• 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.

Errata - that difficult subject

In MT from this discussion it appears that a small craft traveling over 24 hours cannot have crew positions which does not make a bit of sense to me.
The rules give us minimum requirements. You can add as many additional systems, e.g. crew stations, as you like.

Basically the rules say that for short periods you need at least 1 - 4 m³ per person.
If you extend that to over 8 h you need to add stuff like a fresher, a galley, and some spare room to move your legs totalling 2 - 8 m³ per person.
If you extend the time to over 24 h you also need somewhere to sleep and some more areas to move around, for a total of 13,5 - 54 m³ per person.
You can of course add as much additional space as you like for the crew.
It does not seem so strange to me.
 
Hello McPerth,

Once again FireFox is not playing nicely when I clicked on Quote.

Apparently the earlier comment that control panels do not allocate space for an operator is correct.

A MT stateroom per p. 82 consumes 54 kiloliters or 4 d-tons of space while small staterooms require 27 kiloliters or 2 d-tons of space.

IIRC 2 d-tons of a 4 d-ton stateroom is dedicated to the crew member or passenger and the other 2 d-tons is used for passageways, lounges, and other components that do not have a space requirement assigned.

I searched my PDF copy of the MT Referee's Manual for Seat, Seating, or Seat and received the message that No matches were found. Looking in TNE BL Technical Booklet and FF&S the Seat table appears to be the Vehicle and Small Craft Crew Positions Table.

In CT Small Craft can have both seats or the equivalent of MT crew positions and small craft cabins. CT Hulls >= 100 can also have seats/crew positions and staterooms.

In MT from this discussion it appears that a small craft traveling over 24 hours cannot have crew positions which does not make a bit of sense to me.

Any design I create using MT will follow the rules which means that there will no be any clearly identified crew and passenger seating on hulls >= 100 d-tons.

Let's see...

In MT one ton is two 1.5 x 1.5 m square, so about 4.5 m2 of living space...

I live in an apartment about 70 m2 with my family (4 person). That is about 15.5 dtons, so quite close to 4 staterooms (what is considefred the standard for 4 person. of course this includes kitchen, living/dinning room and fresher...

See that a home for more people will need little more in form of kitchen and living/dining room, so some of this space could be used for bridge if it was a spaceship instead of a home (OTOH, in an spaceship you could not just leave for a walk).

So, IMHO, the living space in MT (Staterooms/small staterooms) includes some seats, some lounge and probably workstations for the crew (passengers, don't needing it, have more lounge space, what is quite logical), as well as some space for corridors, airlocks (see that neither them are included in ships with extended accomodations), etc...

Of course, small staterooms mean that all of this is more cramped (but in most cruiser ships many passenger's staterooms are so, so it would not be so illogical), even the bridge is more cramped if the crew has only them.

Any design I create using MT will follow the rules which means that there will no be any clearly identified crew and passenger seating on hulls >= 100 d-tons.

Is not the size that determines it, but the time people are expected to be on it. If you design a passenger's shuttle where they are not expected to stand over 8 hours (let's say, a shuttle to the Moon whose travel is expected to last 6 hours), passengers (and crew) could well be in seats as described in page 82 of the RM (being for less than 8 hours, you needn't even double the sapece needed).
 
Last edited:
There are three dimensions: you can always lower the ceilings.

Sure, but the main reason to move the dton in MT rom 14 m2 to 13.5 was (or so I was told) to keep with this 2 squares/dton with standard ceiling height, so I used easy numbers.
 
Actual crew accommodation, USN 60's - 80's

Officer stateroom, dual occupancy:
bl_offstrm.jpg


Enlisted berthing:
bl_crewsberthing.jpg


Crew Mess:
bl_galley.jpg



All taken from 598 class SSBN:
http://www.ssbn601.com/tour_menu.asp
 
Hello AnotherDilbert,

Firefox is still not playing well with "Quote".

Yes, the rules provide minimum details for space requirements allowing creativity in adding material.

Vehicle/Small Craft Crew positions appear to be the volume required to stand or sit for operational periods of 24 hours or less but does not include the control panel units which is determined in Step 8.

To determine the total space consumed by a vehicle/small craft operator would be, in my opinion, found by adding the control panel unit volume with the crew position accommodation volume. A TL 9 vehicle/small craft design using one TL 9 control panel unit with HUD, determined in Step 8, needs 0.51 kiloliters of space and a roomy crew position of 4 kiloliters gives the operator/driver a space of 4.51 kiloliters. A small craft with two crew require 1.01 kiloliters of control panel units and using two roomy crew position another 8 kiloliters for a total of 9.01 kiloliters. I consider a small craft pilot to be the equivalent of the Bridge Crew on hulls >= 100 d-tons.

