Why wouldanyone want a Type-Y?

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Right...

All well and good as you see it, but honestly esampson, what does this have to do with whether one wants or uses the Type-Y? Remember, it's not the crate, but the man in the crate.

 

[esampson]

All well and good as you see it, but honestly esampson, what does this have to do with whether one wants or uses the Type-Y? Remember, it's not the crate, but the man in the crate.

No, it's both. That's why I said that the type Y is a tool. It opens (or keeps open) certain doors that might be closed if you show up in a converted merchant ship.

I'm not saying that if you show up in a type Y that the local nobles will immediately love you, but the majority of the time it is probably more prudent to show up in the type Y than it is to show up in a converted cargo vessel. Assuming you don't need to care about nobles who would dun you for doing so is extremely dangerous. Maybe if you were in a very strong position you could get away with something like that (often the line between such conditions as being straight-spoken or being rude have to do with the size of your pocketbook) but it doesn't seem likely that PC nobles would be in such a position.

 

[SanDragon]

Who would really want a Type Y?

The thing looks like someone popped the head off a beetle and some guts slid out with it.

Ugly, ugly, ugly!

The statement being, "It's the Imperial standard, and I can't afford something a bit more a thing of beauty."

Hell, the far trader looks better!

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

So you say...

No, it's both. That's why I said that the type Y is a tool. It opens (or keeps open) certain doors that might be closed if you show up in a converted merchant ship.

I'm not saying that if you show up in a type Y that the local nobles will immediately love you, but the majority of the time it is probably more prudent to show up in the type Y than it is to show up in a converted cargo vessel. Assuming you don't need to care about nobles who would dun you for doing so is extremely dangerous. Maybe if you were in a very strong position you could get away with something like that (often the line between such conditions as being straight-spoken or being rude have to do with the size of your pocketbook) but it doesn't seem likely that PC nobles would be in such a position.

No, it is not, see Col. Toon of the NVAF who working in a crappy MiG-15 who killed like a dozen or US planes. So, no crate is entirely secondary at best. But that is besides the point.

Not sure what "dun" is, but I think we are gonna run two different TUs. In yours nobles best not be different and best not buck the trend, whereas in my it is deeds not ships that determine whether you have power or not.

Actually in my TU I have a Baronet, a Baron, a Marquis and two Counts floating as PC nobles so actually only two of them are at the level where a Type-Y is their standard.

At this point I think we shall have to agree to disagree.

 

[esampson]

No, it is not, see Col. Toon of the NVAF who working in a crappy MiG-15 who killed like a dozen or US planes. So, no crate is entirely secondary at best. But that is besides the point.

Not sure what "dun" is, but I think we are gonna run two different TUs. In yours nobles best not be different and best not buck the trend, whereas in my it is deeds not ships that determine whether you have power or not.

Actually in my TU I have a Baronet, a Baron, a Marquis and two Counts floating as PC nobles so actually only two of them are at the level where a Type-Y is their standard.

At this point I think we shall have to agree to disagree.

For those who are unfamiliar with the story I believe that you are referring to Colonel Tomb (also known as Colonel Toon). Actually, ignoring for a moment the argument as to whether or not he existed I think he proves my point rather than refutes it.

To be clear I am not saying that a noble cannot be successful sailing around in a converted cargo vessel. I am saying that by doing so they will probably make it harder for them to interact with other nobles (and then we digressed a bit about the importance of interacting with other nobles).

Yes, Colonel Tomb is credited with shooting down 13 American warplanes in his MiG-21. He was then supposedly shot down by an F-4. However, are you actually going to maintain that if he were in a superior aircraft he wouldn't have done any better? If that's really the truth why do we spend any time at all in developing new aircraft? Duke Cunningham should have been able to shoot him down while flying a Fokker triplane if the only thing is the pilot and not the plane. Developing the F-4 would have been a huge waste of money (not to mention the development of all our future aircraft).

This isn't meant to say 'you're completely wrong' either. Even if Colonel Tomb didn't exist he was still a composite of pilots flying what are generally recognized as inferior aircraft shooting down superior aircraft.

Yes, the man is part of the equation and I never meant to make it sound like all you had to do was show up in your type Y and the other nobles would fall all over you. What I am saying is that by showing up in a converted cargo vessel you run a real risk of putting yourself at a disadvantage.

And "dun" was the wrong word for me to use. I thought it was a synonym for "disdain" but it has a completely different meaning.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Well that is what I heard.

For those who are unfamiliar with the story I believe that you are referring to Colonel Tomb (also known as Colonel Toon). Actually, ignoring for a moment the argument as to whether or not he existed I think he proves my point rather than refutes it.

