• 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.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Comparison between Traveller Rules and Modern Ship Designs

PFVA63

SOC-13
Hi,

Some of the discussions on these boards in recent months concerning Traveller ship designs and how much space different systems take up, has gotten me thinking about how they might compare to modern ship designs. Unfortunately, its hard to find alot of consistant data on any given ship. However, there is a fair amount of data on some student designs on the internet, particularly from places like Virginia Tech, MIT, and the Naval Post Graduate School (NPS).

In particular at the link for the NPS http://www.nps.edu/Academics/GSEAS/TSSE/subPages/experienceTSSE.htmlthere is some data on a couple frigate/Destroyer sized desgns that were developed using some of the same tools that the US Navy uses for its own ship designs.

In particular, there is one design for a frigate sized vessel called the CPCX that displaces about 4000t of Sea Water and has a total enclosed volume of about 499,000 cubic ft. As such in Traveller terms the ship has a volumetric displacement of about 1000 dtons.

If I did the math right then the machinery spaces take up about an additional 49678 cubic feet (99dtons) with another 5738 cubic feet of space in the double bottom in the Machinery Spaces (11.5 dtons).

Using an average hull deck height of 10.57ft and a deck house deck height of 9.84ft (as stated in the data on the NPS site) here is a summary of other internal spaces;

Ship Fuel 18305 cu ft (36.6 dton)
Small Craft Fuel 2814 cu ft (5.6 dton)
Fresh water 653 cu ft (1.3 dton)
Sewage 245 cu ft (0.5 dton)
Waste Oil/Water 366 cu ft (0.7 dtons)

Human Support/Accommodations etc for 122 personnel 167 dtons or 1.37 dtons/person
Internal Accesses (passageways) 135 dtons
Other Ship Support (maintenance & stores etc) 125 dtons

Small Arms 3.4 dtons
Weapons Maint 15.5 dtons
Aviation Support 13.1 dtons
Weapons 37.4 dtons
Countermeasures 3.9 dtons

Chart Room 1.6 dtons
Pilot House 10.4 dtons
CIC 10.4 dtons
Sensors 13.5 dtons
Radio Rms 15.3 dtons
Interior comms etc 7.3 dtons

As such, in summary

Machinery Space (including double bottom) - 11% total volume
Ship fuel - 3.7% total voulme
Small Craft fuel - 0.5% total volume
Other Tankage - 0.25% total volume
Berthing, Passages & Stores etc - 43% total volume (or about 3.5 dtons per accommodation)
Aviation Support - 1.3% total volume
Weapons etc - 6% total volume
Command, Comms, & Surveillance etc - 5.9%

Anyway, I thought it was kind of interesting to see just how much space is dedicated to things like command spaces and accommodations spaces on ocean going ships, and how these compare to the rules for space ships in Traveller.
 
Last edited:
Gosh, 3.5 tons per person and Traveller uses 4 tons. Pretty damn close if you ask me.

Fuel, engineering and bridge obviously cannot be crossed over directly of course.

This is interesting, thanks for posting.
 
Gosh, 3.5 tons per person and Traveller uses 4 tons. Pretty damn close if you ask me.

Yep, but on an ocean going vessel, it may be assumed that you can always step onto the deck to get a breath of fresh air and some (temporary) elbow room... can't really do that on a ship in space, especially jumpspace. ;)

This is interesting, thanks for posting.

Indeed, I have also looked at submarines, Railroad coaches, and Recreational Vehicles (RVs) for inspiration on floorplans and basic systems layouts.
 
Yep, but on an ocean going vessel, it may be assumed that you can always step onto the deck to get a breath of fresh air and some (temporary) elbow room... can't really do that on a ship in space, especially jumpspace.

An aircraft carrier might be a good ship to look at since strolling around on the deck can be bad for your health. [squish]
 
An aircraft carrier might be a good ship to look at since strolling around on the deck can be bad for your health. [squish]

Having served on several aircraft carriers (last being the Abraham Lincoln CVN-72), you would have quite the task of mapping out the 2000+ compartments - Its a rats maze of corridors, hatches, ladder wells and scuttles. And the hanger bay can be as dangerous as the flight deck (ask a few of my former shipmates who forgot to pay attention to the tie down chains or FA18 knife-edged wings)
 
Submarines might be the BEST analogy.

No outer deck, Nuclear Power Plants (fission, not fusion though), cramped quarters, completely independent life support and oxygen generation systems.

I served on a submarine for almost 4 years and I have always used the FEEL of a submarine as inspiration for how a space/starship feels: cramped and smelly.
 
When I told my Navy recruiter (a long time ago) that I was a science-fiction fan, he tried to talk me into volunteering for submarine duty on the grounds that it was as close to being on a starship as I could get on this planet.

It didn't work....
 
When I talked to the navy recruiter, he wanted me to go nuke engineer... until he met me, and realized I couldn't fit the bunks.
 
When I talked to the navy recruiter, he wanted me to go nuke engineer... until he met me, and realized I couldn't fit the bunks.

