on 1980s assumptions about computers. There was obviously never any intention of changing the T20 SDS computers to be compatible with the new T20 VDS (vehicle design sequence). The reason is historical: the authors of T20 obviously (and in my opinion correctly) wanted to keep the T20 SDS as backwards compatible with High Guard as possible - in fact, you can use (with the exception of powerplants) virtually every High Guard formula and apply it to the T20 design sequence perfectly, which is good, considering the zillions of starships that have been designed with HG in the last 24 years - to use them in T20 you dont have to change anything. T20 SDS is IMHO High Guard in drag.
You can even use HG ships in T20 combat (although I use T20 ships with the HG combat system)
Similarly with HG computers - you dont have to change anything for the computers. While that means the computers are rather large in terms of volume (consider a model 9fib occupying 252 cubic metres - wow) at least they are completely compatible with HG. That's how it was in 1980 when HG came out, and I'm glad to see some consistency in the design process enabling those squillions of HG designs out there to be completely compatible with T20.
You can even use HG ships in T20 combat (although I use T20 ships with the HG combat system)
Similarly with HG computers - you dont have to change anything for the computers. While that means the computers are rather large in terms of volume (consider a model 9fib occupying 252 cubic metres - wow) at least they are completely compatible with HG. That's how it was in 1980 when HG came out, and I'm glad to see some consistency in the design process enabling those squillions of HG designs out there to be completely compatible with T20.
Michael Taylor
SOC-13
As for common starship computer configurations, I'm lazy. I simply have Model X for comms, sensors, avionics all being the same number. That way the tonnages of the computers are in line with High Guard (M1 is 1 dton, M2 is 2 dtons and so on)
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hi Michael Taylor,
Thank-you for adding to the thread with your post. I agree, based on a post on a purification plant thread awhile back, that T20 is the most backward compatible starship design sequences in any Traveller version.
I may be off base here, but the vehicle design system seems to have a lot of similarities to the CT Striker vehicle design system. Of course there are differences between the two, or perhaps I am in my own little reality.
I also agree that the T20 CDS does not appear to be based on the 1980's computer technology. THB 1st edition had a Ship's Computer Table in Chapter 13 that did attempt to convert price, volume, and EP to match the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence Ship's Computer (1st ed)/Processing Power (2nd ed) table on p. 263. Volume and price worked fairly closely, however the EP factor was not really effective. I think that the Computer Design Sequence is a great tool for Traveller, however the one minor glitch was not verifying that the system could come close to duplicating the computers detailed in CT Books 2 and 5.
Again thanks for your comments.
Thank-you for adding to the thread with your post. I agree, based on a post on a purification plant thread awhile back, that T20 is the most backward compatible starship design sequences in any Traveller version.
I may be off base here, but the vehicle design system seems to have a lot of similarities to the CT Striker vehicle design system. Of course there are differences between the two, or perhaps I am in my own little reality.
I also agree that the T20 CDS does not appear to be based on the 1980's computer technology. THB 1st edition had a Ship's Computer Table in Chapter 13 that did attempt to convert price, volume, and EP to match the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence Ship's Computer (1st ed)/Processing Power (2nd ed) table on p. 263. Volume and price worked fairly closely, however the EP factor was not really effective. I think that the Computer Design Sequence is a great tool for Traveller, however the one minor glitch was not verifying that the system could come close to duplicating the computers detailed in CT Books 2 and 5.
Again thanks for your comments.
Originally posted by Michael Taylor:
If I may add, the starship design sequence (SDS), based on High Guard and CT Book 2, is based on 1980s assumptions about computers. There was obviously never any intention of changing the T20 SDS computers to be compatible with the new T20 VDS (vehicle design sequence). The reason is historical: the authors of T20 obviously (and in my opinion correctly) wanted to keep the T20 SDS as backwards compatible with High Guard as possible - in fact, you can use (with the exception of powerplants) virtually every High Guard formula and apply it to the T20 design sequence perfectly, which is good, considering the zillions of starships that have been designed with HG in the last 24 years - to use them in T20 you dont have to change anything. T20 SDS is IMHO High Guard in drag.
