MGT Only: Capital ship design in a small ship setting

[aramis]

If you consider each turret on a battleship as a large bay, they were basically Big bay ships.No real world equivalent of the spinal mount exists..Unless you count Scwher Gustav

Actually, yes, there is. Two models in the Wet Navy side, 1 in the aircraft side.
Wet Navy: the 1 man and 2 man 2-torpedo mini-subs...

Aircraft side, the long-barreled 30mm vulcan on the A-10.

As for big ships, we have to go back to age of sail for spinal weapons - specifically, the ram. Or in one case, the 1 ton trebuchet on a galleon (which would have rolled too far over if fired sideways).

And the Trident Submarine's missile bay - the ship had to be designed around that bay; the trident missile itself set the diameter of the boomer.

The irony is that, in the real world, spinals are how you mount big ship weapons on small ships; it's only in space opera that it tends to go the other way. (Tho', in the case of certain franchises, many superweapons are also spinal designs. See also Death Star and Interdictor in Star Wars.)

Edit: There was also a plan for a ship with a rail-cannon like the Schwere Gustav on a naval hull, but it's one of the many "never got out of the planning bureau, probably due to laughter" designs the Nazis had.

Also - in tanks - WWII and onward - many heavy artillery pieces had too much recoil to be turret mounted; they were in elevation carriages with VERY limited side to side traverse. Likewise rocket carriers...

 

[wbyrd]

Actually, yes, there is. Two models in the Wet Navy side, 1 in the aircraft side.
Wet Navy: the 1 man and 2 man 2-torpedo mini-subs...

Aircraft side, the long-barreled 30mm vulcan on the A-10.

As for big ships, we have to go back to age of sail for spinal weapons - specifically, the ram. Or in one case, the 1 ton trebuchet on a galleon (which would have rolled too far over if fired sideways).

And the Trident Submarine's missile bay - the ship had to be designed around that bay; the trident missile itself set the diameter of the boomer.

The irony is that, in the real world, spinals are how you mount big ship weapons on small ships; it's only in space opera that it tends to go the other way. (Tho', in the case of certain franchises, many superweapons are also spinal designs. See also Death Star and Interdictor in Star Wars.)

Edit: There was also a plan for a ship with a rail-cannon like the Schwere Gustav on a naval hull, but it's one of the many "never got out of the planning bureau, probably due to laughter" designs the Nazis had.

Also - in tanks - WWII and onward - many heavy artillery pieces had too much recoil to be turret mounted; they were in elevation carriages with VERY limited side to side traverse. Likewise rocket carriers...

we have a really big gun, what do we put it on....It won't fit you say...Make it fit."

The design process of spinal mount weapons.

I think the trebuchet on a ship would be safely classified as a Spinal mount. I stand corrected. I don't know if the Missile bay counts, but I aint gonna argue with a boat built around a couple hundred megatons of "You are so Effed"!!"

 

[salochin999]

You have just shown me how to marry Star Cruiser, High Guard and CT ship combat into something that works

brilliant, just brilliant (and I'm a bit annoyed that I never thought of it)

if that's at me, you're welcome

i think the idea has mileage although i've only prodded at it so far

 

[salochin999]

okay let me see if i have the basic idea down..by combining weapons into a larger weapon you get better range and hitting power?

If that is the basics I have to admit it's simple and clean.

Yeah exactly - you reduce the weapon power by range - pen 1 minimum needed to penetrate - so the bigger the weapon to start with the longer the range - instead of 16" vs 8" guns you have (no idea what the right numbers would be) just for example 16GW vs 8GW weapons.

I was mostly coming at the c. 4-6k range, CT-HG mashup thing from the direction of ambience. HGs carrier group model is fine as it is but I was thinking about alternatives like Napoleonic ships of the line or WW1 battleships to see what would come up as I like sci fi to feel a little archaic - like tech went in a circle.

And battleships with 4 x 16s vs cruisers with 3 x 8s had that ambience.

#

One of the things that comes up playing around with this is long range low pen hits against armored ships won't penetrate so i was thinking of having a heat track on top - every time the heat track hits 10 (or whatever) you take a hit so pulling out of range to cool down becomes a thing.

#

That's in the ballpark of what I have in mind, but it's also integrating the CT distance and movement rules with HG batteries and armor (and hull type for mesons).

Yeah that's what I'm aiming for: the simplicity of CT combat combined with bits of HG.

 

[McPerth]

As for big ships, we have to go back to age of sail for spinal weapons - specifically, the ram. Or in one case, the 1 ton trebuchet on a galleon (which would have rolled too far over if fired sideways).

Rams were mounted again in the Ironclad times, after the faulty lessons taken from the Battle of Lisa.

They were quite a usual feature in ACW ironclads, and IIRC they were attempted to use in several ocasions, though I'm not sure if successfully...

