MGT Only: 300-ton stretched refitted Free Trader

[GypsyComet]

Ideally, a Beowulf-format ship of 300 tons that can pay the bills, AND protect itself.

Then the next question is more specific: Mains or Traces?

A ship designed with large mains in mind, such as the Type A, should be fitted out with cost and running efficiency in mind. J1, M1, and just enough powerplant to move, power the guns, and keep life support going. Everything else should be payload.

If the expected environment is thin on mains, then J2 is likely called for, but a pokey trader in the Type A mold doesn't need more thrust unless its owner is a hotshot and takes jobs to match.

 

[Whipsnade]

Ideally, a Beowulf-format ship of 300 tons that can pay the bills, AND protect itself.

I agree and I tried my hand at designing one many years ago. I think I succeeded, but I also think I did so because kept to strict design requirements. (Love the Beowulf-format phrase, but the way. It's a keeper!)

My requirements were simple: A Beowulf-format capable of jump2. That was it. At least the same cargo capacity, at least the same pax capacity, everything at least the same except for being capable of jump2.

In 300 dTons, I came up with a one gee, jump2 ship with three turrets, 107 dTons cargo capacity, 15 staterooms (10 for pax), 12 low berths, scoops & purifier, and an air/raft. (The ship was also a tail landing cone because, IMTU, being a tail lander provides many more landing options - especially frontier landing options.)

The "reasons" behind my choices were:

One gee and no agility - The cost in MCr, displacement, crew, and maintenance wasn't worth the capability.

Leaving jump masking and shadows aside, the 100D limit for a T-prime, Size 8, mainworld is 800K km and ~92% of worlds are Size 8 or smaller. One gee on an "accel-flip-decel" course can cover 1 million km in 333 minutes. Three gees covers the same distance in the same manner in 193 minutes. Reducing travel time by less than a third isn't worth the cost - especially if you plan on being armed.

No small craft - A launch, the smallest of small craft, costs too much in MCr, displacement, crew, maintenance relative to the capabilities it provides. The Type-R can "afford" a launch because it's operation is subsidized.

Twenty dTons is 15% of your total displacement and, while you can store/haul as much as 13 dTons of cargo with a launch, giving up 15% of you already limited displacement for what is essentially a taxi isn't worth it.

Three turrets - My design, like yours, was meant to operate either side of the border and in the less savory regions of Chartered Space.

I decided on a 300-ton hull as (a) I like the number!, (b) I don't like cramped 200-ton traders, or overly large 400-ton jobs, and (c) 300 tons seemed like a good bridge and compromise.

Those were also my reasons for "stretching" the Beowulf rather than designing a jump2 Type-R - although I did also design the latter.

Well, this is turning into a right :CoW:, and no mistake!

Stuff and nonsense. This thread is both welcome and fascinating, as the number of responses easily shows. Thank you for starting it!

 

[Redcap]

Then the next question is more specific: Mains or Traces?

A ship designed with large mains in mind, such as the Type A, should be fitted out with cost and running efficiency in mind. J1, M1, and just enough powerplant to move, power the guns, and keep life support going. Everything else should be payload.

If the expected environment is thin on mains, then J2 is likely called for, but a pokey trader in the Type A mold doesn't need more thrust unless its owner is a hotshot and takes jobs to match.

Bit of both, really; this ship is likely to go pretty-much anywhere it needs to, in order to earn an honest (relatively speaking) credit.

I've been working on the spreadsheet mentioned earlier, and came up with something that I think should work; certainly, it looks just about viable, in-game finances-wise.

If anyone can see what, if anything, I've done wrong, I'm all ears.

Also, if anyone knows how to easily output the data from it into a Traveller format, I'm likewise all ears

The original sheet comes from , who posted it here: http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=560586&postcount=10

This is mine; it's in the same format, BUT in order to get it to work on my system (Ubuntu Linux) here, I had to download it in Open Office Sheets format (ODS), and to let you see it, it's been converted back into google sheets format. So I have stuff-all idea if it'll work for you :O

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1csHfbM7Wa7HxxtyJZ_nROjPWws7W070sJCWAI0LTrtE

 

[Redcap]

I agree and I tried my hand at designing one many years ago. I think I succeeded, but I also think I did so because kept to strict design requirements. (Love the Beowulf-format phrase, but the way. It's a keeper!)

