MGT Only: Barracks: 2 tons or 1?

[Brandon C]

Yes, I know HG lists them as 2 tons per occupant and there is no errata for this, However, every ship in S2: Traders & Gunboats that has barracks uses 1 ton. I'm inclined to use 1 ton, rather than making changes to around a dozen ships (in most cases, the easy solution is just to cut the number of marines in half, but a ship like the the Light Assault Transport would need a complete redesign (a 1,600 ton ship whose main point is to carry 61 marines is rather wasteful and inefficient).

EDIT: I guess I should actually ask a question Do you think it's better to redesign a bunch of ships in Supplement 2, or to just use the incorrect barrack size in my ships (I actually don't have an issue with 1 ton/person).

 

[Timerover51]

Yes, I know HG lists them as 2 tons per occupant and there is no errata for this, However, every ship in S2: Traders & Gunboats that has barracks uses 1 ton. I'm inclined to use 1 ton, rather than making changes to around a dozen ships (in most cases, the easy solution is just to cut the number of marines in half, but a ship like the the Light Assault Transport would need a complete redesign (a 1,600 ton ship whose main point is to carry 61 marines is rather wasteful and inefficient).

EDIT: I guess I should actually ask a question Do you think it's better to redesign a bunch of ships in Supplement 2, or to just use the incorrect barrack size in my ships (I actually don't have an issue with 1 ton/person).

In the Real World, World War 2 planning factors for assault transports or long-distance transportation of troops into a combat situation was 9 gross register tons per man. As a gross register ton is a volume of 100 cubic feet, and a Traveller displacement ton is approximately 500 cubic feet, 2 Traveller dTons would equal 1000 cubic feet, so actually, the 2 ton barracks is more accurate from the Real World standpoint. I would not bother to redesign the ships, but it is up to you in the end.

 

[savage]

EDIT: I guess I should actually ask a question Do you think it's better to redesign a bunch of ships in Supplement 2, or to just use the incorrect barrack size in my ships (I actually don't have an issue with 1 ton/person).

Cut the troops in half. Suggest that ships may operate in groups of 2+.

Work with 2dt. They could be including space for basic deployment equipment, etc.

 

[kilemall]

Barracks would include commons and 'fresher' space like stateroom/liner design does, are you including mess hall/facilities/outfitting rooms in that estimate of barracks space use?

 

[phavoc]

This is where sizing gets a little tricky. You can easily stack 2 people in 1Dton using bunks, with even a bit of storage space for each. But you need additional tonnage for things like freshers, some room to move around, a galley, etc. You don't need ALL that space to be occupied ALL the time. Small ships routinely operate on shifts and people off-shift are never in excess of what the facilities can support.

But 2Dtons for 2 people seems reasonable for troop transports. It's the future, and there's room for everyone! Now if you see a transport with the name Soylent Green on the bow, you better make room for your butt elsewhere!

 

[BlackBat242]

Most WW2-type military transports had a capacity "in wartime conditions" (load, take them somewhere, then unload) about twice their "peacetime" load (load, sail around for 6 months with an occasional short port visit, then go home and unload there).

So I would say the 2dt per troop is the peacetime rating for long-term occupancy, and the 1dt per is the wartime/overload capacity for single voyages.

 

[Condottiere]

Air is free and steel is cheap.

I think the real contention is the size and cost of life support equipment, other than that, you can pack them in like sardines. The Solomani do.

 

[aramis]

Air is free and steel is cheap.

I think the real contention is the size and cost of life support equipment, other than that, you can pack them in like sardines. The Solomani do.

CT doesn't give them any breaks there. Rats & Cats gives them a 10% reduction in stateroom volume (not price, mass, nor power, tho')...

But note also, I've heard 1st hand accounts of marines being loaded at triple rate during WWII from several sailors and marines. Generally, these were replacement troops, not whole units.

 

[kilemall]

Hmmm I may have expressed my point badly.

Do the plans you are referring to have the facilities I am talking about on the plan? If so they should be counted too, not just the open space marked barracks, and the plans may be more in line with the 2 dt standard.

 

[Brandon C]

Barracks would include commons and 'fresher' space like stateroom/liner design does, are you including mess hall/facilities/outfitting rooms in that estimate of barracks space use?

Yes, and t appears the deck plans in Supplement 2 include these things as well and the fresher and common area is included on the space.

It is worth noting that the official deck plans have half the number of beds one would expect in the barracks area, but this fits with the bunk beds phavoc mentioned (I think I've seen photos of warships with triple rather than double bun beds, but there is no need to go that far.). This means that the sleeping and personal storage area per man is half that of a stateroom on a deck plan.