To be clear I am not saying that a noble cannot be successful sailing around in a converted cargo vessel. I am saying that by doing so they will probably make it harder for them to interact with other nobles (and then we digressed a bit about the importance of interacting with other nobles).

Yes, Colonel Tomb is credited with shooting down 13 American warplanes in his MiG-21. He was then supposedly shot down by an F-4. However, are you actually going to maintain that if he were in a superior aircraft he wouldn't have done any better? If that's really the truth why do we spend any time at all in developing new aircraft? Duke Cunningham should have been able to shoot him down while flying a Fokker triplane if the only thing is the pilot and not the plane. Developing the F-4 would have been a huge waste of money (not to mention the development of all our future aircraft).

This isn't meant to say 'you're completely wrong' either. Even if Colonel Tomb didn't exist he was still a composite of pilots flying what are generally recognized as inferior aircraft shooting down superior aircraft.

Yes, the man is part of the equation and I never meant to make it sound like all you had to do was show up in your type Y and the other nobles would fall all over you. What I am saying is that by showing up in a converted cargo vessel you run a real risk of putting yourself at a disadvantage.

And "dun" was the wrong word for me to use. I thought it was a synonym for "disdain" but it has a completely different meaning.

First in, last out, no problems, that might have been why I was confused.

Now, I have always heard it as Toon, but I can see Tomb. Either way, I am saying that if it was one dude then had he been in an equivalent aircraft to Cunningham, he would have smoked 4 kill Cunnningham like a like a Philly Blunt. That is what I am saying, any dude with that many kills in such a suck airframe as the MiG-21 compared to the US airframes that he was fighting would have won the battle since he lost mostly due the Rhino being sick house in the power department. Cunninghan and his RIO (sad I forget his name now) won strictly by coming in a technologically superior airframe and armed with a really good short range self-guiding missile, since the semi-guided ones kept missing.

As a straight pilot, the Colonel had it in the bag, sort of like The Red Baron being taken out by his own target fixation and ground cover, but never in the air. Again, the man counts a lot more than ride.

That said showing in a converted liner may offend some, so maybe we need is a better selection of Type-Ys. And let us remember in Traveller that Type is more a class than a size so much like a Merchant can get an upgraded ship, Nobles should get better Yachts with greater rank.

Which is why I shall endeavor to get a good selection together and out some day since I have always leaned that way in my ATU.

Well, I have to hit the rack, work sick early tomorrow.

Well, bedtime.

 

[esampson]

. . .That said showing in a converted liner may offend some, so maybe we need is a better selection of Type-Ys. And let us remember in Traveller that Type is more a class than a size so much like a Merchant can get an upgraded ship, Nobles should get better Yachts with greater rank. . .

I actually have come to think of Type as more like the US tri-service aircraft identification system. This is why the type S changes to a type J when it is used for mining operations (much the same way that UH-60 becomes an HH-60 when it is used by the Coast Guard for search and rescue).

That said, there are a lot of ships that could probably be declared a 'type Y' even though they typically have another classification. The type K Safari is one of the most obvious examples. When it is used in a commercial or semi-commercial capacity (owned by a company and used to ferry around VIPs who aren't paying) it is registered as a type K. When it is owned by a person and not used for such purposes it is (or at least can be) registered as a type Y.

At first glance that might seem to run counter to some of my earlier arguments concerning converted traders, but it really isn't. I was never saying that you couldn't convert a trader into a yacht. I was simply saying that such a ship would not fulfill its function of being a yacht (that being a tool to help facilitate dealing with other nobles or people of influence) very well.

All of which goes to say that yes, I completely think there should be multiple versions of the 'type Y'. I probably wouldn't use a system of 'higher ranks get better yachts' but would probably go for something more like the T5 system where multiple ship awards can be pooled together to buy bigger and better ships.

As a side note, a lot of people were complaining about the range of the default type Y. I was just looking at TravellerMap and realized that with the exception of systems sitting in the Rift the vast, vast majority of planets can be reached in 2 jumps (the particular link were the only systems I could find that were actually cut off, and even they could be reached with 3 jumps, although I am sure there must be others).

