• 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.

Deckplan Challenge - Contest

Hmm.

Assuming that the ship at the front is a spheroid (In this case a sphere+toroid) and is approximately 60m high, then the radii would be approximately 40x40x30.

4/3 x Pi x R1.R2.R3 /14 ~= 15,000 dTon

The "little" SDB in the absolute foreground is also pretty damn big, I'd estimate a 2-4k dTon flattened cylinder, with a half length similar sized cylinder on its back.

Estimating for the cylinder a 12m height, 40m width, and 100m length would be (Pi x 6 x 20 x 120 /14 ~= 3000 dTon), with the additional space on its back that comes to a 5000 dTon craft or so.

The wedge in the background... well. Initial estimates of 150m width, 600m length and 60m height in an unadorned wedge. That is approximately 200 kdTon.

From experience a 5kdTon design is considerable work.
 
If anyone's interested:

The Deckplans of the 800t patrol craft "CSS Vidocq" in our campaign

Deck 1 (cabins, maneuver drive)
Deck 2 (main deck)
Deck 3 (jump drive, engines and hangar)
Deck 4 (fuel tank, aux. bridge, fuel skimmer)

Yes, the deckplans have some minor design glitches - most are intentional.
 
Originally posted by Rraurgrimm:
If anyone's interested:

The Deckplans of the 800t patrol craft "CSS Vidocq" in our campaign

Deck 1 (cabins, maneuver drive)
Deck 2 (main deck)
Deck 3 (jump drive, engines and hangar)
Deck 4 (fuel tank, aux. bridge, fuel skimmer)

Yes, the deckplans have some minor design glitches - most are intentional.
Those links don't seem to like being clicked, though I can do a "download linked file" and get them.
 
I was looking over atpollard's mini craft ruleset and something seems off with fuel allowance and usage.
Posted in "Mini Craft for Classic Traveller":
Triplex Drive: …Each Triplex Drive provides 1G of performance and requires 3% of ship for Maneuver, 4% for Power Plant and 1% for fuel (total 8% of the ship).

…Duration has been reduced to 6 hours per 0.1 cubic meter of fuel.
First, fuel consumption should be proportional to drive size rather than a flat rate. For starships, PP fuel is typically 1/3rd of Man+PP tonnage, and lasts for 48hrs at the rated G. I assumed a slightly more efficient usage due to lower Engineering waste space and tighter overall design. I translated that into 0.006m³ per m³ of Man+PP (7% of volume) per hour.

The other problem is that the Man+PP+fuel doesn't add up correctly. Here is a table of boat and drive volume from the rules, the calculated drive volume (7% of the boat), the remaining volume for fuel, and the duration allowed by that fuel (compared to vol/hrs from rules).
Code:
dTon Vol  Drive Vol   7% Vol   Fuel/hrs  (Fuel/hrs)
 1   14m³  BB   2m³   0.98m³  1.02m³/173 (0.3/ 18)
 2   28m³  CC   3m³   1.96m³  1.04m³/88  (0.4/ 24)
 3   42m³  DD   4m³   2.94m³  1.06m³/60  (0.5/ 30)
 4   56m³  EE   5m³   3.92m³  1.08m³/45  (0.6/ 36)
 5   70m³  FF   6m³   4.90m³  1.10m³/37  (0.8/ 42)

 6   84m³  GG   7m³   5.88m³  1.12m³/31  (0.9/ 54)
 7   98m³  HH   8m³   6.86m³  1.14m³/27  (1.0/ 60)
 8  112m³  JJ   9m³   7.84m³  1.16m³/24  (1.1/ 66)
 9  126m³  LL  11m³   8.82m³  2.18m³/41  (1.4/ 84)
10  140m³  MM  12m³   9.80m³  2.20m³/37  (1.5/ 90)

11  154m³  NN  13m³  10.78m³  2.22m³/34  (1.6/ 96)
12  168m³  PP  14m³  11.76m³  2.24m³/31  (1.8/108)
13  182m³  QQ  15m³  12.74m³  2.26m³/29  (1.9/114)
14  196m³  RR  16m³  13.72m³  2.28m³/27  (2.0/120)
15  210m³  SS  17m³  14.70m³  2.30m³/26  (2.1/126)

16  224m³  TT  18m³  15.68m³  2.32m³/24  (2.3/138)
17  238m³  UU  19m³  16.66m³  2.34m³/23  (2.4/144)
18  252m³  WW  21m³  17.64m³  3.36m³/31  (2.6/156)
19  266m³  XX  22m³  18.62m³  3.38m³/30  (2.8/168)
20  280m³  YY  23m³  19.60m³  3.40m³/28  (2.9/174)
Combining the fuel in the volume is really more complicated than it needs to be. Drive size of 7% (1m³/dT) per G of desired performance is combined with fuel tankage of any desired volume (including fractional m³) assigned to the Engr compartment.

