T5 Ship Turrets

[SpaceBadger]

The illustrations at the top of page 389 in T5 Core Rules show three different turret mounts, one of which includes space for a gunner seated inside the turret, the other two having no such space.

I have found nothing in any of the Mount descriptions indicating if/when the gunner is required to be in the turret, as opposed to using a Control Console located elsewhere in the ship (p.325).

Is there a rule somewhere in T5 specifying the advantages/disadvantages/necessities of having a gunner seated in the turret as opposed to operating the weapon by remote Control Console, or is it simply a matter of taste/style/preference?

 

[whulorigan]

The illustrations at the top of page 389 in T5 Core Rules show three different turret mounts, one of which includes space for a gunner seated inside the turret, the other two having no such space.

I have found nothing in any of the Mount descriptions indicating if/when the gunner is required to be in the turret, as opposed to using a Control Console located elsewhere in the ship (p.325).

Is there a rule somewhere in T5 specifying the advantages/disadvantages/necessities of having a gunner seated in the turret as opposed to operating the weapon by remote Control Console, or is it simply a matter of taste/style/preference?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. It is a matter of design philosophy. I do not think there are any pros/cons one way or the other from a rules standpoint.

 

[andycowley]

Remember that T5 space combat use 'hit locations' for ship to ship combat ..... so its a design philosophy ... where do you put your gunners? At a CC on the bridge or some other location? Or actually in the turret itself like the Millennium Falcon?...

...One lucky hit on the bridge 'could' wipe out your ability to Attack & Defend

 

[SpaceBadger]

OK, those were my impressions as well. I was just thinking back to long-standing debates as to whether CT required a gunner to be physically in the turret to add skill To Hit; I don't see anything like that in T5, but given the organization of the book wanted to make sure I had not missed it.

 

[whulorigan]

Remember that T5 space combat use 'hit locations' for ship to ship combat ..... so its a design philosophy ... where do you put your gunners? At a CC on the bridge or some other location? Or actually in the turret itself like the Millennium Falcon?...

...One lucky hit on the bridge 'could' wipe out your ability to Attack & Defend

That's a very good point.

Actually, using the Computer/Console rules of T5, you could design the turret so that it can be fired locally by an internally seated gunner at need, but still have a Control Console elsewhere in the ship as the "standard" manning position.

 

[Reban]

That's a very good point.

Actually, using the Computer/Console rules of T5, you could design the turret so that it can be fired locally by an internally seated gunner at need, but still have a Control Console elsewhere in the ship as the "standard" manning position.

This is a very good point. I assume all mounts include space for a gunner but aren't either "manned" or "unmanned" but rather depend on crewing and design choices to decide.

A quick review of how Control Panels and Console work might be a good idea SpaceBadger.

Also there is a reference to allocating a squad of ship's troops to a single mount. I think this was meant to represent members of the squad manning the mount in watches when required.

 

[dalthor]

I like the option to be able to have a gunner in turret or fire via a remote console.

This is especially nice when you have a deployable turret - it can maneuver independently of the ship, even if that mobility is limited. Of course, a manned deployable turret could mean losing (or leaving) one of your crew behind...

Note that deployables carry life support and power for about 2 weeks, and that is NOT normally included in the standard shipboard life support. They can be used as lifepods, having limited g-drives.

See more in the BBB on page 387.

 

[Dagrill]

Hi,

What is the thinking behind Quad turrets?

Regards

David

 

[andycowley]

hmmm ... it has FOUR of something rather than one, two or three... LOL

sorry ... couldn't resist the humor

Seriously, I'm not sure where these came from (are they a new invention for T5?) but a T4 certainly bridges the gap between T3 (3D hits) and a Single Barbette (5D hits) ... maybe its nothing more than that?

 

[whulorigan]

Hi,

What is the thinking behind Quad turrets?

Regards

David

I think you will need to be a little more specific as to what it is you want to know.

Earlier iterations of Traveller had single, double and triple weapon-mount configurations for turrets. T5 adds a "Quad" (4 weapon-mount) turret to the mix. All four of these turret configurations are 1.0 dton, and are smaller than barbettes, which come in single and double weapon-mount configurations.

But I do not think that is what you are asking about . . . ?

 

[andycowley]

Reban wrote;

I assume all mounts include space for a gunner but aren't either "manned" or "unmanned" but rather depend on crewing and design choices to decide.

A quick review of how Control Panels and Console work might be a good idea SpaceBadger.

