Cepheus Engine Vehicle Design

[Timerover51]

I understand from an email from John Watts of Gypsy Knights Games that there is a discussion on Facebook of the Cepheus Engine Vehicle Design Sequence. As I do not do Facebook, I thought that I would post some comments here.

This one is with respect to the Ocean Steamship listed on page 79 of the SRD. It is listed as Tech Level 4, so roughly the period on Earth from 1850 to 1900. It does specifically say "Steamship". The crew is listed at "5". The speed is given as 30 kilometers per hour, or 16.2 knots. Passengers I am not worried about.

An ocean steamship of that period is going to use coal for fuel, and be powered by steam boilers and reciprocation steam engines. The minimum size for ocean work is going to be about 250 to 300 feet, assuming that you are crossing the North Atlantic. Coal fuel and boilers mean that you have to have stokers for your boilers, and also to move coal from coal bunker to engine room. Boiler room are hot, 120 degree Fahrenheit was not at all unusual, and in the tropics, considerably hotter. You needed a large crew of stokers, as they did 4 hours on and 8 hours off. You are going to need oilers for the reciprocating engines, unless the ship had a forced lubrication system, which was just coming in around 1900. You need engineers to supervise the boiler and engine room, and they also stood watches. The speed of 16.2 knots, it is not specified of that is top or cruising speed, means multiple boiler rooms and engine rooms, which take more engineers and stokers and oilers. The following quote comes from the book Ocean Steamships, published in 1891, available for download at Project Gutenberg.

In the largest ships the engineer force numbers one hundred and seventy men, and in vessels with double engines these are divided into two crews with a double allowance of officers for duty. One engineer keeps a watch in each fire-room, and two are stationed on each engine-room platform. Watches depend upon the weather, but, as a rule, the force, officers and men, serves four out of every twelve hours. (Emphasis Added)

Now, that is just the engine room crew. That does not include the deck force or the bridge crew, all of which stand watches. Then you also have to feed the crew, so stewards and mess attendants, just for the crew. Passengers are another story entirely. Your first class passengers expect and indeed, demand, to be pampered, with outstanding food and nice cabins, along with activities while onboard ship.

Before you start thinking about a nautical vessel design sequence, I would strongly encourage you to check out some of the following books on archive.org and Project Gutenberg.

A PRACTICAL COURSE in WOODEN BOAT and SHIP BUILDING, published in 1918, showing in great detail how a wooden steamship for the U.S. Emergency Fleet was built, down to the tools required, and lots and lots of illustrations. You can find it at https://archive.org/details/cu31924005005842

Ocean Steamships, published in 1891, which has a range of articles covering the development of steamships until then, along with lots of illustrations and plan drawings. That can be found at Project Gutenberg.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/54136/54136-h/54136-h.htm

TWO CENTURIES OF SHIPBUILDING BY THE SCOTTS AT GREENOCK, published in 1906. The Scotts at Greenock were one of England's leading shipbuilders for an extensive period of time. The book covers a wide range of ships, including warships, and again is well illustrated. That is also on Project Gutenberg.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/54667/54667-h/54667-h.htm

If you need information on warship and submarine design, I can point you to those sources as well that are online, along with tapping my extensive library on nautical architecture. I also have a data base on U.S. civilian aircraft development from the 1920s to the Boeing 707, as well as military aircraft. I probably can help out with ground vehicle development as well.

I will admit to not being a fan of design sequences, but I am willing to help in any way I can to avoid the making of massive errors. I would strongly urge you to have three different sequences for ground, aerial, and nautical vehicles, as otherwise, you are going to have one that does not do a good job in any area.

I will try to post later some information on historical costs and building times. An example would be the World War 2 Liberty-class ship that typically took about 600,000 man-hours to build, some faster and some longer, and cost $2 Million. They were built on a mass production basis, and needed a crew of between 35 and 40 men.

 

[Timerover51]

Again, this is for the nautical design sequence for the Cepheus Engine, although it also gives some idea as to what the steward force on a very large interstellar liner might look like.

Manning and Passengers for the French liner, Normandie, 36,287 grt.