Glad to be of service, or something!

My requirements were simple: A Beowulf-format capable of jump2. That was it. At least the same cargo capacity, at least the same pax capacity, everything at least the same except for being capable of jump2.

Yep, that works for me too.

In 300 dTons, I came up with a one gee, jump2 ship with three turrets, 107 dTons cargo capacity, 15 staterooms (10 for pax), 12 low berths, scoops & purifier, and an air/raft. (The ship was also a tail landing cone because, IMTU, being a tail lander provides many more landing options - especially frontier landing options.)

Unusual on it being a tail-lander, have you ever read "Ship of Strangers"?

The "reasons" behind my choices were:

One gee and no agility - The cost in MCr, displacement, crew, and maintenance wasn't worth the capability.

Leaving jump masking and shadows aside, the 100D limit for a T-prime, Size 8, mainworld is 800K km and ~92% of worlds are Size 8 or smaller. One gee on an "accel-flip-decel" course can cover 1 million km in 333 minutes. Three gees covers the same distance in the same manner in 193 minutes. Reducing travel time by less than a third isn't worth the cost - especially if you plan on being armed.

No small craft - A launch, the smallest of small craft, costs too much in MCr, displacement, crew, maintenance relative to the capabilities it provides. The Type-R can "afford" a launch because it's operation is subsidized.

Twenty dTons is 15% of your total displacement and, while you can store/haul as much as 13 dTons of cargo with a launch, giving up 15% of you already limited displacement for what is essentially a taxi isn't worth it.

OHO, now THERE'S a rationalé (subsidised versus indy) on ship's vehicles I hadn't considered. NICE Thanks An air/raft it'll be for my next spreadsheet attempt

I prefer to have a bit of lead footed capability in normal space, if only to be able to get out of trouble faster than I got into it - it's a preference that my players tend to agree with, when they play my adventures :devil:

Three turrets - My design, like yours, was meant to operate either side of the border and in the less savory regions of Chartered Space.

Yep, follow completely

Those were also my reasons for "stretching" the Beowulf rather than designing a jump2 Type-R - although I did also design the latter.

Cool

Stuff and nonsense. This thread is both welcome and fascinating, as the number of responses easily shows. Thank you for starting it!

*ahem* I sit corrected And you're welcome

 

[Whipsnade]

Unusual on it being a tail-lander, have you ever read "Ship of Strangers"?

Most likely, although I can't say with any certainty that it consciously influenced my thinking.

IMTU, tail-landers exist for many reasons not the least of which was the "One gee drive/1+ gee world" question. There's a skein of interconnected questions involving landing, taking off, moving/flying through atmospheres, port/interface infrastructure available in backwater systems, ground pressure, etc. IMEHO, punching in and out of atmospheres/gravity wells along ballistic courses was both easier and obviated a lot of issues.

From early on in CT, I also never quite liked the "solution" to the "One gee drive/1+ gee world" and berth shifting questions which was best illustrated by MT's SSOM's 400% overdrive "answer". The idea of a tail-lander running it's M-drive at a 10, 20, or 25 percent over capacity was far more plausible IMEHO than a belly-lander like a Suleiman, Beowulf, Type-R, or others running their M-drives at 400% of capacity.

Other opinions on those questions are, of course, equally valid!

I prefer to have a bit of lead footed capability in normal space, if only to be able to get out of trouble faster than I got into it - it's a preference that my players tend to agree with, when they play my adventures

My "One gee is good enough" thinking most likely stems from my Traveller wargaming experience, so it's partially a case of me "gaming the game". Consider the following:

In LBB:2 combat, the 1 million km trip I mentioned earlier will last ~20 turns at one gee and ~12 turns at three gees. That's not enough of a difference to worry about. If you can last 12 turns against an opponent, you can most likely last 20, and especially so if you're shooting back. Getting those "extra" gees will "cost" more in MCr, displacement, crew, etc. than installing a more capable computer and a more capable computer (with it's associated software) that will give you an immediate and decisive edge.

In HG2 combat, the 1 million km trip works out to 999 and 579 turns respectively. Again, one way or another combat is going to be over long before you play out all those turns. Agility will help in HG2, but at the cost of a larger power plant along with all the incidental costs. A computer upgrade of one level, however, helps just as much as adding one point of agility and will do so at a smaller "cost" in EPs, EPs which have their own "cost" in MCr, crew, displacement, etc.

