Crew Complements

[Jeddak]

I've been thinking about the crew complements of the Star Cruiser ship designs and I think they are somewhat too approximate. Several notes about the subject:

1) Starship crews have to work and spend their lives in cramped conditions for months, so at least three watches are needed.

2) Bridge and engineering crew members have two watches. Second engineering watch will be doing damage control during alerts, but what is second bridge watch doing?

3) TAC crew mans the TAC during alerts, but what are they doing during normal travel conditions?

4) When starship is travelling between stars effectively faster than light (several hundred times faster, actually), no communications contact can be made. So why all bridge work stations (including communications) are always manned?

So, these are the major problems. Quick fix for them is to keep given crew complements (2xBridge, 1xTAC, 2xEngineering, 1xOthers) but to re-schedule their watches. Crews are probably cross-trained, so two bridge watches and TAC crew can man brige work stations and for example sensor work stations. This usually gives more crew than work stations, so high ranking officers probably won't stand watches.

EXAMPLE: Kennedy Class Fast Missile Carrier
(different sources give different numbers)

Bridge 2x10, TAC 16-18, Engineering 22-24, Medical 3-4, Ship's Troops 10-27. I'll presume that numbers 20 for bridge (1 cmd, 1 nav, 1 hlm, 3 eng, 2 com, 2 cmp), 16 for TAC (2 sen, 10 gun, 4 rem) and 24 for engineering (9 drv, 9 ele, 6 mec) are correct. So we have 26 and 24 people to man brige and engineering work stations round the clock.

Not quite enough, so I would man only command (officer of the deck), navigation (quartermaster), helm and engineering (3), sensor (2) work stations. Engineering would do with 8 (out of 12) manned workstations. So we'd get sufficient manning for all critical work stations. During higher readiness half of the brige and TAC stations and all engineering work stations would be manned and during alert every man is on duty.

As mentioned before, we have extra 10 crew members during the alert. That would be the senior officers (Captain, XO, Ops, Comm, Weps etc.) making decisions while enlisted crew members operate the actual work stations.

I have based my crew calculations to what information I have about US and Royal Navy submarine services. US Navy subs have their crew devided to four divisions: Operations (led by Operations officer, Ops), Weapons (led by Weapons Officer, Weps), Engineering (led by Chief Engineering officer, Cheng) and Executive Division (led by Executive officer, XO). Other typical officer positions are Navigations, Communications, Sonar, Supply (under XO) and several junior engineering officers.

Submarine crews stand 6 hour watches which makes their "days" 18 hours long. Under the waves (as in space) it really won't matter. This way the crew endurance is sufficient for 2 or 3 month cruises.

These would be easy and reasonable fixes for starship crews, it remains to be seen if I settle with these or would I make my own ship design rules whit detailed crew complement calculations.

Hope this post isn't too long... Comments?

- Jeddak

 

[Dunryc]

I spend quite some time meditating about similar problems/questions I had with the NC.

Just to give you some insight to my thoughts:

2) The second bridge watch have to man the auxiliary bridge in case the main bridge has been hit.

4) Well... FTL ... with the stutter warp this communication problem exists, but they are still able to get informations from special drones/buoys working as information or fligth path broker for insystem traffic.
They are still be able to receive message broadcast from the direction they are traveling to. The trick is to synchronize your stutter intervalls with the frequency of the incomming information wave. Just note you'll only get parts of this wave and you have to compute/extract the information from the "cut" waves you are receiving every time when you're coming out of warp.

As for watches I believe the practice of 4 watches still is a valid shift system for space operating ships, the only question is the manpower you have. To fill the shifts IMHO, a merchant will only have personal for 2 shifts, this crew have to work every second shift like it is done in small submarines.
I believe warships will have a larger crew just to compensate for "losses", a merchant have to be more cost effective.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Jeddak]

Originally posted by Dunryc:

2) The second bridge watch have to man the auxiliary bridge in case the main bridge has been hit.