You can even use HG ships in T20 combat (although I use T20 ships with the HG combat system)
Similarly with HG computers - you dont have to change anything for the computers. While that means the computers are rather large in terms of volume (consider a model 9fib occupying 252 cubic metres - wow) at least they are completely compatible with HG. That's how it was in 1980 when HG came out, and I'm glad to see some consistency in the design process enabling those squillions of HG designs out there to be completely compatible with T20.
Commander Drax
SOC-12
In response to earlier posts about the volume of computer's being based on 1980's knowledge/data, I can easily live with this, as lets face it even a model 1 starship computer is a supercomputer by today's standards, who could possibly say how large or small these devices would be in the distant future. It is possible to passionately argue that a model 9 fib could be the size of an earring, or as big as a house. It is not made clear what the computer volume entails. I generally assume that it contains the core processors, data storage and links to those all important subsystems and junction nodes/boxes spread throughout the ship. Now compare the typical 9Fib to the ship its housed in (normally 1000 tons or larger) and the volume for all of this is quite small in comparison to ship volume. Also some of that volume could be wasted space in order to allow repair access to damaged systems. Who knows, and who's to say that your wrong...
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello Commander Dax,
Thank-you for your addition to the discussion and I agree about the volume and such of a ship's computer.
The major issue concerns using the Core and Computer Type & Model tables, p. 224, of the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) pp. 223 - 233 with the Ship's Computers (1st)/Processing Power (2nd) table, p. 263, of the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS), pp. 253 - 279. When designing a ship's computer using the CDS volume and cost can be manipulated to match those of the Ship's Computers in the SSDS. EP, unfortunately, is the sticking point. The SSDS Model 9 Fib computer is actually 4 computers, core, avionics, sensors, and comms, that use a combined total of 12 EP, requires a Total/Max CPU output of 65/14, and is available at TL 15. To get just the computer core of a Ship's Computer Model (SCM) 9 requires a minimum CDS Type Master Model 6, M/6, from the Type & Model Table on p. 224. To achieve a M/6 requires a computer processor of 21,000 units. The best processor available at TL 15 is Advanced Synaptic from the Computer Cores Table, p. 224, which requires .009 EPs per single unit. 21,000 Advanced Synaptic Central Processing Units (CPU) requires a total of 189 EPs. Each of the sub-computers, avionics, comms, and sensors, also require a minimum of 21,000 CPUs to operate and meet the criteria of a SCM 9. This means that the SCM 9 central processsing core either has 84,000 CPUs or that the core, avionics, sensors, and comm systems each have 21,000 CPUs each. In either case a SCM 9 computer designed using a CDS M/6 Advanced Synaptic processor requires at total of 756 EPs and not the 12 EP on the Ship's Computers (1st)/Processing Power (2nd) Table in the SSDS on p. 263.
The next best option is to use a computer of type Expert Model 3, E/3, for the Ship's Compter Model 9 core. Unfortunately, the required EP to run the E/3 is 819, which again exceeds the indicated 12 EP from the table on p. 12 of the SSDS.
Again, thanks for the addition to the discussion.
Thank-you for your addition to the discussion and I agree about the volume and such of a ship's computer.
The major issue concerns using the Core and Computer Type & Model tables, p. 224, of the Computer Design Sequence (CDS) pp. 223 - 233 with the Ship's Computers (1st)/Processing Power (2nd) table, p. 263, of the Spacecraft and Starship Design Sequence (SSDS), pp. 253 - 279. When designing a ship's computer using the CDS volume and cost can be manipulated to match those of the Ship's Computers in the SSDS. EP, unfortunately, is the sticking point. The SSDS Model 9 Fib computer is actually 4 computers, core, avionics, sensors, and comms, that use a combined total of 12 EP, requires a Total/Max CPU output of 65/14, and is available at TL 15. To get just the computer core of a Ship's Computer Model (SCM) 9 requires a minimum CDS Type Master Model 6, M/6, from the Type & Model Table on p. 224. To achieve a M/6 requires a computer processor of 21,000 units. The best processor available at TL 15 is Advanced Synaptic from the Computer Cores Table, p. 224, which requires .009 EPs per single unit. 21,000 Advanced Synaptic Central Processing Units (CPU) requires a total of 189 EPs. Each of the sub-computers, avionics, comms, and sensors, also require a minimum of 21,000 CPUs to operate and meet the criteria of a SCM 9. This means that the SCM 9 central processsing core either has 84,000 CPUs or that the core, avionics, sensors, and comm systems each have 21,000 CPUs each. In either case a SCM 9 computer designed using a CDS M/6 Advanced Synaptic processor requires at total of 756 EPs and not the 12 EP on the Ship's Computers (1st)/Processing Power (2nd) Table in the SSDS on p. 263.