The way I read the rules on ship construction ... A Turret (or any weapon mount for that matter) comes with a Control Panel (CP) ... The mount CP is usually connect to a Control Console (CC) ... Control Consoles allow the Operator to apply their Characteristic + Skill (C+S) to the mount (weapon) use task .... IF however an attempt is made to operate the mount directly with its CP the task becomes 3 levels harder (see page 516 bottom right)... thus if no CC is installed with the mount the gunner must operate the mount with the CP at +3 levels of difficulty (note; if they have a controller handy to plug in or connect wirelessly its only +2 levels of difficulty or a portable computer for +1 difficulty... see page 335 at the bottom) ...

So if I'm doing ship design AND I want gunners to be able to effectively operate mounts directly from within them then I must install a CC alongside the mount (which is 0.5dT for a 'cramped' CC)

<phew> ... complex enough?

 

[Dagrill]

I think you will need to be a little more specific as to what it is you want to know.

Earlier iterations of Traveller had single, double and triple weapon-mount configurations for turrets. T5 adds a "Quad" (4 weapon-mount) turret to the mix. All four of these turret configurations are 1.0 dton, and are smaller than barbettes, which come in single and double weapon-mount configurations.

But I do not think that is what you are asking about . . . ?

At a stroke all previous Traveller ship designs are rendered obsolete. Why?

Where has the extra space come from?

Does the gunner still sit in the turret? (There isn't room with roomy controls...)

Why is hybrid limited to S-L-M (given room for an extra weapon)?

Whilst on the subject, why aren't weapon sizes included, for stage effects?

Kind Regards

David

 

[nats]

At a stroke all previous Traveller ship designs are rendered obsolete. Why?

Well I suppose its based on the fact that some WW2 planes and ships used to have quadruple turrets so as a design its probably more sensible than triple turrets.

Although surely in WW2 they made getting a hit more likely (more bullets in the air). But in space a hit is just as likely with only one weapon because movement and hit likelihood is probably more determinable using computer aided firing. So in space surely it makes more sense to have one large powerful weapon in several turrets spread around the ship than four small ones that can more easily be blocked/damaged enmass?

 

[pendragonman]

At a stroke all previous Traveller ship designs are rendered obsolete. Why?

Where has the extra space come from?

Does the gunner still sit in the turret? (There isn't room with roomy controls...)

Why is hybrid limited to S-L-M (given room for an extra weapon)?

David

If you are using ships designed under the other rulesets then yes, they are obsolete. However, Rob and several others have been redesigning the previously canonical designs to T-5 rules. So no, they are not suddenly obsolete.

It is not "extra space" in the way you are thinking. A single turret has always been smaller than a double which is smaller that a trip. a quad fits in the same socket as the other three turret types.

The gunner, at your discretion, can sit in the turret if you wish, there is room. If you prefer your turrets operated remotely then you can do that as well.

A standard hybrid turret is a triple turret. To stay a true hybrid it would need to stay a trip turret as adding a second weapon of any of the three types makes it a double turret of that weapon and therefore no longer a proper hybrid even if you used a quad to hold all of them.

That said, I have not seen a turret that has a datacaster in with any other weapons yet. That may make for a quad hybrid if a datacaster is allowed in a mixed turret.

 

[Dagrill]

If you are using ships designed under the other rulesets then yes, they are obsolete. However, Rob and several others have been redesigning the previously canonical designs to T-5 rules. So no, they are not suddenly obsolete.

It is not "extra space" in the way you are thinking. A single turret has always been smaller than a double which is smaller that a trip. a quad fits in the same socket as the other three turret types.

The gunner, at your discretion, can sit in the turret if you wish, there is room. If you prefer your turrets operated remotely then you can do that as well.


That said, I have not seen a turret that has a datacaster in with any other weapons yet. That may make for a quad hybrid if a datacaster is allowed in a mixed turret.

Thanks I was going with as they take up 1 ton of ship space, they are all the same size, I wasn't thinking of the part outside the ship.

I am concerned that CT designs are looking increasingly poor (without revamping)

Regards

David

 

[pendragonman]

Thanks I was going with as they take up 1 ton of ship space, they are all the same size, I wasn't thinking of the part outside the ship.

I am concerned that CT designs are looking increasingly poor (without revamping)

Regards

David

Those CT designs are exactly what Rob has been working on to redo under T-5.

He has them worked up somewhere...

 

[robject]

I am concerned that CT designs are looking increasingly poor (without revamping)

Hi David,

Allowing Book 2 ship designs to have value within Traveller5 is an interest of mine.

Before I go into my list, know that I have not used the quad turret when designing ships for ACS, whether ported from other versions of Traveller, or created from scratch. I feel resistant to using it.

