• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

MGT Only: An Alphabet of Ships

Thanks, that is impressive.

The body-ship is a fun idea!


(You may want to recheck the reaction fuel, I suspect you have underestimated it 10 times or so...)
 
Welcome to the Black Hole of Qualitytm, Winged Cat!

It's an old conundrum dating back to the Traveller Mailing List if not before in which the more useful the material being posted the fewer comments it garners.
 
Welcome to the Black Hole of Qualitytm, Winged Cat!

It's an old conundrum dating back to the Traveller Mailing List if not before in which the more useful the material being posted the fewer comments it garners.

I had noticed. I've been compiling these designs over the past two months on the CotI Discord, and not gotten as much feedback as I would have preferred. I posted a note there saying the "official" versions would be posted here, with all errata compiled; the versions posted there are essentially beta versions.

Speaking of utility: some of these designs are explicitly intended to be compatible with a Pirates of Drinax campaign, specifically if the party takes the "industrial route" of restoring the shipyard first instead of directly trying to acquire a pirate armada. (Thinking through these - plus the Hummingbird, which I had designed in other systems, then imported to Traveller as part of learning how ship design worked - was my inspiration to make this alphabet.) The Legionary is a work ship they might start off with, doing belt mining and building industry in nearby systems to persuade them to join. The Mint, Icepick, System Defense Brick, Zip, Fuelbag, and Quarter Hammer are examples of things it might construct. The Barrister is purpose made for hunting and seizing pirate/raider ships. The Dimin is a capital ship on a budget, the kind of thing this setup might produce. And if the empire survives long enough to go on the offensive (say, against Oghma, or eventually Tyr or Asim), the Ortillerist is all about the old Sindalian ways some may be tempted to rekindle.
 
Last edited:
Thanks again - looks like I did for the Nisina (and less so for the Underfighter). Stats adjusted.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. Check the Torch?


Code:
System____________________________________________ ___________tons__MCr____power
Reinforced streamlined hull (44 Hull)________________________-200__17_____40
Armor 13 (bonded superdense)_________________________________17.6__ 14.96__0
Thrust-7 maneuver drive (3*reduced power)____________________14____42_____35
Thrust-13 reaction drive (3*reduced fuel)____________________52____15.6___0
Fusion power plant___________________________________________8. 2___16.4___-164
Fuel (4 weeks' operation & 30 minutes' reaction drive fuel)__14____0______0
Aerofins__________________________________________ ___________10____1______0
Fuel scoops (free w/streamlining)____________________________0_____0__ ____0
Bridge____________________________________________ ___________10____1______0
Computer/35________________________________________________ __0_____30_____0
Improved sensors___________________________________________ __3_____4.3____4
Medium fusion gun bay (3*size reduced)_______________________70____24_____80
Triple beam laser turret (accurate, high yield)______________1_____1.75___5
Ship's locker (cargo)________________________________________0.2 ___0______0
Software: maneuver/0_________________________________________0_____0_ _____0
Software: library___________________________________________ _0_____0______0
Software: fire control/2_____________________________________0_____4_____ _0
Software: evade/3____________________________________________0____ _3______0

Fuel:
4 weeks = 9 Dt.
1/2 h reaction = 200 × 2.5% × 13 × 0.5 × 0.4 = 13 Dt?

I, as Referee, would not be upset if you burned nominal PP fuel in the reaction drive, especially given the precedent in MgT1, but you might note that on the design.
 
Last edited:
Fuel:
4 weeks = 9 Dt.
1/2 h reaction = 200 × 2.5% × 13 × 0.5 × 0.4 = 13 Dt?

4 weeks = 1 Dt (and then 1 + 13 = 14). The power plant's only 8.2 tons (the image gallery software inserted a bunch of spaces into the stats, but "8. 2" means "8.2"), and it's (PP tons/10) rounded up, so any PP <= 10 tons means 1 ton of fuel for 4 weeks.

I, as Referee, would not be upset if you burned nominal PP fuel in the reaction drive, especially given the precedent in MgT1, but you might note that on the design.

Indeed. I have noted this for the Nisina, as it strikes me that this would become common practice. (Its fighters only fly for hours at a time, so what do they care about 4 weeks' endurance? But they definitely care about getting every possible combat round of maximum burn. So the official stats list 4 weeks - reflecting official guidance from the manufacturers, possibly to comply with shipbuilding regulations, which regulations the Planetoid Hauler shows a possible origin for - then the notes show what that often gets converted to in practice. Likewise, the hangar bay techs want to refuel their fighters as much as possible in case of need, and the carrier itself is designed for 1 engagement, maybe 2, before resupply - thus, likely far less than 4 weeks, even if the official stats give 4 weeks' power plant fuel.)
 
Barrister:
The light tan color (deck 1 and deck 3) is not given a description. R-Drive?


Why are the landing gear on top of the ship (Deck 1) instead of below? Did the deck order get reversed? It is shown D3 D2 D1 in plan views and D1 D2 D3 in the side view.
 
Hummingbird:
Shaded red areas are computer and consoles? Likewise the small shaded area in the large stateroom?


Is there a 30-million-kelvin core fusion reactor right next to the lounge for that tropical vacation feel?
 
Keyhole:
What is the large white space on the driveside deck?


Is this a sphere or a butted pair of truncated cones? For a sphere the fore/aft (or up/down) deck series are too linear, for either shape the closer decks (2/7 and 3/8) are too small.


Is it a disk with projecting truncated cones? Side view would be informative.
 
Barrister:
The light tan color (deck 1 and deck 3) is not given a description. R-Drive?


Why are the landing gear on top of the ship (Deck 1) instead of below? Did the deck order get reversed? It is shown D3 D2 D1 in plan views and D1 D2 D3 in the side view.

Fixed. Thanks!
 
Back
Top