Now, I don't think Cap'n Blackie has a copy of LBB:2 or HG2 when he's designing a replacement for his old ship The Running Boil. I do think, however, that Cap'n Blackie has a keen understanding of just what capabilities will give him an actual edge in Tradin', Trampin', and Fightin' and that understanding comes from not only his own experiences but also the experiences of hundreds of thousands of captains over thousands of years.

Other opinions on those assumptions are, of course, equally valid too!

 

[Whipsnade]

Then the next question is more specific: Mains or Traces?

For me, and like Redcap's reply, the answer is both.

Jump2 doesn't preclude jump1. I can still hop along a main one parsec at a time if the situation warrants.

Jump2 gives me flexibility. I can follow that main between Gold Mine-III and Jackpot-V while also skipping Pesthole-X or New Newark. I can hop from one main to another. I can visit that trace. I can cross a three parsec gap at while "only" carrying one parsec's worth of extra fuel.

Jump2 provides that extra capability in a PC-sized/PC-affordable manner too. Jump3 is nice but pricey. It demands a larger ship and a larger mortgage both of which constrain the PCs in various ways. Jump3 means the PCs are more likely to be working for someone else instead of themselves. Jump3 means the PCs are more likely to have more "strings" placed on them.

Jump2, IMEHO, is the sweet spot.

 

[flykiller]

Ideally, a Beowulf-format ship of 300 tons that can pay the bills, AND protect itself.

subsidize it.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I've been working on the spreadsheet mentioned earlier, and came up with something that I think should work; certainly, it looks just about viable, in-game finances-wise.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1csHfbM7Wa7HxxtyJZ_nROjPWws7W070sJCWAI0LTrtE

It's around MCr 200, so the mortgage is MCr 10 / year.
If it is completely full it could earn 25 × ( 6 × kCr 12 + 10 × kCr 1.2 + 49 × kCr 1.6 ) ≈ MCr 4.
It's nowhere near being able to pay for itself with regular freight & passengers.

You have skipped your Requirement Specifiction and created a gold-plated yacht. It would perhaps serve well for a wealthy speculative trader?



You have chosen MCr 60 worth of software you cannot run because of the tiny computer.

You have chosen TL 13 - 15 drives of the most expensive kind. It is not a rugged TL 11 ship anymore.

You have chosen 6 High Staterooms for passengers and a Med Bay, which is great, but the passengers won't pay extra for that. Negotiate premium pricing with the Referee.

A Launch is great, but just the hangar costs MCr 5.5 and 22 dT that will not earn anything.

Airlocks are necessary, but you get a "free" airlock for each 100 dT, so you already have 3, you do not really need 2 extra.

You have included an extra sensor station, but no crew member for the job. One or two sensor operators can easily fit on the bridge. Extra sensor stations are only needed if you squeeze in lots of sensor operators.

Hardening only gives you immunity to EMP (=Ion) weapons. The hardened sensor suite gives you very little advantage when your drives and weapons are off-line.

You have mixed turrets that do not work well with the combat system. You can only use one type of weapon in each turret every round, so you cannot both fire a missile and the laser from the same turret.


If you want to pay your bills you need to cut the cost of the ship and increase payload. Read what Whipsnade wrote in this post:

I agree and I tried my hand at designing one many years ago. I think I succeeded, but I also think I did so because kept to strict design requirements.

 

[Brandon C]

No small craft - A launch, the smallest of small craft, costs too much in MCr, displacement, crew, maintenance relative to the capabilities it provides. The Type-R can "afford" a launch because it's operation is subsidized.

Twenty dTons is 15% of your total displacement and, while you can store/haul as much as 13 dTons of cargo with a launch, giving up 15% of you already limited displacement for what is essentially a taxi isn't worth it.

For a ship to be used by PCs, a small craft is rewuired. It is far too useful to adventuring to leave out. If you still think a 20 ton craft is too large, build a 10 ton boat.

 

[McPerth]

I'm going to echo Brandon Cope's excellent advice and suggest you focus on a base concept first. I'm going to further suggest that your listed mission requirements in Post #22 are both internally inconsistent and over reaching.

(...)

What do you want the design to be? A Beowulf with a higher jump rating which can pay the bills every day? Or a Type-T carries cargo and passengers at premium rates? You cannot have both at the same time.