Granted, Book 2 ships are less defined. But there are many default assumptions that could, or perhaps ought, to be made when using them in a Traveller5 context:

1. The bridge is spacious. Book 2 starships have 20 ton bridges; for small starships, this is very generous. In most cases this means the "spacious" rule applies for ships generated with Book 2 -- they get a +2 to operational tasks.

2. Assume landing legs, lifters, and flotation hulls. These are add-ons in Traveller5 ACS, but in Book 2 I think it's reasonable and generous to assume these features.

3. Sensor Packages. The paragraph on default sensors certainly applies to all Book 2 ships; however, I believe TL-specific sensor packages are on exploratory and martial Book 2 ship designs. That means the Book 2 types C, E, K, L, P, S, and T, at least.

4. Some Book 2 turrets have more variety. These are:
Double Turret mixed (SK, SL, BK, BL, SB, KL, SM, etc).
Triple Turret mixed, except for L-M-S.
These are, essentially, "Class Z" turrets, with the above letter codes to explain their layout. They have the default range given for each installed weapon (R=7 or S=7, depending on the gun).
Note also that Book 2 weapons take the TL of the ship, just as in ACS. So a Beam Laser in Book 2 becomes a Beam Laser in ACS.

I suggest using the "Z" reserved weapon code, plus the individual guns in parentheses, to denote Book 2-style weapon emplacements. Examples:

Vd T2 L-12      ; standard, VDistant dual beam laser
Vd T2 Z(LL)-12  ; same thing.  Use the above notation instead!
   T2 Z(LM)-12  ; one beam, one missile (ranges differ)
Vd T2 Z(SK)-12  ; one sand, one pulse laser
Vd T2 Z(LS)-12  ; one beam, one sand
   T2 Z(SM)-12  ; one sand, one missile launcher (ranges differ)

In the special case of a Book 2 mixed-turret, each turret behaves as if it were multiple turrets -- except when that turret is hit, of course.


That's off the top of my head.


I believe that Book 2 ships are more expensive than ACS, due mainly to the drive prices being higher, but I could be wrong.

 

[Reban]

It is not "extra space" in the way you are thinking. A single turret has always been smaller than a double which is smaller that a trip. a quad fits in the same socket as the other three turret types.

Thanks I was going with as they take up 1 ton of ship space, they are all the same size, I wasn't thinking of the part outside the ship.

Uhhhh.....

I'm not sure if I like this line of reasoning. The idea that single, double, triple and quad are all 1ton of hull space but mushroom into something bigger outside the hull. So they're not really 1ton at all?

Okay first I acknowledge that fitting four weapons into the same space as one weapon is problematic but lets skip that for a moment.

Given the very detailed rules for creating jump bubbles and fields anything that projects beyond the hull over and above the volume designed for is likely to interfere with the vessel's ability to jump. Therefore I'm not buying the idea that the 1ton turret has extra volume outside the hull to contain extra weapons.

The real problem here is one of language. We use the word turret for which our real world reference is the turret on a tank or the gun turrets on a warship.

TNE laser turrets looked very different; an armored cover for a mirror and emitter that were deployed when the turret was in use. Theres a hint of something similar in T5 with the Extendable option that adds 2tons and moves the Hit Location of the turret when in use.

I've bent my brain around what Traveller meant by "turret" and "barbette" and I've come to the conclusion that rather than an armored bump on the hull that isn't counted in the normal tonnage, turrets and barbettes are housings of limited traverse that contain the weapon emitter (or muzzle) and the associated gear such as the gunners position.

Practically what this looks like in my head is the ball turret on the underside of a B-17 or the airborne laser on the nose of the Boeing YAL-1. Turrets don't have to project far beyond the hull unless they need an unobstructed hemispherical field of fire.

Anyway thats just how I justify the oddness that is a "turret" in all versions of Traveller to myself.

Lets look at turrets specifically in T5.

First look closely at the table on p.342. The type of turret with Mod 0 is a triple turret. Now I'd submit that this means triple turrets are the baseline or standard form of turret. So that means theres plenty of room in 1ton of volume for three weapons and a gunner's position plus the power and life support that T5 tells us are in there.

The Triple Turret is the baseline or reference case

When we take out one or two weapons we get the double or single turrets respectively. For peace of mind lets just assume the turret gets less cluttered or claustrophobic for the gunner but no practically useful space is freed up i.e. you can't fit an extra sophont or some major piece of equipment in.