Passengers: Cabin=568, Tourist=455. Third=209, Total=1,232

Officers: Captain, 7 Deck Officers, 21 Engineers, 7 Electricians, 5 Radio, 4 Pursers and Assistants, 1 Surgeon, 1 Chief and 3 Assistant Chief Stewards
Total=50

Crew: 45 Deck, 45 Engine Room, 1 Provision Chief, 1 Chef, 90 Galley Hands, 418 Stewards, Total=600

From Alfred Cecil Hardy, The Book of the Ship, page 117

The "Normandie" was operated by France in the 1930s, and came to a somewhat ignominious end by capsizing at a New York dock as a result of a fire while being converted to a troopship. Her size is about 7200 dTons for a Traveller Displacement Ton. She did have steam turbines and used oil-fired boilers, therefore requiring a much smaller engine room staff than a coal-burning ship. The large number of stewards will break down into three primary groups. One, those dedicated to keeping the passengers entertained while on board ship at the gaming tables and with deck sports. Second, those serving in the dining rooms, for which you will have three separate ones, one for each of the ship's classes, with plenty of waiters for the Cabin Class passengers, and considerably less for the Third Class group. Third, those responsible for cabin cleaning and service, at roughly 1 steward per 3 to 4 cabins. Note, the cabins for the Cabin class passengers are going to have to be considerably larger than your standard Traveller stateroom, and have capacity for more than one person. Tourist class staterooms might be closer to a Traveller stateroom, while the Third Class staterooms will not have their own toilet and shower facilities, but using a communal one.

This would also be before radar, which would add another set of officers to the bridge force.

For the current crop of cruise ships, the major cruise lines have basic ship layouts online, along with diagrams of the various size of cabins. The smallest and cheapest cabin would be very close to the standard Traveller stateroom.

For ships and boats in general, I would suggest checking out the apolloduck.com website where you will find a very large number of new and used ships and boats for sale, along with ship equipment. The main caveat is that they will be civilian vessels for the greater part.

 

[kilemall]

Since you are putting up classic steamship liners as space use paradigms for Traveller passenger traffic, doesn't that suggest a redo to deck plans and tickets?


For instance, as you mentioned the luxury people would never put up with the sort of Pullman limits the High Passage passenger apparently buys into.


So perhaps the standard for liners should be more like most staterooms are more like 'owner's suites' on yacht plans, catering to a class of ticket we'll call Luxury Passage, 8 tons at Cr30000 for CT purposes (scale to your system), and an expectation of effectively 1:1 Steward time (entertainment steward part time, cooking steward part time, and of course the cleaning/fetchit steward).



Then if you can't board enough to pay for the full suite, subdivide it to put two High/Medium Passage in it.



I don't know that the Steward ratio is sustainable in Traveller economics, automation in both services and entertainment would be key. I'd tend to look at cruise liners now for more of a crewing structure.

 

[Timerover51]

On page 79 of the Cepheus Engine System Reference Document is a list of what are viewed as common vehicles in the Cepheus Engine universe, based on a variety of Tech Levels, ranging from Steamship at Tech Level 4 to a Grav Carrier at Tech Level 15. While I cannot supply real examples of the higher Tech Level equipment, so that is a matter of speculation, I can supply plenty of examples of historical vehicles for ground, nautical, and air.

The historical vehicles listed are as follows: Steamship TL-4, Biplane TL-5, Ground Car TL-5, Motorboat TL-5, Helicopter TL-6, Submersible TL-6, Twin-Jet Aircraft TL-6, and Hovercraft TL-7. There is also listed a Destroyer at TL-9, along with higher Tech Level Armored Fighting Vehicle (Tracked) and All-Terrain Vehicle (Tracked). I have plenty of data on lower Tech Level tracked vehicles, along with a lot of data on Tech Level 8 and lower warships. What I think that I will do is gradually post here a list of what I view as common vehicles, but rather than a building sequence, I will simply take actual vehicles, ships, and aircraft, and adapt them to Cepheus Engine format, along with giving the actual specifications of them. That would get me working on putting together a list for my sector rules, as well as showing what the Real World looks like.

 

[Timerover51]

One thing that I am going to have to figure out, or develop a new system, is the Armor factor given for the vehicles on page 79.

What I assume is an ocean-going steamship is listed with an armor of 2, hull of 40, and structure of 40. A Biplane is listed with an armor of 2, hull of 1, and structure of 1. A Ground Car has an armor rating of 6, hull of 3, and structure of 2. A Motor Boat has an armor rating of 3, hull rating of 16, and structure rating of 17. A Submersible has an armor rating of 3, a hull rating of 85, and a structure rating of 85.

Now, a Tech Level 4 Ocean-Going Steamship is going to have a hull of either wrought iron or mild steel with a thickness of between 20 and 40 pounds of plating per square foot, equating to between one-half inch and one inch in thickness.

A Biplane is going to have a fuselage covered with either doped aircraft fabric, thin plywood, or very thin aluminum plating.

A Ground Car of Tech Level 5 might have a combined skin thickness on doors and body of 3 millimeters of mild steel plate.

A Motor Boat, such as a PT boat in World War 2, will likely have a hull of one-half inch marine plywood laid in double thickness, with waterproof canvas in-between the two thicknesses.