While I see you point here, I think this kind of ship can still have its niche. I played up with similar ideas and designs on my own (by then for MT, as I'm talking about late 80`s to early 90's)...

Let's imagine a planet outside the Imperium (or not in OTU), in the high end of Low Pop, with a decent starport and TL (Tremous Dex, SM1311 comes to my mind). It's naval Budget is probably on the low MCr or tens of them at most, but it still would like to have a planetary Navy to defend itself...

Its Budget does not allow for it to buy Andy decent military ship (probably not even a boat), but can allow it to make the downpayment for a heavily armed "merchant" ship.

So, it starts a state owned merchant company and makes this down payment to adquire its first ship, hping to revert any profit into the same company, while being subsized as a false planetary navy.

Any earnings that the company makes would be an addition to the Naval Budget, and they hope to son be able to make the down payment for a second ship, and so on, until, with years, they will be able to have a state merchant company/planetary navy.

Of course, the ships they will want will be decently (if not outright heavily) armed and armored (for their small shize), and still capable to move passengers and cargo. Probably will not pay up for all expenses, but any credit earned as merchants will be wellcome, and, if it reaches a point where some ships have their mortgages paid off, the company may even turn into profits.

This wil lbe the niche I believe such ships will exist.

Needless to say, this kind of ships will son catch the atention of Starmercs (and unfortunately, pirates)...

 

[Redcap]

*rubs chin* Yeeeeeeeah. *sigh*

Designing things (like, for, wild example, ships) was a wossit sight easier under CT and MT, I have to say. *grumble*

Right. Back to the gruddam drawing board.

I take everything you guys have said on board; they're well-aimed, well-made, and make sense. I'd like to be able to design this damn thing under the earlier rules sets, but as it's *eventually* intended for use in an adventure to be used at a convention, I'm having to use the MgT rules.

So.

Let's see if we can't fix this animal a different way. Nurse: The mallet; I have to anaesthetist the patient. *bonk* *snore*

ships boat first. yes, there will be times where the starship should not, cannot, or even must not, dock in zero-gee or zero-atmo: A boat is therefore required. 20 tons is too darn big, takes up too much valuable space on the ship, and an air/raft is not the sort of thing you use for that problem - Brandon's suggestion therefore has weight (sic :rofl to it , and will be employed (another darn design. Oh frabjous joy).

Question: Can one be designed under MgT/HG 2e that can carry either a standard cargo container, or pax (or even both?), and still meet the ten-ton requirement? Armament and high gee thrust is not required, merely 1g thrust and zero in the way of bang-bangs. Also, crew - one preferred?

Next up, the ship.

Crew first: Ideally, I'd like to keep it down to six:

• Pilot (purser & boat pilot),
• Nav (sensors & boat pilot),
• Eng (no second hat, he has well enough to do),
• Medic (steward),
• Gunners (mechanic) and
• Gunner (steward).

The ship must be a 300-ton hull. It should be streamlined, and have integral fuel scoops, and enough processors to convert wilderness fuel to processed fuel within 24 hours. It should have enough endurance, fuel-wise, for one x jump-2, and four weeks of operations. It must also actually be capable of Jump-2 and ideally Manoeuvre-2 (Thrust-2), and have power plant capacity to run everything at full tilt, including the *$&% computer as well!

It is highly desirable that the computer should be able to run, in order of importance, the following:

Mandatory:

• Manoeuvre /0
• Library /0
• Intellect
• Anti Hijack /2
• Jump Control /2
• Auto repair /2

HIGHLY desirable:

• Broad Spectrum EW
• Electronic Warfare /2
• Evade /2
• Point Defence /2
• Fire Control /2

Passengers. Pax are high-earning when compared to cargo, and should be included.

Low pax x 10 is fine, any more and it gets a little expensive on medics, if I recall correctly.

Mid/High x 5 or 6 is the limit, I think. Any more and you lose too much space for cargo.

I have to say that Flykiller and Whipsnade have good points regarding subsidising the thing. However, IIRC, a subsidised trader has to stick to pre-determined routes, does it not? That tends to rule out on-the-fly adventuring, cargos off the beaten track, and ... ahem... 'missions', surely?

Finances wise, it also has to either pay for itself, or be subsidised. I'd prefer it be able to pay for itself, and add a fair profit to things.

