Drives in a 10 ton Fighter

[Grav_Moped]

Even deployable turrets can roam R=7 (S=2) from the ship.

S=0 is too close to be practical, it leaves next to no room for manoeuvre. Even a few seconds of acceleration in the wrong direction would leave the fighter with no drive power. It would have to be slaved to the mother-ship with a tractor.

If we want extra PD mounts, just make 10 Dt pods permanently attached to the ship. Much cheaper since no drives needed.

I'm not familiar with T5 build rules, and was thinking in terms of munchkin-ing the 1 hardpoint/100Td limit (does it apply in T5?) Maneuver would just be evasive action maybe 1-2 seconds on a given vector at a time, coordinated with the carrying ship to stay within range for the grav drives. Heck, with a good data link they could use the carrying ship's computer and sensors for long-range targeting.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I'm not familiar with T5 build rules, and was thinking in terms of munchkin-ing the 1 hardpoint/100Td limit (does it apply in T5?)

Small craft have firmpoints, not hardpoints, so only short-ranged weapons.

Heck, with a good data link they could use the carrying ship's computer and sensors for long-range targeting.

T5 has a system for that (of course), but it requires another turret for a CommCaster.

 

[Condottiere]

You can probably exchange one hardpoint for three firmpoints.

One hundred and ten tonne hull? One hardpoint and one firmpoint.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

You can probably exchange one hardpoint for three firmpoints.

No "probable" about it, it is explicitly allowed.

One hundred and ten tonne hull? One hardpoint and one firmpoint.

Nothing is that easy by RAW in T5...

First we can't use 110 Dt hulls, it must be 100 Dt. Overtonnage can change that, but does not change the hardpoint allocation.

We can also add a 10 Dt pod with an overhead of grapples or connectors. The pod will have a firmpoint. The pod will have its own configuration and structure options, so cost and armour of the combined craft will be complicated...

 

[dalthor]

See T5.1 pages 52 and 53 for the descriptions of HP and FP, page 58 top of 2nd column about range (out to R-7 from the ship), and page 83 Table C which indicates deployable adds +2 tons. That range limitation is likely based on the mount's Gravatic Drive.

Basically, a firmpoint (FP) may mount a weapon of less than one ton, and it will be a world-range device. (Reducing range by one band reduces the size of the mount by half, according to the book.)

One of the oddities I see with the FP versus hardpoint (HP) on a small craft --

Why can a deployable mount (turret or barbette!) not lose a darn thing when deployed, but my 10-dTon fighter, CUSTOM BUILT FOR ITS WEAPON, can only use an FP??

I would love an explanation for that one, especially since that deployable mount would weigh only 2 dTons more than a standard mount! A deployable barbette would be 5 dTons, less than the smallest pod, and yet mount a hardpoint weapon, usable out to R=7.

Can I build a deployable "mega-mount" with type A plant and M-Drive in place of the F+ and G-Drive? It would be +6 tons for those (instead of the standard +2 dTons), plus 3 dTons for a Barbette, and I'd then have a 9-ton fighter.

Would that work??

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Basically, a firmpoint (FP) may mount a weapon of less than one ton, and it will be a world-range device.

A Space Range weapon or sensor will still be Space Range after reducing the range. Note the separate Range Effects tables for Space Range and World Range systems.

Why can a deployable mount (turret or barbette!) not lose a darn thing when deployed, but my 10-dTon fighter, CUSTOM BUILT FOR ITS WEAPON, can only use an FP??

The fighter is far more capable, as it can operate as a separate spacecraft.

Can I build a deployable "mega-mount" with type A plant and M-Drive in place of the F+ and G-Drive? It would be +6 tons for those (instead of the standard +2 dTons), plus 3 dTons for a Barbette, and I'd then have a 9-ton fighter.

Not by RAW, you would have to house rule it. By RAW we don't even have a system for building small craft.

 

[Condottiere]

Going by the timeline, it would appear that Traveller wanted a clear break between smallcraft scale weaponry and smallship weaponry, or at least, as pertains to energy based weapon systems.

Batteries work just as well for power production, in the short term.

Exception appears to be ordnance based weapon systems, which by default would be missiles.

Or going by this logic, hyperhormonalized autocannons with a hundred kay klick range.

 

[dalthor]

A Space Range weapon or sensor will still be Space Range after reducing the range. Note the separate Range Effects tables for Space Range and World Range systems.

The fighter is far more capable, as it can operate as a separate spacecraft.

Not by RAW, you would have to house rule it. By RAW we don't even have a system for building small craft.

I do understand the relationship between space range and world range, and that S = R - 5 (from memory, which may be faulty.) I mentioned page 53 because of the "A Firmpoint will accept any mount which is less than one ton ... and contains a World Range Weapon, Defense, or Sensor." quote.

My biggest point was that a deployable turret is at 3 dTons, and is treated as a FULL NORMAL hardpoint; even when deployed it loses no capability, retaining its full size, range and power. In that regard, it is a VERY short-ranged 3-ton fighter. [Remember that the deployable is usable as a life pod, per T5.1 page 156.]

So, why does size NOT matter when deployed, but DOES matter for the pod hull/small craft? That is the issue I want to resolve.

I actually use the ACS rules to build small craft. Others here (Robject included) have also showed how to use the ACS rules to build small craft. Personally, I think that is the reason "pod hulls" were included in T5 to start with, though that is solely my opinion without a definitive YEA or NAY from the powers that be. IMTU I don't distinguish between FP and HP when I deal with small craft.

I do understand that firmpoint vs hardpoint is the RAW, and "because Marc said so" applies, but that "intersection" still exists between the firmpoint <-> deployable mount <-> hardpoint, which does not sync with the entirety of the FP vs HP issue.

In any case, the discussions in this thread have been interesting, and like all things Traveller, to each his/her own.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I mentioned page 53 because of the "A Firmpoint will accept any mount which is less than one ton ... and contains a World Range Weapon, Defense, or Sensor." quote.

I'm afraid I have missed, or simply ignored, that, possibly since most other mentions of firmpoints only require the mount to be smaller than 1 Dt.

I can't really see much point in limiting small craft to lasers only, and hence complete irrelevancy.

My biggest point was that a deployable turret is at 3 dTons, and is treated as a FULL NORMAL hardpoint; even when deployed it loses no capability, ...

So, why does size NOT matter when deployed, but DOES matter for the pod hull/small craft? That is the issue I want to resolve.

I have no idea, but T5 isn't MT or FF&S, it doesn't try to use the same system for everything. Vehicles are completely different from the official small craft, that are completely different from ACS. Presumably deployables just ended up on the right side of the system fence.

I actually use the ACS rules to build small craft. Others here (Robject included) have also showed how to use the ACS rules to build small craft.

Yes, of course, I do too, but I try to keep in mind that it is a house rule.