Drive size can be reached by any combination of drive units. E.g., two 3m³ units would provide 3G performance for a 2dT craft or 1G performance for a 6dT craft. Fuel duration would be 168hrs×fuel/drive (both in m³) at the full rated G and proportional for lower power use. E.g., dual 3m³ drives in a 2dT craft with 1.5m³ fuel would be limited to 168×1.5/6 = 42 hrs at 3G or 126 hrs at 1G.
 
Last edited:
The Minicraft rules sprang from the wacky results of the High Guard minimum sizes and the desire to build “vehicles” with High Guard. Calculate the performance, power output and duration of a TL 15 - 10 dTon craft (fighter size) with a minimum sized (1 dTon each) PP, MD and fuel. The MD would be 10 percent and yield about 3.67G performance, except that 3G performance would require only 3% of the ship for PP (0.3 dTons = 0.3 EP). The smallest PP is 1 dTon (1 EP at TL 15, 0.5 EP at TL 13, 0.33 EP at TL 9, and 0.25 EP at TL 7). At TL 15, the craft is dramatically over powered for its drive. One dTon of fuel, per book 5, will provide 1 EP for 4 weeks, so the 10 dTon small craft can operate at 3G using 0.3 EP with a duration of 13.3 weeks between refills. Who needs over 3 months duration on a personal transport? The HG minimums result in bizarrely unbalanced components.

Enter Striker.
I must admit that I was only semi-familiar with Striker. I liked the fact that it allowed the creation of vehicles and small craft, but found the rules much too complex and often incompatible with B2 and B5. What I wanted was a B5 compatible system that was as simple as B2 – plus a “logical” justification. From Striker, I learned 2 new things about ship components: (1) they can be built smaller than 1 dTon with a lower limit of 1 cubic meter, and (2) power plants became less efficient as they got smaller.

My solution.
I chose to combine all three components (MD, PP, Fuel) into a single unit and to set the minimum size of this unit at 1 cubic meter. This allowed the smallest possible craft before the minimum unit size became an issue again. Striker would allow a PP of 1 cubic meter, a MD of zero volume and an infinitely tiny fuel tank. This agrees with my proposed minimum size, but is otherwise completely different from B2 and B5. Hence the logic behind a combined unit.

Efficiency of Scale.
The other big concept from Striker was that smaller components suffered a cost in efficiency. The B5 MD percentage table indicates only 2 percent of the craft is required for 1G, but each additional G requires an additional 3 percent of the ship. (1G=2%, 2G=2+3=5%, 3G=2+3+3=8%, etc.) I saw an opportunity to simplify the B5 MD formula to a constant 3% per G, which would allow the number of engines to equal the performance in Gees and would provide a reduction in efficiency to keep the B5 designed small craft a little better than the Minicraft (important to reducing unintended abuse).

“Yes it is smaller than B5 allows, but it is also a less efficient. That is why the Imperial Shipyards do not build them this way.”

Fuel consumption.
Book 5 (High Guard) lists fuel consumption at 1 dTon of fuel will produce 1 EP for 4 weeks. Book 2 lists fuel consumption at 10 dTon of fuel will produce 1 EP for 4 weeks. Striker says that I can provide as much or as little fuel as I want to get whatever duration seems appropriate to the craft. I do not need 4 weeks duration for a craft whose size is between that of school bus and a VW beetle. Who would want to spend 4 weeks driving in a car with no stops? I chose to stick with the fuel = 1% from HG simply because I like High Guard, but I also remembered the lesson from Striker about decreasing fuel efficiency. I chose to scale the fuel volume and duration from a practical lower limit for personal transport up towards the B2 values as they got larger. It has been too long to remember for sure, but I think the progression yields a 4 week duration when the PP and fuel reach the B5 minimums.

All of this is just to explain my reasoning behind the choices that I made. Your solution is slightly more complex but appears to match HG more closely. Two other solutions are
(1) use Striker for vehicles
(2) use High Guard as is except to remove the minimum tonnage.
 
I have no problem with PP+MD+fuel in a unit, but you gotta have the volumes add up correctly. So either PP+MD are not 7% or the fuel is not the amount you've listed.

The second problem, fuel consumption, is that you've made the PP consume fuel in inverse proportion to size. The 2m³ drive consumes 0.3/18/2 = .0083m³/m³hr. The 23m³ drive consumes 2.9/174/23 = .00072m³/m³hr, less than one tenth as much fuel.