Thoughts on the above?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Question: Can one be designed under MgT/HG 2e that can carry either a standard cargo container, or pax (or even both?), and still meet the ten-ton requirement?

Easily.

Crew first: Ideally, I'd like to keep it down to six:

• Pilot (purser & boat pilot),
• Nav (sensors & boat pilot),
• Eng (no second hat, he has well enough to do),
• Medic (steward),
• Gunners (mechanic) and
• Gunner (steward).

Shouldn't be a problem.

It is highly desirable that the computer should be able to run, in order of importance, the following:

Mandatory:

• Manoeuvre /0
• Library /0
• Intellect
• Anti Hijack /2
• Jump Control /2
• Auto repair /2

HIGHLY desirable:

• Broad Spectrum EW
• Electronic Warfare /2
• Evade /2
• Point Defence /2
• Fire Control /2

Do you really need the software? It negates any chance of profitability. You can perform the tasks without software, the software only gives you a +DM. Some of the software is higher than TL11.

Take a look at Expert software in the Equipment chapter. It can perform tasks independently at far lower cost.

Note that Auto-Repair requires Repair Drones to actually do anything.

Point Defence is only required to kill missiles aimed at another ship.

 

[Whipsnade]

For a ship to be used by PCs, a small craft is rewuired. It is far too useful to adventuring to leave out. If you still think a 20 ton craft is too large, build a 10 ton boat.

Required? Hardly. The three designs featured in the majority of adventures over the last 40 years have no small craft: the scout/courier, the free trader, and the far trader.

All the original classic designs which include small craft are subsidized in some manner: the subsidized merchant, the subsidized liner, the yacht, the merc cruiser, and the patrol cruise.

You're going to have to pay for that small craft, both up front as part of the purchase price/mortgage and continually through lost capacity, crewing requirements, and maintenance fees.

The 20 dTon launch can carry all your passengers, but only 13 dTons of cargo if you rip out all the seat. The 10 dTon launch will carry even less of both.

Is a launch worth it? Not if you're paying the mortgage, something which Redcap's design is specifically meant to do. He's not designing an adventuring ship, if he were the armed packet he first posted would be perfect. He's building a frontier trader so the requirements are different.

 

[Redcap]

Easily.

Excellent

Shouldn't be a problem.

Good to know

Do you really need the software? It negates any chance of profitability. You can perform the tasks without software, the software only gives you a +DM. Some of the software is higher than TL11.

I'm aiming at TL-13 at this point. Lower reduces the ability to get a few things done that I'd like to have on the ship. At a push, I guess the mandatory list, given the requirement for drones for the auto repair, can be modified to move the auto repair to the desired list.

Take a look at Expert software in the Equipment chapter. It can perform tasks independently at far lower cost.

I'll do that, thanks.

Note that Auto-Repair requires Repair Drones to actually do anything.

Adressed above.

Point Defence is only required to kill missiles aimed at another ship.

Um. That's a trully frelled-up definition in the rules (which I just reread to make sure). No. Point defence is intended to defend your OWN ship against incoming projectiles, missiles, etc. It CAN be used to help other ships, but it's prime raison d'être is to let your own ship live, not get killed. IRL Goalkeeper, C-whizz, et al the other CIWS (Close-In Weapon Systems), are all PD weapons. The in-game package turns your laser turret into a PD weapon of last resort to protect your own ship. This said, the rules disagree, which is nutso of the first order. A GM Frigate IRL is designed to engage incoming missiles on the fleet, and uses it's tracking/targeting software at long range. A CWIS system engages at short to point blank range, and the software MUST be faster, tidier, and even more effective, they are NOT the same animal at all. The rules are just WRONG.

Required? Hardly. The three designs featured in the majority of adventures over the last 40 years have no small craft: the scout/courier, the free trader, and the far trader.

All of those had air/raft capability, rather than a ship's boat.

All the original classic designs which include small craft are subsidized in some manner: the subsidized merchant, the subsidized liner, the yacht, the merc cruiser, and the patrol cruise.

I'd not noticed that, thanks for bringing it up!

You're going to have to pay for that small craft, both up front as part of the purchase price/mortgage and continually through lost capacity, crewing requirements, and maintenance fees.

lost capacity I'll accept; costs of mortgage and maintenance I'll accept, but crewing? The command staff (pilot & Nav?) can do the piloting on that easily enough, I would have thought. They should have the skills for it - certainly, the ship's pilot will.