 

[esampson]

Intrepid, Yacht
200 ton, TL 15 Civilian Design, 78.13 MCr
5 crew (Command: 1+0, Engineer: 0+1, Stewards: 1+1, Medic: 0+1)
14 High/Mid passengers

__Ton.____MCr.____EP.____
| ___.__ | 20.00 | _.__ | Flattened Sphere, streamlined, fuel scoops
| __3.00 | _0.03 | _.__ | purification plant 
| _20.00 | _1.00 | _.__ | bridge 
| __1.00 | _4.00 | _.__ | computer model 1-bis (allows jump 2) 
| __6.00 | 24.00 | _.__ | drive jump #2 
| __4.00 | _6.00 | _.__ | drive maneouver #1 
| __4.00 | 12.00 | _.__ | power plant #2 
| ___.__ | __.__ | 2.00 | agility #1
| __4.00 | __.__ | _.__ | fuel, PP endurance 4 weeks (8 weeks powered down)
| _40.00 | __.__ | _.__ | fuel, jump range 2 parsecs
| __1.00 | _0.10 | _.__ | hard point x1 with no turret
| _76.00 | _9.50 | _.__ | staterooms x19
| __9.00 | __.__ | _.__ | 9 tons cargo capacity
| _12.00 | _1.50 | _.__ | auditorium x3
| _20.00 | __.__ | _.__ | hanger space for 20 ton Launch 
‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒
| 200.00 | 78.13 | 2.00 EP used, PP generates 4.00 EPs

78.91 MCr (first ship, includes architect fees) built in 48 weeks
62.50 MCr (20% discount in volume, TCS) built in 39 weeks
CT Ship Designer by Matt. Visit https://tca-2014-12.herokuapp.com

One stateroom is a double stateroom for the owner, reducing total staterooms to 18. 12 non-crew staterooms are joined allowing them to be used as up to 6 2 room suites if the adjoining doors are unlocked.

3 auditoria are linked into 2 separate 6 tons rooms for dining and lounging.

 

[GypsyComet]

I actually have come to think of Type as more like the US tri-service aircraft identification system. This is why the type S changes to a type J when it is used for mining operations (much the same way that UH-60 becomes an HH-60 when it is used by the Coast Guard for search and rescue).

The differences between the Type S and Type J are significant, though. The J is not simply an S that has been sold to a Belter. There are considerable fittings differences between the Y and the K as well. The K makes a fine yacht, but is not a Type Y.

The basic "Types" are not the same as the High Guard letter designators. Those are more like the Navy/Coast Guard designator, in that the same ship can change roles and change codes, and multiple designs in various sizes and specific capabilities can have the same code.

The Types are much more prescribed technical specs with specific displacements, tactical and strategic speeds, and payloads.

 

[esampson]

The differences between the Type S and Type J are significant, though.

The differences between the Type S and the Type J in T&G is significant. It is also stated that there is no such thing as a standard 'Type J' and they are all modified to specifications by their new owners, so some Type Js may be very, very close to the Type S (probably those used by prospectors who search for valuable mineral deposits, stake a claim, and then sell those claims to miners/corporations who are more interested in mining than in prospecting).

The J is not simply an S that has been sold to a Belter.

In fact, that probably is the most significant difference. It is no longer considered by the Imperium to be a Type S because it is no longer owned by the IISS (or an associated organization).

There are considerable fittings differences between the Y and the K as well. The K makes a fine yacht, but is not a Type Y.

There are considerable differences in the fittings of a 200 ton Yacht and a 500 ton Yacht, but they are both Type Y (since the type codes don't care about things like tonnage, jump capacity, passenger count, or cargo ability).

The basic "Types" are not the same as the High Guard letter designators. Those are more like the Navy/Coast Guard designator, in that the same ship can change roles and change codes, and multiple designs in various sizes and specific capabilities can have the same code.

Then why do the types correspond so well with the High Guard designators?

The Types are much more prescribed technical specs with specific displacements, tactical and strategic speeds, and payloads.

That does not appear to be the case. For example, Scout/Couriers are Type S. The specific one given in T&G happens to be a Sulieman (and if all Type S were as rigidly defined as you seem to imply then why would there be the Sulieman family of Scout/Couriers?)

 

[CliffBates]

No, it is not, see Col. Toon of the NVAF who working in a crappy MiG-15 who killed like a dozen or US planes. So, no crate is entirely secondary at best. But that is besides the point.

Not sure what "dun" is, but I think we are gonna run two different TUs. In yours nobles best not be different and best not buck the trend, whereas in my it is deeds not ships that determine whether you have power or not.

Actually in my TU I have a Baronet, a Baron, a Marquis and two Counts floating as PC nobles so actually only two of them are at the level where a Type-Y is their standard.

At this point I think we shall have to agree to disagree.

Where they not Phantoms before the NAVY realized a gun is actually needed still and that what made the Col so dangerous was his inferior plane had guns and the Americans only had missiles?

 

[esampson]

I would have to check some history. I'm not sure that is 100% accurate. However, I do know that the main thought of the time was that most combat would be missile based. The NV success in the air led to a re-evaluation of this combat strategy and to the creation of the Top Gun program.

Certainly the A-6 saw a lot of use in Vietnam and had no guns, but it was intended as an air to ground attack vehicle. The F-100, F-105, and F-111 also saw a lot of use in Vietnam and all three of those airplanes had guns.