On hulls >= 100 Bridge Crew minimum 2. At minimum a Starship/Spacecraft Bridge requires two crew and 1.01 kiloliters of space for two TL 9 control panels units with HUD. I am not up to using the MT extrapolation method to determine the requirements so I'll use the full values for small staterooms and staterooms.

On a starship/spacecraft one has to install either a small stateroom or stateroom at full price, power, weight, cost, volume to give a Bridge with 2 crew access space while a small craft with the same crew of two assigned roomy crew positions plus two control panel units with HUD.

Small Craft Crew: 2
TL 9 Computer-Linked Control Panel Units each with HUD x2:
Power: 0.011, Volume: 1.02 kiloliters, Weight: 0.402, Cost: Cr40,700

Roomy Crew Positions x2:
Power: 0.000, Volume: 8 kiloliters, Weight: 0.04, Cost: Cr200

Total Small Craft Crew requirement operating for <= 8 hours:
Power 0.011, Volume: 9.02 kiloliters, Weight: 0.402 kiloliters, Cost: Cr40,900

Total Small Craft Crew requirement operating for > 9 and <= 24 hours:
Power 0.022, Volume: 18.04 kiloliters, Weight: 0.804 kiloliters, Cost: Cr81,800

My guess is that the two crew members probably spell each other during the trip. If there is only one operator I would guess that the person puts the small craft into autopilot to take a quick break.

Spacecraft/Starship Bridge Crew or Small Craft Operating > 24 hours: 2
allocating space from small staterooms and staterooms: In this case I would expect the crew to be standing a watch that gives them time to rest. Small craft operating for more than 24 hours I would hope had a second crew member with a secondary skill of pilot onboard or have a good autopilot.

TL 9 Computer-Linked Control Panel Units each with HUD x2:
Power: 0.011, Volume: 1.02 kiloliters, Weight: 0.402, Cost: Cr40,700

Small Stateroom as Bridge volume x1:
Power: 0.002, Volume: 27 kiloliters, Weight: 2.0, Cost: Cr40,000

Total using Small Stateroom as Bridge Volume:
Power: 0.013, Volume: 28.02 kiloliters, Weight: 2.402, Cost: Cr80,700

Stateroom as bridge volume x1:
Power: 0.003, Volume: 54 kiloliters, Weight: 4.0, Cost: Cr400,000

Total using Stateroom as Bridge Volume:
Power: 0.014, Volume: 55.02 kiloliters, Weight: 4.402, Cost: Cr440,700

Unfortunately, from my efforts to follow the MT design example I do not feel that the bridge volume for spacecraft/starships was determined at all or if the example did calculate bridge volume using accommodation space the total requirements for the component were not used.

Yes, one can add all the space you want by taking the volume from Cargo space, which avoids requirement for power, weight, and cost in Cr.
 
Unfortunately, from my efforts to follow the MT design example I do not feel that the bridge volume for spacecraft/starships was determined at all...
You can do much simpler: just allocate crew space as usual, then when you draw the deck plans you take as much as seems reasonable for the bridge, common areas, etc.
 
Hello McPerth,

The web gremlins have relented and allowed FireFox to Quote the author's comments while omitting the already Quoted text in a reply.

Let's see...

In MT one ton is two 1.5 x 1.5 m square, so about 4.5 m2 of living space...

I live in an apartment about 70 m2 with my family (4 person). That is about 15.5 dtons, so quite close to 4 staterooms (what is considefred the standard for 4 person. of course this includes kitchen, living/dinning room and fresher...

See that a home for more people will need little more in form of kitchen and living/dining room, so some of this space could be used for bridge if it was a spaceship instead of a home (OTOH, in an spaceship you could not just leave for a walk).

So, IMHO, the living space in MT (Staterooms/small staterooms) includes some seats, some lounge and probably workstations for the crew (passengers, don't needing it, have more lounge space, what is quite logical), as well as some space for corridors, airlocks (see that neither them are included in ships with extended accommodations), etc...

Of course, small staterooms mean that all of this is more cramped (but in most cruiser ships many passenger's staterooms are so, so it would not be so illogical), even the bridge is more cramped if the crew has only them.

Is not the size that determines it, but the time people are expected to be on it. If you design a passenger's shuttle where they are not expected to stand over 8 hours (let's say, a shuttle to the Moon whose travel is expected to last 6 hours), passengers (and crew) could well be in seats as described in page 82 of the RM (being for less than 8 hours, you needn't even double the space needed).

Apparently I am not communicating very well
.

In CT the crew of a small craft, non-starship, and starships are shown to have seating which apparently includes the controls that takes up 0.5 d-tons or 7 m^3 of space as part of the bridge/cockpit control tonnage on deck plans regardless of how long they operate for.

