If it's labeled on the plans as "aquatic landing flotation/ballast tankage" or "liquid bulk Cargo Hold" and installed with lightly bolted in panels every 6-12m...
How Hard To Hide A Shipyard?
- Thread starter jawillroy
- Start date
If it's labeled on the plans as "aquatic landing flotation/ballast tankage" or "liquid bulk Cargo Hold" and installed with lightly bolted in panels every 6-12m...
No, never been on a warship (well, I've visited as a tourist the HMS Belfast, moored as a tourist attraction in London. Does it count?)
Do you tell me that those inspectors will be fooled if you're building a destroyer and label it as a freighter?
I guess I trust a little more than you in control inspections (perhaps I'm too naive or too trusting, but I guess it's not so easy to build/buy a warship)
Having some first hand experience with military and civilian ship construction, I can confirm that a) QA is done by the buyer whether military or civilian if they know what's good for them and b) government inspectors don't normally board until some sort of certification is necessary. Leaving the yard before scheduled would avoid some mundane government attention but would also draw a lot of unwanted extraordinary attention starting with law enforcement and eventually military.
As it goes, civilian yards have a lot of employees and visitors milling about whether they should be there or not; ships are cool things and people like to watch them being built. On an average day there are contractors, stevedores, caterers, and delivery men coming and going and probably a few insurance agents, union officials, corporate spies, or even foreign intelligence agents skulking about. Building a large ship with a bunch of lanthanum (sp?) would definitely draw the attention of some or all of these as deliveries of an expensive commodity wouldn't go without some notice. So in addition, throw in there some underworld figures and, even worse, a few local officials looking for a piece of the action.
All in all, that's a lot of palms to grease in order to have a Q-ship built out in the open without someone reporting it (for a small reward I'm sure). I would also expect that those in the know would be able to tell a warship hull, with its heavy compartmentalization and reinforced hull, from a typical merchant, with its cavernous cargo spaces, pretty easily even before the hull plating was installed. IMTU, any Q-ship you could build in a civilian yard wouldn't stand up against a military vessel of roughly the same tonnage; there's just that much more to military construction.
As it goes, civilian yards have a lot of employees and visitors milling about whether they should be there or not; ships are cool things and people like to watch them being built. On an average day there are contractors, stevedores, caterers, and delivery men coming and going and probably a few insurance agents, union officials, corporate spies, or even foreign intelligence agents skulking about. Building a large ship with a bunch of lanthanum (sp?) would definitely draw the attention of some or all of these as deliveries of an expensive commodity wouldn't go without some notice. So in addition, throw in there some underworld figures and, even worse, a few local officials looking for a piece of the action.
All in all, that's a lot of palms to grease in order to have a Q-ship built out in the open without someone reporting it (for a small reward I'm sure). I would also expect that those in the know would be able to tell a warship hull, with its heavy compartmentalization and reinforced hull, from a typical merchant, with its cavernous cargo spaces, pretty easily even before the hull plating was installed. IMTU, any Q-ship you could build in a civilian yard wouldn't stand up against a military vessel of roughly the same tonnage; there's just that much more to military construction.
Last edited:
Whats to stop them from buying said ships from the neighbor that is a full member. The protectorate system as defined can't build them does not say anything about buying fully built ones then your yard only has to service them.
Iran is not to build nuclear reactors so they go to France and they build them for Iran IN Iran
o:
Iran is not to build nuclear reactors so they go to France and they build them for Iran IN Iran
o:
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
Yes, I've been on the Belfast twice in London and on dozens of other warships along with serving on a number. I look at a ship like that with a different eye. I can tell what the piping and wiring are for. I can 'see' a simplicity that to the untrained eye looks like a maze of wiring and plumbing.
[/quote]Do you tell me that those inspectors will be fooled if you're building a destroyer and label it as a freighter?
I guess I trust a little more than you in control inspections (perhaps I'm too naive or too trusting, but I guess it's not so easy to build/buy a warship)[/QUOTE]
What I would do to build it is start with a modular hull that would allow fitting the systems within what appears as almost a merchant ship. The engines and power plant etc., would be designed the same way; modularly. Once the hull is finished as a "merchant ship" you simply move it to a secondary location, yard, etc. where you fit additional engines, power plant and such then add the armament and other military items as modular packages.
Most modern warships are more or less built this way except for their not being a "merchant" hull. For a starship this is not as much of a problem as there is no real need to have a streamlined hull and such. You would have far more flexibility in design.
The various systems could be added after the hull was finished. I've personally installed miles of cable in ships well after their construction. It isn't that hard to do. The same applies to piping and other systems. If this were pre-considered in the design you have little problem doing it after the basic hull was finished.