My fuel rate is based on LBB2, not LBB5/HG (which I don't have). If I just look at performance and go with LBB5/HG I expect my new numbers to be an order of magnitude higher.

Looking at various sources it appears 1 EP = 100G/hull. 1 dT fuel = 1 EP × 4 weeks, or 1 m³ = 1 EP × 2 days. That gives us 1m³ = 200G×days/hull.

So, for a 2dT minicraft 1m³ fuel = 100 G-days! That puts us at 10 G-days for the 20dT craft. If we extend to "regular" craft a 40dT 5G pinnace can run a whole day at full power on 1m³ of fuel.

Let's further assume that these very small PPs are only half as efficient as large Starship PPs, so we'll only give 100 G-days for 1m³ of fuel. The resulting table is:
Code:
dTon Vol  Drive Vol   7% Vol   Fuel/time
 1   14m³  BB   2m³   0.98m³  1.02m³/102d
 2   28m³  CC   3m³   1.96m³  1.04m³/52d
 3   42m³  DD   4m³   2.94m³  1.06m³/35d
 4   56m³  EE   5m³   3.92m³  1.08m³/27d
 5   70m³  FF   6m³   4.90m³  1.10m³/22d

 6   84m³  GG   7m³   5.88m³  1.12m³/18d
 7   98m³  HH   8m³   6.86m³  1.14m³/16d
 8  112m³  JJ   9m³   7.84m³  1.16m³/14d
 9  126m³  LL  11m³   8.82m³  2.18m³/24d
10  140m³  MM  12m³   9.80m³  2.20m³/22d

11  154m³  NN  13m³  10.78m³  2.22m³/20d
12  168m³  PP  14m³  11.76m³  2.24m³/18d
13  182m³  QQ  15m³  12.74m³  2.26m³/17d
14  196m³  RR  16m³  13.72m³  2.28m³/16d
15  210m³  SS  17m³  14.70m³  2.30m³/14d

16  224m³  TT  18m³  15.68m³  2.32m³/14d
17  238m³  UU  19m³  16.66m³  2.34m³/13d
18  252m³  WW  21m³  17.64m³  3.36m³/18d
19  266m³  XX  22m³  18.62m³  3.38m³/17d
20  280m³  YY  23m³  19.60m³  3.40m³/17d
Of course, this is the perfect place to say "You milage may vary" :p
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Straybow:
I have no problem with PP+MD+fuel in a unit, but you gotta have the volumes add up correctly. So either PP+MD are not 7% or the fuel is not the amount you've listed.
Now I get it.
The Ratio of MD to PP to Fuel is exactly 3:4:1. So each cubic meter of “drive” contains 0.375 cubic meters of MD, 0.5 cubic meters of PP and 0.125 cubic meters of fuel. A 1 cubic meter drive will provide 1G performance for a ship where 1 cubic meter is exactly 8% of the ship. So the largest 1G craft able to mount a 1 cubic meter drive would be 12.5 cubic meters. The largest 1G craft able to mount a 2 cubic meter drive would be 25 cubic meters. Since a 1 dTon craft would be 14 cubic meters, the 1 cubic meter “drive” is too small, so the 2 cubic meter craft must be used. Actual G performance would be calculated as:

(drive size in cubic meters) / [(craft size in cubic meters) * 0.08] = Performance in Gees
For a 1 dTon craft with a 2 cu.m. drive, (2/[14*0.08]) = 2 / 1.12 = 1.78 G performance

Since 1.78 G is less than 2G, it was listed as 1 G performance with the assumption that a 1G regulator would be factory installed (since other systems might not be rated for 1.78G). A “customer” with Mechanical/Electronic/Engineering skill could remove the regulator to tweak the performance, but the factory cannot recommend the removal of any safety equipment. [Although several subsidiaries produce after market “regulators” that make it an easy job to swap the parts.]


With respect to fuel consumption, you are correct that efficiency increases with the size of the drive. Striker chose to have power output per cubic meter increase with size, but this is not reflected in either the B2 or HG design rules. B2 and B5 do disagree on the ratio of fuel to power (B2 requires 10 dTons per EP for 4 weeks and B5 requires 1 dTon per EP for 4 weeks) so I chose to reflect the Striker “penalty” for small PP as an increased fuel consumption rate instead of a reduction in PP power output. It was just a personal decision to simplify the Minicraft design rules – the alternative was to calculate a different ratio of MD to PP to Fuel for each drive size.

