Is 9G available in the OTU now?

[Nerhesi]

Just a curious question as to your thoughts... if my understanding of T5 tables is correct, it would seem that 7,8 and 9G M-drives are now valid - and they are valid within the OTU?

I ask because apart from some smallcraft if I'm not mistaken, I haven't seen anything above 6G in historical canon designs for OTU.

 

[whulorigan]

Just a curious question as to your thoughts... if my understanding of T5 tables is correct, it would seem that 7,8 and 9G M-drives are now valid - and they are valid within the OTU?

I ask because apart from some smallcraft if I'm not mistaken, I haven't seen anything above 6G in historical canon designs for OTU.

CORRECT. M-Drives, G-Drives, etc, are now capable of being rated 1-9. Prior to T5, ratings were always 1-6, so no historical (read = "prior CT/MT ruleset") designs have M-Drives rated higher than 6.

Technically, MgT has allowed Drive ratings higher than 6 for certain small craft as well.

 

[mike wightman]

TNE and T4 could break the 6g barrier too.

It does raise yet more questions about retconning earlier eras...

I hate 'you wake up in the shower' recons.

I should also mention that the new MgT HG makes 9g standard for capital ships, with the possibility of using reaction drives to go even faster.

So yes, Kansas has changed, but I'll be damned if I'm changing my proto-Traveller setting to adopt it.

 

[aramis]

Just a curious question as to your thoughts... if my understanding of T5 tables is correct, it would seem that 7,8 and 9G M-drives are now valid - and they are valid within the OTU?

I ask because apart from some smallcraft if I'm not mistaken, I haven't seen anything above 6G in historical canon designs for OTU.

They've been valid since TNE's FF&S...

 

[David Johansen]

I've always liked the idea that the inertial damper capacity is the real barrier. Sure you can put a bigger drive and a bigger reactor but the pilot will pass out or die.

 

[aramis]

I've always liked the idea that the inertial damper capacity is the real barrier. Sure you can put a bigger drive and a bigger reactor but the pilot will pass out or die.

That's the TNE solution...

Note that NASA tested for endurance in various G's.

3 G's experienced flat, Front=up, endurance is almost unlimited. Head=up, hours to days. (1 G foot=up is problematic in a couple hours or less)

In both cases (Chest=up and head=up), the real limit is how long before one ...
(spoilers are for frank but gross discussion.)

Spoiler:

needs to defecate, not so much for the operation of the gut, but for the tolerance of skin to contact with fecal matter.

Diaper rash sets in within a handful of hours. And it gets painful in another hour or two of contact.

Plus, there's the issue of maintaining internal gravity...

If the AG/IC system can generate 2 G's and thrust is...

• parallel to decks, you can only safely use IC-1 G's... as you use 1G to counter the felt acceleration, and 1G for internal gravity.
• perpendicular to decks, you can go to IC+1 or more.. Because you just have to compensate for the maneuvers; the felt artificial gravity is from the main thrust that isn't compensated.

In fact, for battle, if everyone straps in, IC+3 is doable in either mode... and can be done for hours. Some prep may be useful...

Spoiler:

in the hour or so between detection and engagement, everyone goes and empties their bowels.
Everyone puts in their foley catheters.
Everyone puts on an adult diaper, just in case...

Then, there's the possibility of Neutral Buoyancy tanks. Again, personal hygiene limits endurance.

Mote in God's Eye discusses some of this; that setting has 3-6 G torch drives, but no AG/IC...

 

[Selandia]

The possibilitiy to generate the math for speed 9G does not mean the ship goes to 9g. It may simply reflect that a LASH - M1 tug having dumped its lighters have the math for a 9g once light, whilet is not design to achive 9g considering other factors (dampener, structure, crew species, wear, local parts,...)

Still the rules allow for it, so how do we live with it?f using old material in a T5 universe, I simply consider 6g as a "standard" max in a multi species universe (the NASA could not find Aslan or Varg for their test ), with 7g+ part and maintenance been specialized military logistic unavaillible outside a very limited number of shipyards, and therefore unsuitable for detatched or distant station (frontier). Where could you repair the engine of a LosAngeles class submarine? No need for new table on frontier encounter to include 8g "interceptors" (but do them if that gives you fun)

Note for ref that this give an edge to a minor specie's raiders with 7g+ ships, or allow introduction of "robot ship" if your players were given as rational the physical limitation of the crew.

Have fun

Selandia

 

[mike wightman]

The new rules (T5 and MgT HG2e) mean that 9g has always been attainable within the OTU of the classic era - its a retcon.
People are already redesigning warships for MgT HG2e with 9g performance that gives them a significant edge over legacy designs.

If you ignore the new rules and stick with the old paradigm then welcome to proto-Traveller - where ships are still limited to 1-6g and jump can't go higher than 6.

It's yet another setting split.

 

[whartung]

The new rules (T5 and MgT HG2e) mean that 9g has always been attainable within the OTU of the classic era - its a retcon.
People are already redesigning warships for MgT HG2e with 9g performance that gives them a significant edge over legacy designs.

Yes, it's a retcon, but one that really has pretty much zero impact on, well, anything - at least historically.

All it does is obsolete the old designs. Not "obsolete" because they're not "fast enough", but "obsolete" because it's hard to fathom they were designed that way in the first place.

Not being familiar with the downsides of a 9G drive and sufficient power plant over a 6G, it's hard to imagine that a combat vessel would not have as powerful a drive as they could manage. Especially if they're using the same "Agility" metric that HG uses. I know I'd certainly give up a turret or two for an extra -3 DM from Agility if it comes down to it.

That said, the individual performance of a craft likely had little impact on the meta military and political happenings of the Imperium. The Frontier Wars would have ended the same way, etc. So, from a canonical POV, the faster drives have little impact.

4G, 6G, or 9G, they're still going to outrun your little freighter.

 

[Selandia]

Yes, it's a retcon, but one that really has pretty much zero impact on, well, anything - at least historically.

All it does is obsolete the old designs. Not "obsolete" because they're not "fast enough", but "obsolete" because it's hard to fathom they were designed that way in the first place.

....

That said, the individual performance of a craft likely had little impact on the meta military and political happenings of the Imperium. The Frontier Wars would have ended the same way, etc. So, from a canonical POV, the faster drives have little impact.

4G, 6G, or 9G, they're still going to outrun your little freighter.

For merchant, only Super Xpress Courrier carrying messengers (for the timing of some info makes even minutes priceless) would justify the economic of 9 g. If it is just data, it does have light speed to jump point anyway. Since every BIG Power Brooker would have them, nothing change to the Meta game


For battle tenders, they are still limited to 1G or 3G if using the cluster or braced config.

Have fun

Selandia