Gents,
A very interesting thread this. If I may inject my 0.02 CrImps via the following comments; 'no nanos', 'modular rules', 'standard components', and 'varying TLs, varying techniques'. Oh, and a very healthy dose of IMTU!
No Nanos - I know this proposed technology has been the darling of sci-fi ever since Drexler's 'Engines of Creation' rediscovered Feynman's lecture from the early 60's, but it isn't going to work. More accurately, it isn't going to work in the manner it's most ardent boosters and other wishful thinkers believe it will. This isn't the place for a complete re-examination of the Nano Prophets' various claims, but the problems boil down to 'fat fingers' and the obscenely high numbers involved.
For the first; how do you insert an atom in an atom-sized 'hole' using atom-sized fingers? For the second; make up an absurdly high molecular construction rate (how many atoms moved per second) for your single nano, then figure out how long it would take X number of nanos to 'build' ONE kg of steel. (Here's a hint, start with a construction rate in the dozens PER second, uses millions or trillions of nanos, and only 'build' a mole of steel. You'll still be disappointed by the construction time.) If you want to investigate the problem further, Scientific American had an issue devoted to the problems in 2002. The same issue also explored how nanotechnology will most likely be used.
Thus, IMHO & IMTU, no widescale nano production or construction. Nanos are used for certain small scale fabrication tasks; like whatever is used as computer chips or 'welding' seams, but no 'growing' a starship from a heap of raw materials, a computer program, and a barrel of nanos. Nanotech is much like the previously much ballyhooed bioengineering; it is both much harder and less powerful than first envisioned.
Modular Rules - Nearly every non-recreational sea vessel nowadays is constructed in a modular fashion, and the inlcudes the USN's Nimitz-class carriers and the bulk oil, super tankers coming from the Hyundai yards. Also, a large portion of aviation construction; be it Beoing or Airbus, is modular in nature.
Modular construction allows you to build and *test* various components and assemblies in a controlled manner. Building by modules lets you assign more workers to a given hull, more than can fit in the hull normally. It also lets you disperse your production in time and space. A Real World example of all this will help.
I worked in the Nuclear Test Office at Electric Boat's Groton facility building 688 and Trident-class submarines. While EB built those submarines, they did not manufacture most of the components used. The main engine turbine and reduction gears were built elsewhere by a firm and a workforce experienced in that ver specific andvery demanding work. Those components were also tested, inspected, and adjusted prior to their shipment to Groton. (They were tested and inspected after arrival and installation too, but most of the testing occurred where they were manufactured.) Many other components were handled in the same manner. Even the hull segments and machinery flats were built, tested, and inspected in EB's Quonset, RI facility and barged down to Groton.
As one poster already mentioned, a sub is assembled in hull section slices; much like putting a salami back together. The various hull sections are lifted vertically onto railroad bogies and pushed around in the Groton "boat barn" on tracks that crosshatch every bit of the floor. Slices are placed in a row, welded together, and various equipment, machinery, piping runs, and flats are then inserted as required. The hull sections making up the reactor compartment are brought together and the reactor suite slipped in from fore and aft. The same is done with the engine room and, when those two sections are as complete as they can be, the two larger hull sections are welded together.
The same method is used for the entire submarine; everything that can be is installed prior to the hull being completed. Bringing tools, materials, and workmen through the hatches is far too constricting. You can only assign so many workers inside a sub's hull, after a certain point they merely get in each others' way.
If it is all possible, modular construction is the way to go. Most of a yard's workforce can perform their jobs in shirtsleeve atmospheres at standard gravity just a short commute from their homes. All most of the *work* is scattered about, you can easily ship the results of that work to where it is ultimately needed; the orbital construction platform where the vessel comes together.
Standard Components - A Beowulf is a Beowulf is a Beowulf. That 15-O-9J Left-Handed Frommitz Board needs to fit in a Beowulf whether it be in the Marches, on the Rim, or out in Gateway. There are Imperial Standard Designs; capitals intended, and the variosu classic PC craft are the best example of this.
This is not to say that *every* starship is standard or that every example of a 'classic' ship has remained standard (PCs love to customize), but it does mean that there are standard ships. Even more importantly, it means that there is standard equipment. You may be flying a custom free trader but her avionics suite is straight out of a Type-R; if your nav radar craps out, find Type-R parts, and you're back in business.
Standard components will also let you 'spread the wealth' in terms of letting contracts to various suppliers on various worlds. Standard components also help your engineers and technicians get on with the job instead of having to re-learn each system every time they work on a new ship.
Again, this doesn't mean that *every* piece of equipment aboard *every* standard vessel is a standard one. It just means that most are. If the plot or adventure require that the port fuel purifier isn't one that an engineer would be normally familiar with, then the port fuel purifier isn't one that an engineer would be normally familiar with!
Varying TLs, varying techniques - A class A port can build a starship whether the local TL is 9 or 15. Sure, most of the components may be kits or modules shipped from manufacturers in other systems, but the locals will still be putting it all together. Thanks to the disparity between worlds, the *results* of assembly between World A and World Z will be the same, but the *techniques* used in that assembly will different. A TL15 world may employ a nano created seam between a given piece of equipment and its mounting bracket where a TL9 world laid a weld bead. Different ways of attaching the bracket that ultimately do the same thing. As long as you meet the Imperial standards for mounting that bracket; strength, weight, vibration resistence, etc., it doesn't matter *how* you do it.
IMTU, larger vessel are built in orbit (or vacumn in the case of planetoid belts and airless worlds). Most PC-sized 'classic' designs; Suleiman, Marava, fat trader, etc., are built 'dirtside' as their size doesn't make lifting components piecemeal into orbit worthwhile. Nearly all ships are modular in nature. Some; the 'classics', are completely modular using standard sections manufactured elsewhere and simply assembled at the 'slip'. Most other ships use standard components to some extent. Only a very few; yachts are one example, are completely custom in nature.
While they do manufacture some of the components used in ship construction, shipyards can be viewed primarily as 'assembly' and 'testing' areas. Machinery, equipment, and materials from a host of subcontractors and from within the yards are marshalled, inspected, assembled, and tested as they come together in a huge, awe inspiring, 3-D jigsaw puzzle. The only real difference between military and civilian designs lay in what modular components are assembled, where those components come from, and what standards they were built to. Aside from the increased quality control and a *very* persnickety customer, an IN Plankwell-class dreadnought is built pretty much the same way as an Arekut Mammoth-class transport.
Hope all this blather helps. Remember, it's *your* game, it's *your* campaign. If Suleiman in *your* TU are built by nanos from a pile of scrap iron, that is both excellent and 'correct' because it fits *your* TU. If it means fun for you and your gaming group, DO IT, and don't worry about how some grumpy, old, grey-headed fat man does it!
Sincerely,
Larsen