Feel free to use a constant fuel consumption rate for all drives if you want, just keep the fuel volume the same but change the duration to 4 weeks (to match HG) or 67 hours (to match B2).
 
Note that the Striker scaling plants (with the Striker EP-to-MW ratio) are what were used in MT without an additional efficiency step or two, and are directly responsible for MT ships being utterly different from CT in terms of power and fuel requirements. Despite Striker being a CT product, mixing it with B2 or HG is not for the faint-hearted.
 
D'oh, now I see why the drives designations started at BB instead of AA.


I would simply list drives independently, and then the drives can be combined to make the desired performance.

Allowing for diminished performance* can yield very simple formulas for design:

G = (total PP+MD vol)/(hull in dT)
endurance = FF×(total Fuel vol)/(G·dT)

Where Fuel Factor FF is:
LBB2: 168 G·hours·dT/m³
HG: 100 G·days·dT/m³
Code:
Drive  Vol    PP+MD     Fuel
 AA    1m³     .75m³    .25m³
 BB    2m³    1.50m³    .50m³
 CC    3m³    2.25m³    .75m³
 DD    4m³    3.00m³   1.00m³
 EE    5m³    3.75m³   1.25m³
 FF    6m³    4.50m³   1.50m³
 GG    7m³    5.25m³   1.75m³
 HH    8m³    6.00m³   2.00m³
 JJ    9m³    6.75m³   2.25m³
 KK   10m³    7.50m³   2.50m³
 LL   11m³    8.25m³   2.75m³
 MM   12m³    9.00m³   3.00m³
 NN   13m³    9.75m³   3.25m³
 PP   14m³   10.50m³   3.50m³
 QQ   15m³   11.25m³   3.75m³
 RR   16m³   12.00m³   4.00m³
 SS   17m³   12.75m³   4.25m³
 TT   18m³   13.50m³   4.50m³
 UU   19m³   14.25m³   4.75m³
 VV   20m³   15.00m³   5.00m³
 WW   21m³   15.75m³   5.25m³
 XX   22m³   16.50m³   5.50m³
 YY   23m³   17.25m³   5.75m³
 ZZ   24m³   18.00m³   6.00m³
The AA drive only gives 0.75G performance for a 1dT minicraft. If the GM decides to allow sub-1G ratings (an orbital/belter service vehicle, or a cheap surface-to-orbit taxi on a low-G world or moon) let that stand. Going by strict LBB2 either 2 AA or one larger drive must be installed.

A 1dT minicraft can get 3G performance from 2 BB drives instead of 3 BB drives as required by your abbreviated design method. That frees up 2m³ for an additional passenger or extra luggage.

Using this method, your 2dT Stallion could add 1m³ in the cabin by substituting one BB drive and still get the required 3G performance: (2.25×2+1.50)/2dT=3G.
__________
*These formulae give 65-98% of the G rating compared to linear scaling from starship design. Fuel efficiency is 50% of HG values for starships, but essentially full value for LBB2 designs.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Straybow:
I would simply list drives independently, and then the drives can be combined to make the desired performance.
Your option seems very workable and is very High Guard feeling with it’s reliance on formula. I tried to keep the chart as simple as possible (the goal was LBB 2 or greater simplicity). I also tried to include enough data in the text to allow anyone to tweak the system to their taste.

The beauty of the simple 8% per G of required “Triplex Drives” (or 7% plus fuel) is that you can calculate the required volume of drives and any drive or combination of drives that meets that volume will give that indicated performance. With my diminishing fuel efficiency, this would reward craft with one big drive over multiple small drives (for equal fuel efficiency it would be a designer’s choice). It is also possible that some design concept might look better with many small drives – replace 1xMM Drive with 12xAA drives. The easiest “reasoning” for these changes would be to assume that a good Naval Architect (or Senior Construction Engineer) knows a trick or two that are not mentioned in the official manufacturer's literature.

As a completely side bit of information, someone on a Traveller group on Yahoo advocated that it was a standard policy in His Traveller Universe for the number of engines to equal the performance in Gees for starships. I liked the concept and it allowed me to simplify the B2 hull vs drive table and fit the entire Minicraft rule on 1 sheet. So this is just a “standard industry practice” which an innovative designer could violate to his advantage.

Have Fun and design some small craft.
 
It still seems too much of a penalty/bonus between small and large drives. Using 6 BB drives would have 1.8 m³ of fuel and last only 18 hrs, while one MM drive had 1.5 m³ of fuel and lasts 90 hrs. Working from HG, it is already a major penalty dropping from 4 weeks (at minimum 1dT PP or MD) to 1 week at XX (just under ½dT each for PP and MD).
 
Back
Top