But there's no work stations assigned for auxiliary bridge (or no mention whatsoever about it). So if you don't mind, I don't settle with this explanation...

4) Well... FTL ... with the stutter warp this communication problem exists, but they are still able to get informations from special drones/buoys working as information or fligth path broker for insystem traffic.
They are still be able to receive message broadcast from the direction they are traveling to. The trick is to synchronize your stutter intervalls with the frequency of the incomming information wave. Just note you'll only get parts of this wave and you have to compute/extract the information from the "cut" waves you are receiving every time when you're coming out of warp.

Well this is a bit better explanation, especially in insystem travel. While travelling between stars, I find it hard to believe that anyone would try to communicate with ships, since radio messages (travelling at the speed of light) take years to reach their destination. For inter stellar communications I use X-Boat service (in regular routes) and all kinds of ships serving as message couriers.

As for watches I believe the practice of 4 watches still is a valid shift system for space operating ships, the only question is the manpower you have. To fill the shifts IMHO, a merchant will only have personal for 2 shifts, this crew have to work every second shift like it is done in small submarines.

I don't know about smaller subs, but in Finnish Navy (and in most of the other navies, at least during the age of sail) the two watch system is used. I'm an infantry man myself (we have conscript army here in Finland) but I can imagine that serving in 4 hour shifts for weeks or months is hard work.

As I mentioned, in US Navy submarine service crews stand 6 hour watches, spending half of the 12 our off duty time sleeping and other half eating, training, studying and maintaining equipment. 4 hour watches would be IMO quite luxury (and waste of man power).

I believe warships will have a larger crew just to compensate for "losses", a merchant have to be more cost effective.

I agree that merchants try to be more cost effective, but I don't think warships have any extra crew members in case of losses; everyone is needed. Merchants could for example man continuously only 3 of 5 bridge work stations, so captain (and sometimes the owner of the ship) would not need to stand routine watches.

- Jeddak

 

[Dunryc]

Regarding the auxiliary bridge you have to assign this workstations

This kind of bridge is quite normal in larger warships - just keep in mind it just take one hit in the bridge to "kill" the whole ship.

As for smaller submarines (in WWII) - there is a 2 shift system with alternate watches (it's called in german "warme koje" [warm bunk]).
I believe this 4 watches system was used in the british navy during the age of sail

(I'll check this, but maybe this links will help you:
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jpaa/coastwatch/Submissions/JFS.pdf

Watch system for exploration vessel:
http://www.whoi.edu/marops/port_office/smm/PDF/ATL%2001%20CREW%20PLAN.pdf

UK SEAFARER HEALTH ASSESSMENT AND MARITIME WORKING CONDITIONS:
http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-seafarer_information/mcga-dqs_st_shs_seafarer_information-medical/mcga-dqs_st_shs_approved_docs_list-2/mcga-dqs_st_shs_approved_docs_manual-ch1.ht m?printout=1

Ship Manning:
http://www.onr.navy.mil/nrac/docs/2000_rpt_optimizing_surface_ship_manning.pdf
)

- Dun

 

[Jeddak]

I'll use the previous Kennedy example to enlighten my thinking about crew complements and tasks during different readiness conditions. After 'official' occupation is crew member's rank and task during 'red alert'. Numbers (1-2 and 1-3) indicate the watch during 2-watch and 3-watch readiness. So basicly crew can work in one, two or three watches.

Most of the enlisted crew members work in their occupational work stations, but bridge officers (Ops, Nav & Com) share the duties of officer of the deck (OOD), and TAC officers (Gun, Sen & Rem) supervise TAC operations (mostly sensors).