 

[aramis]

Phantoms saw un-gunned service in 'Nam. It was their early poor performance vs the MiGs that resulted in adding the gun pods to existing fighters, and new construction having a gun built on on the F4E and later.

 

[Condottiere]

You need an automatic cannon if you end up in a furball, which might happen if you run out of missiles and/or one or both fighters can't electronically detect each other.

 

[Patron Zero]

I would tend to think the air combat seen during the Korean Conflict would prove a jet fighter should always pack a gun, air-to-air missiles on their best day can be temperamental.

 

[GypsyComet]

The specific one given in T&G happens to be a Sulieman (and if all Type S were as rigidly defined as you seem to imply then why would there be the Sulieman family of Scout/Couriers?)

Because every generation, era, polity, and culture that builds at the minimum size to support Jump is going to have a different aesthetic approach. The Intrepid (Snapshot & T20), Serpent, Ninz, and Sulieman are all legitimate Type S designs in publication, as is Scarecrow's Florian Scout, the Golfball, and several others about the Web.

The Types were set out in CT Book 2 and Supplement 4, using the text-only description format of Book 2. The realities of subsequent editions do vary, but the essence has always remained.

There is some wiggle room by necessity, such as MegaTraveller's decision to bump several of the standards up by 10% displacement, but I would use the same limits stated for deckplans: 10 to 20%. Beyond that much change it stops being the Type, IMO.

Once you get away from that small group of one-letter Types, you also, again IMO, get away from the Vilani mindset of rigidly conservative development and designation. The two-letter types are *always* better known by a class name or other name, and almost never get referred to as "Type So-and-so". The two-letter type might end up painted on as a tail number and follow a military ship through its career in the paperwork, but to the public and those who supply, fly, and fight her, she's a Tigress, not a Type BB.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Why a Type Y?

There's one scenario for having a yacht that hasn't yet been mentioned -- the one anticipated by a number of White South Africans before the end of Apartheid. That is, having an oceangoing long-range (or in Traveller, interstellar) vessel in which to flee should the ruling elites' political situation became... violently untenable.

Turning it into a luxury status showpiece helps hide the fact that it would only be able to evacuate the noble and his/her close family, leaving the staff and retainers to the kindness of the people over whom they'd until then been ruling.

But until the dark day it's needed for that purpose, it's mostly a white elephant. So one finds things to do with it in the meantime, and promotes those activities as the hallmarks of elite status -- long-distance racing, touring the subsector, hosting VIPs, etc.

The two keys to this interpretation are the 6G small craft and the oversize fuel tanks (2xJ1). The first gets you quickly out to the ship you've conveniently parked in a distant orbit; the second means you can get to a refuge 2 parsecs away without risking interception halfway there during a fuel stop. Yes, larger Jump Drives and better acceleration might help with one's escape -- but how much are you willing to spend on something that might never be really needed? And the extra engines and fuel would cut into the luxury accommodations that distract from the ship's actual purpose.

 

[Jame]

Back in 2003 I got a copy of Traveller 4th and rolled up a Noble.
Now, she got a Type Y as myster out and I asked exactly the same question.
My logic was, why would any noble with access to better than TL 10 gave this low tech piece of slow?
So this spurred me to learn the CTshipbuilding rules so I could design my iwn.
Theres a couple somewhere on this forum, with J2 range and neither ships boat nor ATV, both sacrificed for range, like any proper noble would want.

 

[simonh]

The way I see it, the designs provided with the base game are just reasonably typical examples, but the game comes with a starship design system for a reason.

My favorite computer game is Kerbal Space Program. You get to build and fly rockets. The standard designs provided are all sub-optimal and limited in various ways, but I see that as deliberate. They're there to spur you to improve and develop those designs, come up with variants and then start building better rockets yourself. So the 'flaws' are quite deliberate. I don't think that's actually true of the example ships in Traveller, but I think approaching them from that frame of mind can be very productive.

Simon Hibbs

 

[creativehum]

The way I see it, the designs provided with the base game are just reasonably typical examples, but the game comes with a starship design system for a reason...

The standard designs provided are all sub-optimal and limited in various ways, but I see that as deliberate. They're there to spur you to improve and develop those designs, come up with variants and then start building better rockets yourself. So the 'flaws' are quite deliberate. I don't think that's actually true of the example ships in Traveller, but I think approaching them from that frame of mind can be very productive.

I think this point is interesting in the context of the current thread about Cargo Costs. Specifically in terms of economic efficiency (or lack of efficiency) for ships.

Using this idea as a starting point, it seems to me that as the Players get a better grasp how how the want to use a ship and how ships work, gathering the funds to have a ship specifically built to their needs and desires becomes a concrete goal to reach for.