Acinonyx Class Fast Courier - The Beginning

[Carlobrand]

A sketch of the initial concept of the 200 Ton Acinonyx Class Fast Courier, essentially the joining of a stock 100 Ton X-boat to a 100 Ton annular wing hull (picture a scaled-down 400 Ton L-type Lab Ship).

This is the bare bones point of development as the ship's design has not acquired a docking slip for a Ship's Boat or other small craft.

The annular wing provides fuel tankage lost in the X-boat hull, from the addition of a dedicated cargo hold, and also houses the ship's m-drives.

There annular wing also is where the ship's hardpoints are located, the Acinonyx Class FC can mount two (2) separate turrets.

I remember now! You were the one doing:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=30591

Is this an evolution of that design?

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

opensent - I've worked on a project with navonod previously, the 100Ton X-boat Service Hull, he credits me with the original concept in his submission and publication of the design at Freelance Traveller.

http://freelancetraveller.com/features/shipyard/vagrant.html

The Acinonyx Class Fast Courier is a more 'evolved' concept of the annular wing as seen with the Vagrant Class 100Ton Service Hull, while similar in appearance the AC-FC is a stand-alone ship design itself.

I was in a PbP game with one of those in, a few years ago over on the RPOL forum. I remember it fondly.

I think navonod was either running the game or involved in it, but i didn't make the connection until i re-read this.

 

[atpollard]

If I might interject my own personal IMTU take on hardpoints ...

1. A hardpoint is a reinforced area on the hull designed to withstand and distribute the additional stresses of a turret or barbette while incorporating the fittings needed to accommodate the mechanical workings of the turret or barbette.

2. The 100,000 credits per dTon cost of a standard commercial hull, includes the bracing and fittings needed to incorporate 1 hardpoint per 100 dTons of ship hull.

3. Just as a modern attack helicopter can have small "wings" added whose only purpose is to accommodate additional weapon mounts, so the hull of a ship can be modified to accommodate additional hardpoints (more than 1 per 100 dTons of ship).

4. Like one of those dogs with many folds of skin, a ship may purchase a larger hull (which defines the bracing, plating and hardpoint fittings available) and wrap the larger hull around a smaller volume. A Free Trader, as an example, could wrap 3 hardpoints and 300 dTons worth of bracing and plating (purchased at a cost of 30 million credits) around a 200 dTon internal volume.

5. The 200 dTon ship with three hardpoints (300 dT skin) would have greater than average internal bracing ... giving it the MgT Structure Points of a 300 dT hull. Upgrades and modifications to the hull would be treated like the ship were 300 dTons, while everything else (like Jump Drive, Maneuver Drive, etc.) would be designed based on the ship's actual 200 dTon volume.

6. In the case of the ship in the OP, the bracing and fittings for the x-boat hardpoint would have been cut and relocated to the outer ring (which came with the bracing and fittings for one hardpoint in the basic 100 dTon hull cost).

7. Theoretically, there might be some savings due a ship specifically designed with fewer hardpoints, but the savings would probably be minimal and far less than the cost of producing a 'non-standard' design, so ships built without a hardpoint are probably still fitted with the bracing (per standard hull plans) and the savings from the fittings not installed is offset by the cost of the "change order" for not installing the standard hardpoint fittings.

The rules should be a guideline for game balance, not a straightjacket for designer creativity.

 

[Patron Zero]

I remember now! You were the one doing:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=30591

Is this an evolution of that design?

Yes, Carlobrand, good memory ! Actually the ship in this thread is the 'testbed' design the one mentioned in the thread noted evolves from.

What I'm working on is a 'retrospective' of how the more refined and markedly sleeker vessel began, the AC-FC MK-0 is-was a quick and dirty but functional first step by it's manufacturer, X-press Salvage.

Once a market was found for the 200Ton courier, X-press Salvage went back to the drawing board to improve and update the MK-0, the annular wing was the area targeted for most attention. The next version (the MK-I) featured a streamlined annular wing which included integral fuel scoops and onboard fuel processors.

Subsequent ships in the series included docking slips for a Ship's Boat and relocated powerplant and J-drive to dedicated outboard nacelles but with a significantly smaller more 'blended' integral annular wing.

That said, There does seem to be clearly divided camps regarding the 100Ton-1 turret provision, depending on which set of published rules one chooses to work with or if such is 'modified' to fit one's personal Traveller setting.

My thanks to everyone chiming in about my little ship.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

That said, There does seem to be clearly divided camps regarding the 100Ton-1 turret provision, depending on which set of published rules one chooses to work with or if such is 'modified' to fit one's personal Traveller setting.

My thanks to everyone chiming in about my little ship.

I'm not sure if me and another poster discussing can counts as "camps", especially since we weren't even in disagreement about the rules (we weren't debating weather you could do it by the rules, but weather you should be able to.)

 

[Vargas]

That said, There does seem to be clearly divided camps regarding the 100Ton-1 turret provision, depending on which set of published rules one chooses to work with . . .

TNE is the only version of the game that allowed more than one per 100 dTons, correct?

 

[aramis]

TNE is the only version of the game that allowed more than one per 100 dTons, correct?

No, incorrect. T4 did so as well. both used surface area as the limiting factor on weapons.

 

[Condottiere]

I think surface area and structural reinforcement would be the factors involved. However, how much structural stress does firing three lasers cause?

 

[atpollard]

I think surface area and structural reinforcement would be the factors involved. However, how much structural stress does firing three lasers cause?

VERY imHo, but the stress is rapidly rotating 1-5 dTon(s) of weapons (whatever the type) while safely reinforcing a 1 dTon hole in a monoque structural shell that may be subject to up to 6 gees of acceleration in any direction while limiting the local deflection enough that it will not interfere with maintaining an airtight movable seal.

 

[Vargas]

No, incorrect. T4 did so as well. both used surface area as the limiting factor on weapons.

I'm not that well versed in T4 so thank you for that bit of information.

I think surface area and structural reinforcement would be the factors involved. However, how much structural stress does firing three lasers cause?

There might also be issues related to things like, but not necessarily limited to, heat management, having sufficient space to run power and control lines, maintenance access and local distributed processing.

I don't know if it's a helpful analogy but there must be a reason why Aegis cruisers only have so many missile cells and turrets. I would think some of the same factors apply.

 

[Patron Zero]

On this design in particular, I had located the hardpoints on the section of the annular wing that housed the M-drives, that area in particular should be the most reinforced as well as structurally stable.

I also saw such as an optimum position for allowing the turrets near-unrestricted firing arcs.

 

[savage]

Nice work making the x-boat more useful. IMTU x-boats are older 3I tech, so this fits nicely.

I don't see the need to make it permanent attachments. Like a Shuttle hitching a ride on a 747 or Obi Wan's older tech Republic starfighter having an FTL module that can be left in orbit vs Luke's X-wing.

 

[Patron Zero]

Thanks for the kind words, always much appreciated.

My thing with X-boats being there has to be so many built and from that, so many that were retired or mothballed from service just waiting for a new job so to speak. A definitely overlooked potential resource at the very least.

-As to a permanent joining. I see that as a way of bringing an affordable priced ship to market as say a sort of new-but-used car for first-time owners.

200Tons seems a nice middle ground when a group of characters are shopping for a vessel, 100Tons, usually scout/couriers are a bit limited for cargo or passengers and 400Tons is a big investment just starting out.