Command Officer (CO) Capt Cmd 1 -
EXECUTIVE DIVISION
Executive Officer (XO) Cmd Cmd 2 -
MEDICAL DEPARTMENT
Ship's Doctor (Doc) Lt Med 1 -
Medical Petty Officer (MedPO) PO Med 2 1
Medic SH Med 1 2
Medic SH Med 2 3
SECURITY DEPARTMENT
Marine Corps Officer (MCO) 1stLt Sec 1 -
Gunnery Sergeant GSgt Sec 2 -
Communications Operator Pvt Sec 1 -
Sergeant Sgt Sec 2 1
Corporal Crp Sec 2 1
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 2 1
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 2 1
Private Pvt Sec 2 1
Private Pvt Sec 2 1
Private Pvt Sec 2 1
Private Pvt Sec 2 1
Sergeant Sgt Sec 1 2
Corporal Crp Sec 1 2
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 1 2
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 1 2
Private Pvt Sec 1 2
Private Pvt Sec 1 2
Private Pvt Sec 1 2
Private Pvt Sec 1 2
Sergeant Sgt Sec 2 3
Corporal Crp Sec 1 3
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 2 3
Lance Corporal LCrp Sec 1 3
Private Pvt Sec 2 3
Private Pvt Sec 2 3
Private Pvt Sec 1 3
Private Ptv Sec 1 3
OPERATIONS DIVISION
Operations Officer (Ops) LtCmd Cmd 1 1
NAVIGATIONS DEPARTMENT
Navigations Officer (Nav) Lt Nav 2 2
Helm's Chief CPO Cmd 1 1
Helm's Petty Officer PO Hlm 2 1
Engineering Petty Officer PO Cmd 1 2
Engineering Petty Officer PO Eng 2 3
Engineering Operator SH Eng 1 1
Engineering Operator SH Eng 2 2
Engineering Operator SH Gun 1 3
Engineering Operator SH Gun 2 1
COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT
Communications Officer (CommO) LtJG Cmd 1 3
Communications Chief CPO Com 2 2
Communications Operator SH Com 1 2
Communications Operator SH Sen 2 3
Computer Chief CPO Cmd 1 3
Computer Petty Officer PO Cmp 2 1
Computer Operator SH Cmp 1 2
Computer Operator SH Rem 2 3
WEAPONS DIVISION
GUNNERY DEPARTMENT
Weapons Officer (Weps) LtCmd Cmd 1 -
Gunner SH Gun 1 1
Gunner SH Gun 2 2
Gunnery Officer (GunO) Lt Cmd 2 1
Gunner SH Gun 1 3
Gunner SH Gun 2 1
Gunnery Chief CPO Gun 1 1
Gunner SH Gun 1 2
Gunnery Petty Officer PO Gun 2 3
Gunner SH Gun 2 3
SENSORS DEPARTMENT
Sensors Officer (SensO Lt Cmd 2 2
Sensors Chief CPO Sen 2 2
REMOTE CONTROL DEPARTMENT
Remote Control Officer (RemO) LtJG Cmd 1 3
Remote Control Chief CPO Rem 1 3
Remote Control Operator SH Rem 1 1
Remote Control Operator SH Rem 1 2
ENGINEERING DIVISION
REACTOR DEPARTMENT
Chief Engineering Officer (Cheng) LtCmd Eng 1 1
Reactor Chief CPO Eng 2 2
Reactor Engineer SH Eng 1 1
Reactor Engineer SH Eng 2 2
MAIN DRIVE DEPARTMENT
Main Drive Officer (MDO) Lt Eng 2 2
Main Drive Chief CPO Eng 1 1
Main Drive Engineer SH Eng 1 3
Main Drive Engineer SH Eng 2 1
ELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT
Electronics Officer (ElecO) Ens Eng 1 1
Electronics Chief CPO Eng 2 3
Electronics Engineer SH Eng 1 2
Electronics Engineer SH Eng 2 3
DAMAGE CONTROL DEPARTMENT
Damage Control Officer (DCO) LtJG Dmg 2 3
Damage Controller SH Dmg 1 1
Damage Controller SH Dmg 2 2
Damage Control Petty Officer PO Dmg 2 1
Damage Controller SH Dmg 1 3
Damage Controller SH Dmg 2 1
Damage Control Petty Officer PO Dmg 3 2
Damage Controller SH Dmg 1 2
Damage Controller SH Dmg 2 3
Damage Control Petty Officer PO Dmg 1 3
Damage Controller SH Dmg 1 2
Damage Controller SH Dmg 2 3

I Hope this isn't too spesific or confusing for you guys...