The next best option is to use a computer of type Expert Model 3, E/3, for the Ship's Compter Model 9 core. Unfortunately, the required EP to run the E/3 is 819, which again exceeds the indicated 12 EP from the table on p. 12 of the SSDS.
Again, thanks for the addition to the discussion.
bobpartdeux
SOC-9
maybe just use the computer creation guide?
JM
JM
snrdg082102
SOC-14 1K
Hello bobpartdeux,
Thank-you for your post. I am unclear what you mean by the computer creation guide. Are you referring to the Spacecraft and Starhip Design Sequence (SSDS) steps for the building a Ship's Computer pp. 262-264?
I agree that using the standard systems and design sequences is usually the easiest method to create standard systems. Unfortuantely, it is not very realistic that every Ship's Computer Model 9 on civilian and military vessels have the same capability. There are three totally alien sapient spieces in Traveller, they are Aslan, Hiver, and K'kree. None of the sapinets computer systems should be an exact duplicate of those used in the 3I. I doubt that the Zhodani systems would be exact duplicates of the 3I either.
Hunter and Martin provided a system that allows a designer to create something other than the standard design for those who want to do so. In the Little Black Books (LBB) of Classic Traveller I got tired of using the Computer Table for every ship design and attempted to create one of my own. Unfortuantely, I never finished due to commitments placed on me by being in the USN .
Again, thank-you for your comments.
Thank-you for your post. I am unclear what you mean by the computer creation guide. Are you referring to the Spacecraft and Starhip Design Sequence (SSDS) steps for the building a Ship's Computer pp. 262-264?
I agree that using the standard systems and design sequences is usually the easiest method to create standard systems. Unfortuantely, it is not very realistic that every Ship's Computer Model 9 on civilian and military vessels have the same capability. There are three totally alien sapient spieces in Traveller, they are Aslan, Hiver, and K'kree. None of the sapinets computer systems should be an exact duplicate of those used in the 3I. I doubt that the Zhodani systems would be exact duplicates of the 3I either.
Hunter and Martin provided a system that allows a designer to create something other than the standard design for those who want to do so. In the Little Black Books (LBB) of Classic Traveller I got tired of using the Computer Table for every ship design and attempted to create one of my own. Unfortuantely, I never finished due to commitments placed on me by being in the USN
.Again, thank-you for your comments.
Commander Drax
SOC-12
I think I've isolated the problem, though please tell me if I'm wrong. An EP used in spacecraft and starship design is of a completely differnt scale to the EP's used in vehicle/robot design. I am of the opinion that the computer design sequece is aimed at vehicle components as opposed to starship/spacecrafts etc. I don't tend to look at this section very often so please let me know if I've made a mistake, I do feel however that some scale should be given between Vehicle and Spacecraft scale EP. I seem to remember from MegaTraveller that a single EP was MW 250, though in cross comparison was later design sequences (i.e. TNE & T4) it seems to be somewhere between MW 125 and MW 280.
In the TA (Against Gravity) there are weapons tables that seem to suggest that a vehicle EP is MW 10. I won't try and factor these calculations into the work you've already done, as I am boggled by it all to say the least and am sure that your greater familiarity with these charts will quickly allow you to make a decision on this.
Though just for the record it looks like
1 Starship/Spacraft EP (MW 250) = EP 25 Vehicle/robot scale.
Alternatively 1 Starship/Spacecraft EP (MW 125) = EP 12.5 Vehicle/robot scale.
Hope this can help
In the TA (Against Gravity) there are weapons tables that seem to suggest that a vehicle EP is MW 10. I won't try and factor these calculations into the work you've already done, as I am boggled by it all to say the least and am sure that your greater familiarity with these charts will quickly allow you to make a decision on this.
Though just for the record it looks like
1 Starship/Spacraft EP (MW 250) = EP 25 Vehicle/robot scale.
Alternatively 1 Starship/Spacecraft EP (MW 125) = EP 12.5 Vehicle/robot scale.
Hope this can help