Mine never told me I wouldn't fit into the bunks, and recruited me for nuke engineer, anyway. :o
 
Mine never told me I wouldn't fit into the bunks, and recruited me for nuke engineer, anyway. :o

My Navy Recruiter was my Cadet Commander's older brother... their whole family remains tied to the local community where my parents (and I), and my recruiter's parents (and inlaws) still live.

Sometimes, it's good to live in small towns. At the time I was 6'3"... and 180#. (I'm now 6'2" and 250#... )

Later that year, our cadet trip took us on a boomer. CMM leading the tour let us try the bunks... OUCH! I couldn't even pull the curtains...

Which is part of why I design bunks at 2m (6'6") x 1.25 (4'); you get 96% of people covered that way... and about 90% comfortably so. I usually put 1m (3'3") vertical space.
 
Hi, I thought ...

Hi,

I thought the 3.5 dt/person number was kind of interesting too, though I guess on amodern naval ship, individual staterooms and berthing spaces may contain far more than the double occupancy assumed in Traveller.

With respect to subamarines, there are a couple of interesting Theses on the MIT D-Space site that provide some information, but I haven't had a chance to look over that info too closeley yet. Here are some links though for anyone else interested:

http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/33587
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/36823
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/14609
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/8268

Finally, one thing that really interested me was he relationship between ship displacement (mt) and volume (dtons). I plotted up some additional data I had on modern naval ships and it looks like for surface combatants (like Frigates & Destroyers) 1 mt equates to about 0.25 dtons. here's a graph I put together.

[Edit] From this graph, it appears that a modern firgate (like the FFG7 class) is about similar to a 1000dton vessel and a modern destroyer (like the DDG51 class) is similar to a 2000dton vessel [End Edit]

Regards

PF

DispvsVol.jpg


PS - In the graph MCM's are mine countermeasures vessels, SC's are surface combatants, Des are design studies, and LSD's are Landing Ship Docks
 
Last edited:
When I told my Navy recruiter (a long time ago) that I was a science-fiction fan, he tried to talk me into volunteering for submarine duty on the grounds that it was as close to being on a starship as I could get on this planet.

It didn't work....
Did they show you the William Shatner video? It did work on me.
Can't complain, it was fun when it was fun, and I met my wife.
 
Bill did a US services recruiting video? :oo:

I must go a hunting on the net now. In the meantime if anyone knows where one could find it online drop a note here please.

Did they know he was a Canuckistan?

:smirk:
 
Bill did a US services recruiting video? :oo:

I must go a hunting on the net now. In the meantime if anyone knows where one could find it online drop a note here please.

Did they know he was a Canuckistan?

:smirk:
Yep, it was specifically for the Naval Nuclear Power Program. And it does not matter whether he was a Canadian or not. He was a starship captain, and the perfect recruiter for geeks like me.
 
Some Additional Data

Hi,

I got messing around with some stuff a little more and updated my chart.

Disp%20vs%20Vol%202.jpg


Looking at it and the data I used in the plot, and if I did the math right then it appears that;

- these ships are close to 200 dtons

viewpic.asp


- these ships are about 600 dtons

ssbn--dvic112.jpg


- these ships are about 1000 dtons

800px-USS_Oliver_Hazard_Perry_FFG-7.jpg


- these ships are about 2000 dtons

800px-Destroyer_Okrylenny.jpg


Regards

PF
 
If you can find a ship's Gross Tonnage (GT) which refers to the volume of all ship's enclosed spaces (from keel to funnel) measured to the outside of the hull framing you can determine it's Traveller dtons size by dividing GT by ~4.770318. Gross tonnage is a measurement of the enclosed spaces within a ship expressed in "tons" – a unit which is actually equivalent to 100 cubic feet (2.83 cu m).

Therefore the Liberty of the Seas
Liberty_Of_The_Seas_22-04-2007.JPG
is about 32,368.3 dtons.
 
Finally, one thing that really interested me was he relationship between ship displacement (mt) and volume (dtons). I plotted up some additional data I had on modern naval ships and it looks like for surface combatants (like Frigates & Destroyers) 1 mt equates to about 0.25 dtons. here's a graph I put together.
By dtons do you mean real-world ship gross tonnage (1 ton = 1m^3) or Traveller tonnage (1 ton = 14m^3)?

Also, I wonder if the formulae work for larger surface combatants (such as Cruisers, Battlecruisers or Battleships) and for older ships (late 19th century to early 20th century)...
 
Hi

By dtons do you mean real-world ship gross tonnage (1 ton = 1m^3) or Traveller tonnage (1 ton = 14m^3)?

Also, I wonder if the formulae work for larger surface combatants (such as Cruisers, Battlecruisers or Battleships) and for older ships (late 19th century to early 20th century)...

Hi,

I've been trying to use dtons to represent Traveller type volumetric units and mt (or metric tons) to represent the amount of water that a ship displaces to to its weight (which I also refered to as a ship's hydrostatic displacement). As such, dtons represent 14 cubic meters and mt represents that weight of about 1 cubic meter of sea water, and from that data I have, for a modern surface combatant a ship with a hydrostatic displacement of 4000mt has a Traveller displacement of about 1000 dtons.

Regards

PF
 
Back
Top