I like the touch of realism in my game (or I just have too much time in my hands).

- Jeddak

P.S. Sorry about this mess, try to reply to my message to get spaces right.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Go find posts by Bill Cameron in some of the other forums here - he has discussed (as have others with extensive naval experience) watches and crew rotations quite a bit.

 

[Jeddak]

Originally posted by Dunryc:
Regarding the auxiliary bridge you have to assign this workstations

This kind of bridge is quite normal in larger warships - just keep in mind it just take one hit in the bridge to "kill" the whole ship.

Hmm, I have visited only relatively small ships, so I haven't seen any auxiliary bridges. But room is always limited so I would imagine that possible aux. bridges are not fully equipped. I think in most ships there is no specific aux. bridge but there are additional controls in engineering control room.

As for smaller submarines (in WWII) - there is a 2 shift system with alternate watches (it's called in german "warme koje" [warm bunk]).
I believe this 4 watches system was used in the british navy during the age of sail

I agree with the WWII part, but according to my sources RN had only two watches: 5x4 hours and 2x2 hours dog watches per day to get some change. Captain usually didn't stand watches (as did not steward, doctor, smith etc.) instead they were on duty when needed. Also the whole crew were piped on deck when the ship set sail etc. Sailors didn't get too much sleep, but I bet they slept heavily when thay got a chance!

I'll check this, but maybe this links will help you:

Thanks for the links, they are quite helpful! Of course everyone can use whatever system they want to (or not to stick to ssuch details at all) but I prefer that division/department organization and 1-2-3 watch system.

- Jeddak

 

[Dunryc]

I believe this is the one from Bill?

http://www.travellerrpg.com/cgi-bin/Trav/CotI/Discuss/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000816#000012

- Dun

 

[Fritz_Brown]

That's the thread (not the only watch-standing post by Bill, BTW), I think.

 

[Whipsnade]

Fritz,

Well, that thread wasn't exactly my finest hour, but I posted it and I'll vouch for it.

A man must be responsible for his messes.


Have fun,
Bill

P.S. Like Traveller, 2300AD often failed to differentiate between civilian manning requirements and military manning requirements. 2300AD use of crew rating DMs with regards to living space and gravity was a nice touch.

 

[Jeddak]

Although the conversation almost got out of hands, you guys were still talking business. And the conclusions that can be drawn are same as mine on the subject: working in cramped, possibly zero-g conditions for weeks and even months is exhausting job. Work needs to be done in shifts, depending on situation at hand, but there's no luxury of truly 'extra' personnel. Therefore during red alerts every man has his place and everybody is needed. Such situations can occur also in civilian (sea-faring) ship: exiting and entering harbors, storms, narrow sea lanes etc. therefore different readiness need to be maintained.

I prefer to use modern submarines as a basis for crew complement, organization, tasks they perform, and way of life. As in underwater, there is no night and day in space, and one error in navigation or little damage in battle may result to death of the whole crew. So everyone must be used to difficult conditions and to work for not for themselves, but for the ship and shipmates.

- Jeddak

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Bill, that's why I try to pause before I hit the Add Reply button. But, it was really good information that you and others provided in that thread.

 

[Merxiless]

It actually is a bit more complicated, I'd think.

Aboard a US Navy Cruiser:

When I was at sea, normal cruising, I did 6-8 hour Sonar watches.

But when we went to General Quarters (Submarine Contact), I manned the port side torpedo launcher, until the specific engagement/submarine contact was resolved. Otherwise, I'd man a gun.

Wartime cruising /Alert levels were different.