The 20 dTon launch can carry all your passengers, but only 13 dTons of cargo if you rip out all the seat. The 10 dTon launch will carry even less of both.

Given the need for it to carry at minimum one x ISO container or five, maybe six, passengers, that's not a major problem. Yes, it might mean more than one trip, but at least they can be transferred in zero-G/zero-atmo reasonably safely. Is it inconvenient to do more than one trip? Certainly. But it saves the PCs from trying to figure out how to dock if there's no dock available for the ship, instead of a cargo transfer vessel such as a small boat.

Is a launch worth it? Not if you're paying the mortgage, something which Redcap's design is specifically meant to do. He's not designing an adventuring ship, if he were the armed packet he first posted would be perfect. He's building a frontier trader so the requirements are different.

And there's the nail (the rub), which has been hit on the head perfectly by your hammer. We need to figure out if the rules regarding subsidised ships allow this frontier trader to go off established routes or not; if not, then we have to decide if a boat should be included. If yes, then include the boat by all means. If not, then include the boat only if the ship will still be financially viable for a mortgage and subsequent trading/freight operations.

Comments?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Um. That's a trully frelled-up definition in the rules (which I just reread to make sure). No. Point defence is intended to defend your OWN ship against incoming projectiles, missiles, etc.

Which you can do without special software.

The software only allows you to share your PD resources with other ships, which is necessary for military squadrons to counter missile storms.

 

[Whipsnade]

lost capacity I'll accept; costs of mortgage and maintenance I'll accept, but crewing? The command staff (pilot & Nav?) can do the piloting on that easily enough, I would have thought.

When the command staff are away piloting the launch, who is minding the store back home? How big is your crew?

Given the need for it to carry at minimum one x ISO container...

One 5 dTon container eats up half your 10 dTon launch. Your launch will basically be designed "around" that container.

We need to figure out if the rules regarding subsidised ships allow this frontier trader to go off established routes or not; if not, then we have to decide if a boat should be included. If yes, then include the boat by all means. If not, then include the boat only if the ship will still be financially viable for a mortgage and subsequent trading/freight operations.

My old design was a tail-lander because, IMTU, that allowed it to land more easily in more places. Being able to land more easily in more places meant, IMEHO, that a small craft wasn't necessary. There are other, equally valid, opinions however.

What could help your trader make it's "nut"? Two words: Premium Pricing. To whit:

Yeah, ships in the Core charge 1,000 CrImp per ton, but this is the frontier, Slappy.

Yeah, you paid less than that between Rhylanor and Porozlo, but this is the frontier, Skippy.

IMTU, 1,000 CrImps per ton is the "sweet spot" and not red letter law. Freight costs can and do vary whenever I, the referee, have a good reason for them to vary. The canonical rate is merely a rule of thumb, a quick way to calculate fees when I, the referee, don't want or need to bother with that level of detail.

 

[Redcap]

Which you can do without special software.

Against incoming ships, sure. Not so regarding incoming missiles and projectiles. The small size, difficulty in acquiring a sight picture, and so on and so forth, mean that at close range, only a dedicated software/hardware solution has a more than half decent chance at successfully engaging the vampire (missile or projectile). The other guy only has to be lucky once: The PD package has to be successful all the time.

The software only allows you to share your PD resources with other ships, which is necessary for military squadrons to counter missile storms.

That, I'll accept.

However, the rules have given it a confusing name. A better name for the existing package might be "F-SHODS" (Fleet SHOrt-range Defence System), imho.
(Sensor operator: "VAMPIRE, VAMPIRE, VAMPIRE! Missiles tracking Atlas carrier!"
Tactical Action Officer: "Weapons free, Engage with EFF-SHODS!")