In TNE small craft, starships, and spacecraft require a workstation or crew station plus control systems. Crew stations are used for operations lasting 24 hours or less, in MT terms, a cramped crew station requires 2.5 kiloliters of space while a roomier version uses up 3.5 kiloliters. Looking at MT Referee's manual a TNE crew station would probably be classified as none and cramped. The TNE workstations would in my opinion classified as adequate and roomy.

In MT a small craft operating for 24 hours or less in TNE would be using workstations and crew stations resulting in taking up less space, cost, power, and weight. MT Small craft operating for more than 24 hours, spacecraft and starships on the other hand have to use a portion of stateroom or small stateroom.

Underway for longer than 24 hours the crew should be divided into watch section that are changed every few hours giving personnel a break.

In my opinion TNE is a better fit than MT since the designers apparently did not research watching standing on a real world ship civilian or military.
 
Hello AnotherDilbert,

The web gremlins appear to be tormenting someone else now. I am replying to posts 905 and 906 too.

You can do much simpler: just allocate crew space as usual, then when you draw the deck plans you take as much as seems reasonable for the bridge, common areas, etc.

Yes, Post 905 is what crew's mess, berthing, and one stateroom for three officers look like on a submarine actually the pictures are more the size of the USS Shark SSN 591 than SSBNs 610, 635 and 636 which seemed a bit bigger.

Thank you for the link to the corvette and here is a link that the technical publication used by the USN for habitability: http://www.habitability.net/WebData/T9640-AC-DSP-010_HAB.pdf.

When someone decides to try replicating the design how would the individual know how much space to reallocate from the bridge to staterooms since the bridge may or may not include the volume for the control panel units?

The answer is they won't know unless the designer includes the information which is unfortunately sadly lacking I have found.
 
Consider this, Control Panel Add-ons are limited by the amount of crew, One could bump up the volume to provide operator space in that step...
 
Yes, Post 905 is what crew's mess, berthing, and one stateroom for three officers look like on a submarine actually the pictures are more the size of the USS Shark SSN 591 than SSBNs 610, 635 and 636 which seemed a bit bigger.
Sorry for being cryptic. You know this better than I do. My vague point was that actual bedding arrangements can be compact and a fairly small part of the total crew space.

When someone decides to try replicating the design how would the individual know how much space to reallocate from the bridge to staterooms since the bridge may or may not include the volume for the control panel units?
How would someone know how large the Enlisted Mess # 3 is? The design system is not that detailed.

Deciding how large specific rooms are is a part of the "Draw deck plans" phase. The same design can lead to radically different deck plans.


Look at the classic CT Scout: The design has a 20 dT "bridge", the deck plan has a room called "bridge" that is about 2,5 dT, the rest is presumably machinery between the hull and crew spaces. There is absolutely no need for the CT "bridge" component to be a single specific room of exactly 20 dT.
 
Hello infojunky,

Consider this, Control Panel Add-ons are limited by the amount of crew, One could bump up the volume to provide operator space in that step...

No, MT Bridge control panel add ons are limited by the number of control panel units determined in Step 8. A craft with one crew member has two control units and each one can have add-ons.
 
No, MT Bridge control panel add ons are limited by the number of control panel units determined in Step 8. A craft with one crew member has two control units and each one can have add-ons.
No?

Errata said:
However, as a rule of thumb, do not install any more control panel add-ons than you expect to have crewmembers.
Where are add-ons limited by the number of panels?
 
Hello infojunky,



No, MT Bridge control panel add ons are limited by the number of control panel units determined in Step 8. A craft with one crew member has two control units and each one can have add-ons.

Wrong. See the consolidated errata:

Page 60, left column, Controls and Bridge Section, Panel Add-ons (clarification): Panel add-ons can be installed to augment a craft’s control panel needs. The power and volume requirements of an add-on are usually superior to that of straight control panel units for a given CP value. In all cases, a control panel add-on can act as a direct replacement for weaker control panel units.
However, as a rule of thumb, do not install any more control panel add-ons than you expect to have crewmembers. It is a bit ridiculous to install 10 large holodisplays when you only expect to have one crewmember.
Also, holodynamic linked and holographic linked panel units refer to the same type of panel unit.​

Earlier versions of the errata were more blunt. 1 per crewmember.
 
Sorry for being cryptic. You know this better than I do. My vague point was that actual bedding arrangements can be compact and a fairly small part of the total crew space.

Yes, I have lived on a vessel designed to travel in a hostile environment. Yes, the bunking arrangement is a small part of the total crew space. However, the crew space allocation is determined by Shipboard Habitability Design Criteria Manual T9640-AB-DDT-010/HAB. In the photo with the Petty Officer Third Class standing in a 12 person Crew Berthing Space. The space between the four 3 bunk tiers is specified as 18 inches and is not taken from the bunks shown.