Outside the Persian Gulf, I manned the .50 cal gun mount Starboard, 8 hours on, 8 off.

Inside the Persian Gulf, I manned the port side 25 mm Gun mount 12 hours on 12 off.

Unless we were escorting Oil Tankers through the strait of Hormuz, then we got 4 hours of sleep a day, sometime we were awake 48-72 hours, depending on the specifics of shipping traffic.

People were exhausted, to say the least. I learned a lot about morale, and sleep deprivation's effects on concentration.

At GQ Stations, everyone had a job, usually extra bridge crew manned radar consoles in CIC. Engineering crew were assigned to battle aid / casualty stations, or firefighting/damage control teams.

Weapons dept guys became ammo carriers/ loaders, and manned up alongside small and medium caliber guns, if they didn't have an air / surface / submarine missile launcher station / console to man.

Make your manning as simple or complicated as you want, I am positive that such things have a general plan, but vary from ship to ship, based on too many factors to easily quantify.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Jeddak:
I prefer to use modern submarines as a basis...

Jeddak,

I think the "Submarine = spaceship" idea can be taken too far.

So everyone must be used to difficult conditions and to work for not for themselves, but for the ship and shipmates.

The same can be said for any ship or military unit.

On the whole, I feel Traveller and 2300AD have undermanned military vessels and overmanned civilian vessels.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Merxiless:
It actually is a bit more complicated, I'd think. Aboard a US Navy Cruiser: {snip of extremely good Real World examples.)

Merxiless,

As you pointed out, manning levels are very complicated. Each GM will have to balance how much complication he adds to his game against the 'fun' that complication creates.

My cruiser pulled escort duty during the Tanker War too. As you explained in your post, the crew wore out because of the number and length of GQs we stood. However, that effect was exacerbated because we were constantly undermanned.

For example:

- Our ship's GQ watchbill listed four damage control parties, but we made do with three from a lack of qualified bodies.
- During our Persian Gulf transits, the various ratings in CIC (call them 'sensor watches') stood very long watches, watches that they, unlike engineering, weren't used to standing.
- On a daily basis in engineering, the various watches in the plants were on different watch cycles due to manning issues with ~70% on 6x6 and ~30% on 4x8.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Jeddak]

Originally posted by Merxiless:
It actually is a bit more complicated, I'd think.

I've thinking this today (once again) while working (well, you have touse your time effectively...) and I totally agree. I just feel the SC-NAM rules are way too simplified.

People were exhausted, to say the least. I learned a lot about morale, and sleep deprivation's effects on concentration.

I can imagine you had some rough time. I have some experience about sleep deprivation, extended physical and mental stress and the like, too. But as I've mentioned before, I'm an infantry grunt myself (holding the rank of staff sergeant) and since Finland hasn't been involved in any wars or crisis since WWII (except during UN (and NATO's) peace keeping missions) I cannot possibly have any real life combat experience. My training consist mostly of weapon handling and light infantry tactics, but naval warfare holds a special place in my curious mind, so your posting was extremely interesting reading.

At GQ Stations, everyone had a job, usually extra bridge crew manned radar consoles in CIC. Engineering crew were assigned to battle aid / casualty stations, or firefighting/damage control teams.

This is exactly my point. There are no idle people aboard warships, and cross training is more rule than exception.

Make your manning as simple or complicated as you want, I am positive that such things have a general plan, but vary from ship to ship, based on too many factors to easily quantify.

In addition to honest curiosity, what I'm trying to do is to understand the whole system in all its complexness, to make some general rules to use in games. I think I'm making some progress and soon I can present some rules and principles how to man spaceships (in 2300AD context) in more realistic manner.

Thanks again for sharing your real life experiences, they were quite interesting on their own account...

- Jeddak

 

[Jeddak]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
I think the "Submarine = spaceship" idea can be taken too far.

What do you mean?

On the whole, I feel Traveller and 2300AD have undermanned military vessels and overmanned civilian vessels.