The Japanese and US between WW 1 and 2 did this to a number of ships. The US had a whole class of ocean liners the P-4P design that could be turned into carriers in 120 to 180 days (XCV). So, building a merchant that could be turned into a viable warship should be not only possible but relatively easy to do and not readily noticable.
That said, such a conversion would likely be less than ideal compared to a purpose designed and built ship. But, if you had to go this way it could be done.
Last edited:
Did the liner/carrier ever make it past the design stage - air tech and treaty violations negated their need, IIRC (at least for the U.S.).
However, where there is a will there is a way - and there are surely plenty of historical examples where large military buildups and assets remained hidden (and didn't
).
Subterfuge (like building a 'secret' ship that publicly 'blows' up in the 'secret' shipyard - as a cover for obtaining parts removed to an actual secret location) and using an asteroid for resources (lanthanum) would address some of the issues brought up.
Official inspectors may be easily handled - but other parties would require more creative accommodating. Again, counter intelligence, phony civilian contractors (actual military personnel) and other means could be employed to divert suspicion. Hiding massive military projects (Manhattan project) is not unusual, and in full public view is not unheard of (U.S. early space program).
However, where there is a will there is a way - and there are surely plenty of historical examples where large military buildups and assets remained hidden (and didn't
). Subterfuge (like building a 'secret' ship that publicly 'blows' up in the 'secret' shipyard - as a cover for obtaining parts removed to an actual secret location) and using an asteroid for resources (lanthanum) would address some of the issues brought up.
Official inspectors may be easily handled - but other parties would require more creative accommodating. Again, counter intelligence, phony civilian contractors (actual military personnel) and other means could be employed to divert suspicion. Hiding massive military projects (Manhattan project) is not unusual, and in full public view is not unheard of (U.S. early space program).
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
Did the liner/carrier ever make it past the design stage - air tech and treaty violations negated their need, IIRC (at least for the U.S.).
However, where there is a will there is a way - and there are surely plenty of historical examples where large military buildups and assets remained hidden (and didn't
Subterfuge (like building a 'secret' ship that publicly 'blows' up in the 'secret' shipyard - as a cover for obtaining parts removed to an actual secret location) and using an asteroid for resources (lanthanum) would address some of the issues brought up.
Official inspectors may be easily handled - but other parties would require more creative accommodating. Again, counter intelligence, phony civilian contractors (actual military personnel) and other means could be employed to divert suspicion. Hiding massive military projects (Manhattan project) is not unusual, and in full public view is not unheard of (U.S. early space program).
Actually, yes. WPL-10 as part of War Plan Orange included the turbo electric liners California, Pennslyvania, Manhattan, Washington, Malolo, Mariposa Lurline,and Monterrey. Later the President Hoover and President Coolidge were added.
The Japanese built several tenders that were converted to carriers in a similar manner. The US simply decided against doing the conversions choosing new construction instead.
I have my doubts about acheving to construct a trully worth military ship this way. And if you intend to have it with any spinal weapon, I cast then serious dubts about its feasibility to build it with modular sections as a merchant.
Probably to lesser exent, same can be said of armor, bays, and other large offensive and defensive elements.
Nor the Japanese neither the US (or any other country tha tried it) had any superior supervision as Jawillroy hints in the Imperium it plays and where this shipyard is tried to hide.
They could build those ships that could be converted without notice nor interference, but if the INI is watching you and looking just for that, I guess it would be quite more dificult to do it.
Anyway, I guess you know better than myself in ship building, so my opinions are only speculations from one who still trusts the police and Intelligence agencies know their job (I guess if they didn't, the Imperium will not be hold as it is described by Jawillroy).
Probably in a less thightly controlled TU it would be easier (but probably unnecessary).
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
You'd end up with an inferior product doing it as described. The carriers built this way all proved less than desirable products in use.
But, if you were having to hide your activities it should be possible to build a ship within Traveller that could be converted after construction to a warship. But, as I said, it would be inferior to a purpose built vessel in the end.
Maybe if I have a bit of time I'll fiddle with HG and MT shipbuilding rules and see if I can come up with something that would fit this model. That would likely satisfy the game requirement in any case.
But, if you were having to hide your activities it should be possible to build a ship within Traveller that could be converted after construction to a warship. But, as I said, it would be inferior to a purpose built vessel in the end.
Maybe if I have a bit of time I'll fiddle with HG and MT shipbuilding rules and see if I can come up with something that would fit this model. That would likely satisfy the game requirement in any case.