 

[salochin999]

A couple of extra bits

I wanted to keep it as close to the lassic "feel" as possible so i've been using the same displacement ideas and crew but scaled up so

laser4
- hard points used up 4
- crew 4
- displacement 10dts (4dts x 2.5)
- firepower 4
--- pen 4 at range 1
--- pen 1 at range 2

for the displacement i am currently using the original 1 dtons of FC per standard turret and multiplying the total by 2.5 as i want to picture it looking a bit like the inside of a battleship turret

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa471/Ariecho/Nelson/2_zpsb0aa22bf.png

the crew in this case are monitoring
- heat build up
- capacitors
- sensors
- weapon itself

laser16
- 16 hardpoints
- 16 crew
- 40 dtons (16 x 2.5)
- firepower 16
--- power 16 at range 1
--- power 4 at range 2
--- power 1 at range 4

#

the other thing i was wondering - not sure how plausible it would be - if if a tight beam is possible at range x could a deliberately wide beam be used for a shotgun effect?

laser4 (tight beam)
- pen 4 at range 1
- pen 1 at range 2

or

laser4 (wide beam)
- pen 1 at range 1 in 30 degree cone

for fighters, missiles etc

 

[wbyrd]

Rams were mounted again in the Ironclad times, after the faulty lessons taken from the Battle of Lisa.

They were quite a usual feature in ACW ironclads, and IIRC they were attempted to use on several occasions, though I'm not sure if successfully...

The CSV Virginia/Merrimack used her ram against several Union ships..successfully. Until it became lodged and they had to leave it in the ships side.

They also used spar Torpedeos. a powder charge t the end of a long pole..which were used a number of times..usually by small boats sneaking up on blockade vessels....including the CSV Hunley...which sank it's target before it sank.

A couple of extra bits

I wanted to keep it as close to the classic "feel" as possible so i've been using the same displacement ideas and crew but scaled up so

laser4
- hard points used up 4
- crew 4
- displacement 10dts (4dts x 2.5)
- firepower 4
--- pen 4 at range 1
--- pen 1 at range 2

for the displacement i am currently using the original 1 dtons of FC per standard turret and multiplying the total by 2.5 as i want to picture it looking a bit like the inside of a battleship turret

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa471/Ariecho/Nelson/2_zpsb0aa22bf.png

the crew in this case are monitoring
- heat build up
- capacitors
- sensors
- weapon itself

laser16
- 16 hardpoints
- 16 crew
- 40 dtons (16 x 2.5)
- firepower 16
--- power 16 at range 1
--- power 4 at range 2
--- power 1 at range 4

#

the other thing i was wondering - not sure how plausible it would be - if if a tight beam is possible at range x could a deliberately wide beam be used for a shotgun effect?

laser4 (tight beam)
- pen 4 at range 1
- pen 1 at range 2

or

laser4 (wide beam)
- pen 1 at range 1 in 30 degree cone

for fighters, missiles etc

Hmmm okay I see where you're going with this. Now explain how yo work the PEN rating. sorry I can only keep one set of rules in my head at a time..and today it's not Traveller....

 

[salochin999]

Hmmm okay I see where you're going with this. Now explain how yo work the PEN rating. sorry I can only keep one set of rules in my head at a time..and today it's not Traveller....

still a work in progress but generally i see it going...

- laser1 is rated to produce pen1 at range 1
- laser4 is rated to produce pen4 at range 1 and pen1 at range 2
- unarmored hull counts as armor 0

pen 1 hits a standard unarmored hull - same effect as current rules - 1 (pen) - 0 (armor) = 1 hit

pen 4 vs armor 0 could either
- count as 4 hits
- count as 1 hit but also add 3 to a heat track

so a standard type M getting hit by all three of a battleship's 16s at range 2 where they have a pow/pen of 4 could either be
- 12 hits
or
- 3 hits + 9 heat

(not sure yet)

#

if some variant of armoring rules from HG are added then a pen 1 weapon won't penetrate armor 2

options
- could just ignore it
- could have a heat track and non penetrating hits add to that instead

so a pen 4 weapon hitting a target with armor 2 could
- count as 2 hits (4 pen - 2 armor = 2 hits)
or
- 1 hit + 2 heat (or 1 hit and 4 heat)

(not sure yet)

#

that's the basic gist, weapon's pen/power rating at a particular range vs target's armor to get hits

any excess pen either creates extra hits or goes to an overheating track

ships can lose heat by
- not getting hit for a while
- not firing for a while

##

 

[Brandon C]

As I am working on the various warships, I have noticed I am forming a mental link between various Traveller weapons and WWII weapons.

100-ton meson or particle beam bay: 14" to 16" turret
50-ton meson or particle beam bay: 8" to 10" turret
Particle beam barbette: 5" turret
Particle beam turret: 3" turret
Beam laser turret: 40mm turret