Yeah, that's what your example above clearly shows (so you BOTH have served on cruisers..?). At least in 2300AD I like to think that computers are not that effective (and need to have multiple backup systems and proper shielding) because of stutterwarp effect, so human operators are needed. But yeah, I agree with you about over/undermanning.

- Jeddak

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Jeddak:
What do you mean?

Jeddak,

It has to do with weapons, sensors, and methods of fighting mostly. Spacecraft are nothing like submarines when you examine those issues.

- Subs are extremely stealthy, spacecraft are not.
- Subs fight alone from ambush, spacecraft fight in groups in the 'open'.
- Subs have tactical weapons of a limited range, spacecraft have weapons whose ranges are measured in light-seconds.
- Subs have sensors limited in both type and range, spacecraft have a plethora of sensors of great range.

Compared to subs, spacecraft fight completely differently with completely different weapons against opponents they found in a completely different manner. Subs and spacecraft are two very different things so any 'lessons' learned from one can only be 'applied' to the other in very general terms.

Can you use tidbits from daily life aboard a submarine to 'color' your descriptions of daily life aboard a spacecraft? Sure.

Can you copy everything about life an organization aboard a submarine and apply it exactly to a spacecraft that works and fights so very differently? No.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Jeddak]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
It has to do with weapons, sensors, and methods of fighting mostly. Spacecraft are nothing like submarines when you examine those issues.

Whether we are fighting with sailing ships, modern surface ships, submarines or space ships (or even with tanks and infantry), same basic aspects can be seen: Detection (range and target solution), movement (speed and agility) and damage dealing (accuracy, range and damage against dodging, blocking or interfering).

- Subs are extremely stealthy, spacecraft are not.

Depends. In vastness of space it's easy to lose one small spacecraft, especially when detection depends mostly radiation and there are stars and other objects to interfere. It's somewhat like trying to hear submarine with all the backround noise interfering.

- Subs fight alone from ambush, spacecraft fight in groups in the 'open'.

Well, of course in 2300AD there are different classes of spacecrafts, each fulfilling its own role as a part of the whole. But hey, WWII "wolf packs"..?

- Subs have tactical weapons of a limited range, spacecraft have weapons whose ranges are measured in light-seconds.

Yeah weapon ranges are really measured in light seconds, but so is ship movement. Everything is relative, and in 2300AD weapon ranges are quite short actually. And of course, missiles act a lot like torpedoes.

- Subs have sensors limited in both type and range, spacecraft have a plethora of sensors of great range.

Again, everything is relative. And same principles apply in both submarine detection sensors and in 2300AD: most of the sensors actually used are passive, active sensor use meaning 'hey I'm here!'.

Compared to subs, spacecraft fight completely differently with completely different weapons against opponents they found in a completely different manner. Subs and spacecraft are two very different things so any 'lessons' learned from one can only be 'applied' to the other in very general terms.

Well, if I've understood the game at hand correctly, space warfare in 2300AD is derived from modern/historic naval warfare. It was described in Star Cruiser rules as 'hide and seek with bazookas'. But after all it's a game, and inside the game world game rules apply.

Can you use tidbits from daily life aboard a submarine to 'color' your descriptions of daily life aboard a spacecraft? Sure.

Can you copy everything about life an organization aboard a submarine and apply it exactly to a spacecraft that works and fights so very differently? No.

I'm not copying everything straight from the real life, but instead finding similarities to get some sense of realism to a game. From my point of view naval life and warfare share quite many aspects with life and fighting in space (in 2300AD context): cramped ships, difficulties of livig in almost total isolation, extremely hostile surroundings, means of detection and fighting etc.

- Jeddak

 

[Whipsnade]

Depends. In vastness of space it's easy to lose one small spacecraft...

Jeddak,

Sorry, but no.