T5 says allocate a Control Panel for each weapon. Now its arguable that in a quad turret that should mean 4 Control Panels but I'd prefer to treat all four weapons in a quad turret as one "weapons system" because thats the way they'll be treated when resolving combat, so lets say its one Control Panel per turret/barbette/bay/main. The Control Panel will be located on the mount. T5 says there is room and life support for a gunner (this could be as little as 100kL out of the 1ton turret).

Now here's the difficult bit. Control Panels are direct interfaces and so cause the difficulty of a Task to be Impossible. Naturally this would make a designer want to include a Console for the gunner to use. Consoles take up from 0.5 to 2 tons so its impracticable to put the Console in the turret. You have two options, locate the console adjacent to the turret or in a central "Gunnery" or CIC location.

But this assumes that when a gunner fires a weapon he or she is relying on the Control Panel or Console. The Space Weapons Task detailed on p.387 does refer to any type of computer. Difficulty is based on range to target so the fact that the control panel in the turret makes a Task Impossible isn't really relevant for firing the weapon. For other tasks such as malfunctions and maintenance yes use the Control Panel. If your Gunner is using a Console it may be useful to use it's C+S for the Space Weapons Task but otherwise its not a major influence. What I'm really saying here is treat the Space Weapons Task as being independent of the computer interface.

Anyway thats my view. Your thoughts (and pointing out the gaping holes through which my breathing gasses are venting) will be appreciated.

 

[robject]

Okay first I acknowledge that fitting four weapons into the same space as one weapon is problematic but lets skip that for a moment.

Does it help to think in terms of the emplacement, rather than the weapon? For in all cases except the hybrid, there may only be one actual weapon "element" in the turret, and the emplacement itself contains the stuff required to make it more effective. Just a thought that occurred to me over time grokking the chapter.

Therefore I'm not buying the idea that the 1ton turret has extra volume outside the hull to contain extra weapons.

Agreed. Assume a one ton turret takes up one ton of volume, regardless of how that volume is displayed or managed.

I've bent my brain around what Traveller meant by "turret" and "barbette" and I've come to the conclusion that rather than an armored bump on the hull that isn't counted in the normal tonnage, turrets and barbettes are housings of limited traverse that contain the weapon emitter (or muzzle) and the associated gear such as the gunners position.

Reasonable.

First look closely at the table on p.342. The type of turret with Mod 0 is a triple turret. Now I'd submit that this means triple turrets are the baseline or standard form of turret. So that means theres plenty of room in 1ton of volume for three weapons and a gunner's position plus the power and life support that T5 tells us are in there.

Reasonable.

When we take out one or two weapons we get the double or single turrets respectively. For peace of mind lets just assume the turret gets less cluttered or claustrophobic for the gunner but no practically useful space is freed up i.e. you can't fit an extra sophont or some major piece of equipment in.

Reasonable.

T5 says allocate a Control Panel for each weapon. Now its arguable that in a quad turret that should mean 4 Control Panels but I'd prefer to treat all four weapons in a quad turret as one "weapons system" because thats the way they'll be treated when resolving combat, so lets say its one Control Panel per turret/barbette/bay/main.

That's correct. The emplacement is the "mechanism".

Now here's the difficult bit. Control Panels are direct interfaces and so cause the difficulty of a Task to be Impossible. Naturally this would make a designer want to include a Console for the gunner to use. Consoles take up from 0.5 to 2 tons so its impracticable to put the Console in the turret. You have two options, locate the console adjacent to the turret or in a central "Gunnery" or CIC location.

You might have found a special case, there, but I think you're essentially correct. I suppose that a cramped console might be installable in a turret, perhaps.

But this assumes that when a gunner fires a weapon he or she is relying on the Control Panel or Console. The Space Weapons Task detailed on p.387 does refer to any type of computer. Difficulty is based on range to target so the fact that the control panel in the turret makes a Task Impossible isn't really relevant for firing the weapon.

That's an interesting point, and might be errata-able, or at least in need of clarity.

 

[andycowley]

Quote:
But this assumes that when a gunner fires a weapon he or she is relying on the Control Panel or Console. The Space Weapons Task detailed on p.387 does refer to any type of computer. Difficulty is based on range to target so the fact that the control panel in the turret makes a Task Impossible isn't really relevant for firing the weapon.

That's an interesting point, and might be errata-able, or at least in need of clarity.

Clarification would be good ... Personally if my Players were operating a ship where the ship designer had neglected to install ancillary CCs in or adjacent to each Turret AND the main (bridge or CIC) gunnery console(s) got wiped out ... The players could still fire the turret weapon from within the turret using its CP @ +3D difficulty or (more likely) @ +1D difficulty using their personal Comp. patched into the Turret CP ...