Anyhow, this doesn't get away from the fact that there isn't a dedicated own-ship CWIS package, so let's drop the PD package from the list, darnit

 

[AnotherDilbert]

A small utility boat might look something like this:

TL 11            Hull  4                                        3,0    
                          Desired    ∆TL    Rat    #    dTon    Cost    Power
Hull                          10                        10                 2
Config           Streamlined   2             2                  0,60
Hull strength    Standard      2             2            
Armour           Crystaliron   1             1           0,13   0,03
                                
ManœuvreD        Standard      3             3     1     0,30   0,60       3
PowerP   (TL8)   Standard                          1     0,50   0,25       5

Fuel, Power                    4           4 w     1     1,00        

Bridge                         1                   1     3,00   0,50    
    Holographic                1                   1            0,13    
Comp             m/10          2            10     1            0,16    
Backup Comp      m/5           1             5     1            0,03    
                                
Sensors          Basic                             1            

Airlock          5 dT          1                   1     5,00   0,50    
Acceleration Bench, Foldable   5                   5            0,25       
Collapsible Tanks              5                   5     0,05   0,00

10 dt, streamlined, MCr 2.7 in quantity.
3G, 4 weeks endurance.
5 dT payload that can carry 5 dT cargo, 20 passengers (uncomfortably), or 5 dT fuel.
No separate airlock, the entire payload bay is an airlock.
Armour 1 is good against small-arms.

 

[Redcap]

When the command staff are away piloting the launch, who is minding the store back home? How big is your crew?

Addressed earlier; either Pilot OR Nav pilot the boat, not both at the same time. One or other must be on board the ship at any given time.

Order of command:

• Captain
• Pilot
• Nav
• Eng
• Steward
• Medic
• Gunner "we're boned"

One 5 dTon container eats up half your 10 dTon launch. Your launch will basically be designed "around" that container.

Is the footprint for a standard container still two squares? and where on earth did the 5dT figure come from? I can't find that anywhere in either book other than in regard to mail freight containers?

My old design was a tail-lander because, IMTU, that allowed it to land more easily in more places. Being able to land more easily in more places meant, IMEHO, that a small craft wasn't necessary. There are other, equally valid, opinions however.

Noted.

What could help your trader make it's "nut"? Two words: Premium Pricing. To whit:

Yeah, ships in the Core charge 1,000 CrImp per ton, but this is the frontier, Slappy.

Yeah, you paid less than that between Rhylanor and Porozlo, but this is the frontier, Skippy.

heh. Noted.

IMTU, 1,000 CrImps per ton is the "sweet spot" and not red letter law. Freight costs can and do vary whenever I, the referee, have a good reason for them to vary. The canonical rate is merely a rule of thumb, a quick way to calculate fees when I, the referee, don't want or need to bother with that level of detail.

So noted as well; out of cons, I tend to the IMTU rules too, but this is going to be used according to the main, core, rules, so let's stick to that for the time being.

A small utility boat might look something like this:

TL 11            Hull  4                                        3,0    
                          Desired    ∆TL    Rat    #    dTon    Cost    Power
Hull                          10                        10                 2
Config           Streamlined   2             2                  0,60
Hull strength    Standard      2             2            
Armour           Crystaliron   1             1           0,13   0,03
                                
ManœuvreD        Standard      3             3     1     0,30   0,60       3
PowerP   (TL8)   Standard                          1     0,50   0,25       5

Fuel, Power                    4           4 w     1     1,00        

Bridge                         1                   1     3,00   0,50    
    Holographic                1                   1            0,13    
Comp             m/10          2            10     1            0,16    
Backup Comp      m/5           1             5     1            0,03    
                                
Sensors          Basic                             1            

Airlock          5 dT          1                   1     5,00   0,50    
Acceleration Bench, Foldable   5                   5            0,25       
Collapsible Tanks              5                   5     0,05   0,00

10 dt, streamlined, MCr 2.7 in quantity.
3G, 4 weeks endurance.
5 dT payload that can carry 5 dT cargo, 20 passengers (uncomfortably), or 5 dT fuel.
No separate airlock, the entire payload bay is an airlock.
Armour 1 is good against small-arms.

Yeah, that looks good, thanks

 

[GypsyComet]

Bit of both, really; this ship is likely to go pretty-much anywhere it needs to, in order to earn an honest (relatively speaking) credit.

So a "stretched" A2 instead of an A1. That doesn't mean its a stretched Marava, just that it uses a similar business model.

That said, I'm not a fan of the classic Beo hullform being distended for a 50% volume increase. The Marava or Alexandria hulls are more suited to stretching. The MGT Marava could probably use a stretch, for that matter, as it's a bit of a tub at 200 tons. The CT/MT Marava and MT Beo are already 400 tons mapped, so stretching those just makes that problem worse. The TNE Marava is pretty sleek at 200 tons mapped, but could have its upper deck expanded to get to 300 I think.