And especially NO when we limit this conversation to the 2300AD. In 2300AD you have stutterwarp traces ships can follow at FTL speeds, gravitational sensors that pick up FTL 'shelf' crossings, and a host of other sensors. Look at both the SC and NAM combat rules, each ship, missile, or drone is represented on the map at all times. Yes, sometimes as just a bogey marker, but it still there.

In 2300AD there is no stealth comparable to that which a submarine enjoys today. Each opponent knows where the other is, maybe not enough to get a target lock, but they know where the other is.

Well, of course in 2300AD there are different classes of spacecrafts, each fulfilling its own role as a part of the whole. But hey, WWII "wolf packs"..?

You completely fail to understand what rudentactik was all about. Even when part of a 'pack', a submarine still approached its targets alone, selected its target alone, fired on its target alone, and withdrew from the battlespace ALONE. The only real 'co-operation' was having a sub act as a 'trailer' after contacting the convoy. The subs did not plan or carry out their attacks together in any manner.

Now contrast that to SC-NAM with the different classes of spacecraft you mention. We have scouts, fighters, missile ships, beam ships, and carriers all working together and in communication with each other during battle. That is something subs have never done and can never do.

Subs hunt alone, ships work together. In SC-NAM, ships work together.

Everything is relative, and in 2300AD weapon ranges are quite short actually. And of course, missiles act a lot like torpedoes.

Weapon ranges in 2300AD are short, but no where near as short as modern tactical sub weapons are relatively speaking. Because of the sensor limitations subs operate under, their tactical weapons (not SLCMs or ICBMs fired against fixed targets) are relatively short. A sub-launched SSM may have the same theorectical range as a surface-launched version, but the sub's sensors cannot acquire a target at a distance anywhere near that which other platforms can.

And if you think SC-NAM missiles are akin to torpedos, you have a lot of reading to do about torpedos. The best torpedos today have a useable range of under 12nm and are of limited endurance. Contrast that to the missiles of SC-NAM which have an essentially unlimited range and endurance.

Again, everything is relative. And same principles apply in both submarine detection sensors and in 2300AD: most of the sensors actually used are passive, active sensor use meaning 'hey I'm here!'.

The same detection paradigms do not apply between submarines and 2300AD combat. The active-passive dilemma is there, but the relatively limited nature of submarine-based sensors is no where to be seen in 2300AD as is the sensor masking a submarine's natural environment provides it.

There is no thermocline in space, no way truly 'hide'. There is nothing like the stealthy abilities the ocean provides a sub and nothing like the sensor limiting handicaps operating underwater forces on a sub.

Well, if I've understood the game at hand correctly, space warfare in 2300AD is derived from modern/historic naval warfare. It was described in Star Cruiser rules as 'hide and seek with bazookas'.

Re-read the rules. You remembered the 'hide and seek' part correct, but you missed the mention of a game called Harpoon. There is more to modern naval warfare than submarines. Surface craft armed with missiles play hide and seek too. Surface craft can also work together, like spacecraft in 2300AD and unlike submarines.

I'm not copying everything straight from the real life, but instead finding similarities to get some sense of realism to a game. From my point of view naval life and warfare share quite many aspects with life and fighting in space (in 2300AD context): cramped ships, difficulties of livig in almost total isolation, extremely hostile surroundings, means of detection and fighting etc.

That can be said about any naval combat as far back as the trireme. It isn't just specific to submarines.

Remember; Form Follows Function. Spacecraft in 2300AD are not precise analogs of modern submarines because the two operate and fight in very different ways. One fights alone with a constrained sensor picture and the limited weapon ranges that entails. The other fights in groups with a 'clearer' sensor picture and the lengthy weapon ranges that creates.

Can you use subs for the broad brush strokes? Yes.

Should you use subs for all the nitty-gritty details. Of course not. Your organizational charts, department groupings, and whatnot fall into that catagory IMHO. ForEx: subs carry no small craft other than inflatable boats, yet nearly every SC-NAM vessels either carries an interface craft or is interface capable. Does your submarine derived organization have a flight/boats department?


Have fun,
Bill