• 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.

engine component displacement


I am tring to design a deckplan for a 1000 dton ship.
It has jump drive rating of 3.
It displaces 40 dtons.
Does that mean that the jump drive actually takes up 40 dtons of space on the deckplan.
Or is there some other ratio of placing it on the deckplan?
thanks for any help.
yep. a 40dton jump drive will displace 40dtons of deckplan space.

note that this is the engineering space devoted to the jump drive. it is not the actual size of the jump drive itself. a good rule of thumb is that the actual component should occupy one-half to two-thirds of the available space. the rest is used for access, parts lockers, control panels, and other such.
Don't forget that in most Traveller rulesets there is a statement that ship deckplans can be up to 20% smaller or larger than the numbers.
So your 40t jump drive could be given 48x2 squares if you use the standard 1.5m by 1.5m square.
As flykiller says for the rest...
thanks for the input flykiller.
i thought thats what i could do.
40 1.5x1.5 meter squares out of 80 would be the actual componet, and the rest would be access corridoor and workstations and repair access as well.
Or.. if you aren't wanting the plans to be approved by the online Traveller community, do whatever the hell you like. If 40 tons is too much space on your decplans then lower it. Who's to care?

I generally use 80% of the volume is the drive, and 20% is access spaces.

Under MT:
I add control panels sufficient to operate the drives to make the engineering room proper.

Under TNE/T4: Put the Engineering (JD, MD, PP, FPP) workstations in engineering, as the control room.

The 1/2 to 3/4 is just too open for me... and implies too much density for the equipment.
Hi, one more to mess with your mind here ;)

I used a half rule for deckplans for years, since CT and generally every system, always worked fine for me. Basically half the stated size of any element is the actual item, half the remaining (round up to half-tons) is access space immediately adjacent to the item and what is left after that goes to common access, the corridors and such that allow you to get from one element to the next. Basically. I never found it too open or enforcing too much density on the actual elements but that's just my opinion.

iirc most "official" deckplans (certainly the last few Hunter has done for publication iirc) seem to use the full stated tons as the actual size of the element (so your 40ton drive is actually 80 squares (1.5m x 1.5m) and they seem to just add access space as desired and tend to end up with a ship that is way over the rated tons (might be within the 20% overage allowed, I don't recall).
thats what i get now,my ship is designed to be a 1000 ton local systems navy corvette.
my tonnage keeeps going in at almost as much as 1200 dtons.
so if you consder the 20%=or- im there.
i really appreciate you guys anwering my call for help.