A Tech Level 6 Submersible is likely to have a hull of between 35 pound and 40 pounds vanadium alloy steel or HY-65 steel, roughly 40 percent stronger than mild steel. That would be the minimum, as the hull thickness would depend on the operational depth desired. Those thicknesses would equal a crush depth of around 900 feet minimum, and an operational depth of 450 feet. Actual crush depth would depend on the diameter of the hull.

Have I lost you with a dazed look in your eyes as yet?

I am not sure where the initial armor rating came from, but they do not reflect in any way reasonable figures. I have a feeling that I am going to simply impose an armor system on the rules, and give representative vehicles with actual armor ratings, and add a bunch of actual penetration by various weapons. I will try to make things clear enough so as to allow players to convert other actual vehicles, aircraft, and ships to my system for Cepheus Engine. Ships will include sailing ships, and also oared ships. I just have to figure out what is likely to be used on planets in my sector. I suspect that my planetary populations are going to be increased on some planets, especially the very wet ones. Such is life. I have been down this road before when modifying other game rules.

 

[infojunky]

One thing that I am going to have to figure out, or develop a new system, is the Armor factor given for the vehicles on page 79.

That table only kinda works for ground vehicles. Lots of very liberal application of what it means is up to the designer.

I am not sure where the initial armor rating came from, but they do not reflect in any way reasonable figures. I have a feeling that I am going to simply impose an armor system on the rules, and give representative vehicles with actual armor ratings, and add a bunch of actual penetration by various weapons. I will try to make things clear enough so as to allow players to convert other actual vehicles, aircraft, and ships to my system for Cepheus Engine. Ships will include sailing ships, and also oared ships. I just have to figure out what is likely to be used on planets in my sector. I suspect that my planetary populations are going to be increased on some planets, especially the very wet ones. Such is life. I have been down this road before when modifying other game rules.

I must note here that Traveller designers and gamers in general tend to way over armor vehicles. There are very few vehicles that are immune to fire from things like .50 cal machine guns and RPGs.

 

[Timerover51]

That table only kinda works for ground vehicles. Lots of very liberal application of what it means is up to the designer.

I got that idea, but that does put a big load on the Game Master to figure out how to hand attacks and damage.

I must note here that Traveller designers and gamers in general tend to way over armor vehicles. There are very few vehicles that are immune to fire from things like .50 cal machine guns and RPGs.

That is interesting you mention the .50 caliber machine gun, as I was thinking that might be a good standard or starting point to work from for penetration. I have those armor-penetrating curves already to go. Plus armor penetration for 20mm and up.

By the way, keep the dialogue going if possible, Infojunky.

RPGs are a totally different story. Their mechanic of penetration is the shaped charge, so a different approach is needed to break up the penetrating jet.

 

[infojunky]

I got that idea, but that does put a big load on the Game Master to figure out how to hand attacks and damage.

Yes, yes it is. Considering the number of vehicle you can fill full of hole before hitting something that will make it quit working as a vehicle. A good hit location chart is probably more effective simulation of fire on a vehicle than the armor/hit points model.

That is interesting you mention the .50 caliber machine gun, as I was thinking that might be a good standard or starting point to work from for penetration. I have those armor-penetrating curves already to go. Plus armor penetration for 20mm and up.

RPGs are a totally different story. Their mechanic of penetration is the shaped charge, so a different approach is needed to break up the penetrating jet.

Note, I picked two fairly common weapons that are often underrated in the amount of damage they can do, though a 7.62 Machine Gun is nearly as effective as a 50 in that respects.

Another point is CE inherited the a complete lack of scale from from the SRD, and thus assigning things like hits and armor to vehicles via a strict design system is very problematic.

 

[Timerover51]

Yes, yes it is. Considering the number of vehicle you can fill full of hole before hitting something that will make it quit working as a vehicle. A good hit location chart is probably more effective simulation of fire on a vehicle than the armor/hit points model.

Note, I picked two fairly common weapons that are often underrated in the amount of damage they can do, though a 7.62 Machine Gun is nearly as effective as a 50 in that respects.

Another point is CE inherited the a complete lack of scale from from the SRD, and thus assigning things like hits and armor to vehicles via a strict design system is very problematic.

I have quite a few miniature war game rules sets to work from on that. Just about all of them have some form of hit location chart or die roll.

I also have quite a lot of operational effectiveness data that I can draw on as well. It would be interesting to put a B-25G/H into the game with the 75mm gun mounted, along with all of the .50s.

 

[Timerover51]

When I get the basic ground vehicle book out, for up to Tech Level 8, I will be adding some weapons as well. I have plenty of graphics of weaponry. The question might be how much to put in. Another thing to think about.