So, I am now quite comfortable to use 1 ton barracks for soldiers, colonists, prisoners and non-paying passengers in general.

 

[flykiller]

You can easily stack 2 people in 1Dton using bunks, with even a bit of storage space for each.

12, actually.

1st hand accounts of marines being loaded at triple rate during WWII

with hot-bunking, sure. that's 36/dton. of course that presumes free fresh air and being able to walk around on deck ....

 

[phavoc]

Well, I dunno about 12... I sure as hell would hate to be part of the miserable dozen there. I toured the battleship Texas and saw some crew berthing areas. If you were enlisted you got stacked five to six high in wire bunks dangling from chain in the ceiling. I'm not sure you'd be able to get 12 people in 1DT - not without rioting... and certainly you shouldn't be able to get troops (who you have to give guns to!) into that.

Two, or even three, per ton, using a stacked rack system works. You should even logistically be able to squeeze in a fourth if you are talking about say a prison transport, or you are simply desperate to get as many bodies as you can reasonably accommodate. But general racking and stacking for troops, crew or passengers should be limited to 2 per 1Dton - PLUS the additional tonnage required for galley, hallways, etc. And that's where things get tricky because the standard 4Dtons gives you as much free space as you want to put that stuff in, but makes the compartments seem oversized.

 

[Brandon C]

Two, or even three, per ton, using a stacked rack system works. You should even logistically be able to squeeze in a fourth if you are talking about say a prison transport, or you are simply desperate to get as many bodies as you can reasonably accommodate. But general racking and stacking for troops, crew or passengers should be limited to 2 per 1Dton - PLUS the additional tonnage required for galley, hallways, etc. And that's where things get tricky because the standard 4Dtons gives you as much free space as you want to put that stuff in, but makes the compartments seem oversized.

Well, I am using 1 ton per man for barracks. There is generally enough room for a common area and fresher in deck plans if you assume double bunk beds in barracks (2 squares for a bunk bed icon), although this can be a problem is very small barracks (6 men or less)

BTW, CT specifically allowed up to a +/- 20% difference in deck plan tonnage and design tonnage, but I can't find any similar rule in MgT, so I don't know if any wiggle room is allowed for..

 

[phavoc]

You can actually squeeze out more efficiency by limiting the number of freshers per person, as well as your galley and other shared common areas. Used to be some ships, like subs, may have had 60-80 seamen sharing the same crapper (a different one for officers sometimes). Older naval vessels were the same - it was just the way it was.

Yea, the =/- 20% rule has been around for a while, and I have always used it. It may, or may not be buried somewhere in MGT, I don't specifically recall. I think it's still safe to use.

 

[Condottiere]

The shower is yours for one combat round, on a six hour rotation schedule. As is the toilet.

 

[atpollard]

Just remember that actions have consequences.
Yes you can pack them in, but expect morale to suffer after several months of confinement ... your troops may arrive at the battle in need of R&R or operating at reduced efficiency.
The WW2 transports did not 'pack them in' at New York and unload them under fire at Normandy.
Traveller often assumes that those Marines will be exiting the ship directly into combat ... a little more TLC might be in order.

 

[pendragonman]

Just remember that actions have consequences.
Yes you can pack them in, but expect morale to suffer after several months of confinement ... your troops may arrive at the battle in need of R&R or operating at reduced efficiency.
The WW2 transports did not 'pack them in' at New York and unload them under fire at Normandy.
Traveller often assumes that those Marines will be exiting the ship directly into combat ... a little more TLC might be in order.

T5 has a "crew comfort" factor that is produced during construction that is a modifier to efficiency.

 

[Brandon C]

I've gone through all my MgT designs and made the volume change. It makes a big difference for troop transports (and, in good news for a small ship universe, allows ~1,800 troops to fit in a 5,000 ton hull, minus vehicles). For most other warships with a small marine contingent (10-20 men), it didn't affect things much (and on some larger warships, I left the marines in staterooms so they could perform damage control).

 

[Timerover51]

Just remember that actions have consequences.
Yes you can pack them in, but expect morale to suffer after several months of confinement ... your troops may arrive at the battle in need of R&R or operating at reduced efficiency.
The WW2 transports did not 'pack them in' at New York and unload them under fire at Normandy.
Traveller often assumes that those Marines will be exiting the ship directly into combat ... a little more TLC might be in order.

Finally, a note of sanity.

To those who wish to pack them in without regard to any comfort.
Ask yourself how functional and ready to fight you would be under those conditions.

 

[flykiller]

"Finally, a note of sanity."