The space shown in the above the one of Crews Berthing is an Officers Bunk room is designed to accommodate three officers with bunks, hanging storage, work areas, with a bit of open space. The passageway outside the bunk room is 27 inches wide which is again not taken from the bunk room.

The photo of Crew's Mess is basically a common space. The distance between the tables and the interior wall where the four guys are standing is the passageway going to the torpedo room is at minimum 27 inches wide. The space between the tables and the passageway are not taken from the crews' bunks, officers bunk rooms, or from the staterooms allocated to the CO and XO.

The control room space, the equivalent of a surface ship's bridge, on submarines is not taken from bunks, bunk rooms, or staterooms. The space was determined by the stuff needed to operate the ship.

The bridge bridge space on the USS Simon Lake AS-33 was not taken from bunks, bunk rooms, or staterooms.

I purchased a copy of the Student's Edition of Architectural Graphic Standards and discovered there are similarities to the requirements in Shipboard Habitability Design Criteria Manual T9640-AB-DDT-010/HAB.

How would someone know how large the Enlisted Mess # 3 is? The design system is not that detailed.

Deciding how large specific rooms are is a part of the "Draw deck plans" phase. The same design can lead to radically different deck plans.

During the design process and on the sample of the MT Universal Craft Profile there is no mention of a space titled Enlisted Mess #3. The Bridge is mentioned as part of the MT Craft Design process and does not provide clear instructions on how much volume the space takes up like in CT and TNE/T4.

You are correct that the layout of a design using the same tonnage can be be totally different. However, each space's layout should be determined by the function of the space.

Look at the classic CT Scout: The design has a 20 dT "bridge", the deck plan has a room called "bridge" that is about 2,5 dT, the rest is presumably machinery between the hull and crew spaces. There is absolutely no need for the CT "bridge" component to be a single specific room of exactly 20 dT.

In my attempts to recreate the deck plans I have found that most of the tonnages calculated by the design rules do not match what is shown on drawing. For the most part they are short even when I add passageway and common areas back to the staterooms.

CT Traveller LBB 2 Starships 2e 1977/1981 p. 13
A. The Bridge: All ships must allocate 2% of there tonnage (minimum 20 tons) to basic controls, communications equipment, avionics, scanners, detectors, sensors, and other equipment for proper operation of the ship.

CT Supplement 7 p. 17 deck plan for the scout/courier's bridge space includes space tagged Avionics. According to the Interior Details on p. 16 Item 19 is the forward sensor position. Combining these two items bumps the bridge volume up to about 6.5.

A stateroom is 4 d-tons, the four on the scout/courier are drawn as 3 d-tons. Per the rules the passageway volume is taken from the staterooms indicating that three of the staterooms each provide 1 d-ton for the passageway.

Staterooms also, according to the rules, provide a part of their volume for common areas. On the Scout/Courier the Common Area appears to be 10 d-tons of which I guess came from the last stateroom. Two staterooms appear to have been allocate to the Common Area leaving 1 d-ton that was taken away from cargo being my guess.

Items 13 and 18 are basically cargo holds.

The passageway that has items 11 and 15 appears to use a 4 d-ton stateroom.

Has anyone found the Ship's Computer on the deck plans for the X-boat, Scout/Courier, Seeker, and SDB in CT Supplement 7?

CT LBB 5 HG 2e p. 27 The Bridge last sentence: "The bridge contains all necessary equipment for the control of the ship with the exception of the computer." In my opinion LBB 5 HG is even lighter than LBB 2.

MT on the other hand provides a way to determine the space requirements for communications, sensors, and avionics. The downside MT does not provide a clear way to determine the bridge space requirement.
 
Hello AnotherDilbert


A ship's Bridge has three control panels and is being routinely operated by the players using the minimum crew requirement of two or expect to have a third bridge crew member. Having had curve balls thrown at me I would have had all three control panels with the same add-on to cover the situation when the adventure needs to have a third crew member on the bridge.


Where are add-ons limited by the number of panels?

Based on the information I have a single seat fighter has one HUD. A dual seat fighter can have a HUD for each crew member. Extrapolating from this information 10 MT control panels could each have a HUD. So I guess there is no limit other than space, cost, weight, and power requirements.

I'm lazy so I will only use one add-on per control panel.
 
Hello aramis,

When I clicked the Quote button on Post #915 from I believe to be Jan. 03, 2016 at 11:36 PM I got a blank box. Drat, I think the web gremlins got bored and have come back to mess with me.

Thank you for directing me to MT Referee's Manual p. 60 and MT Consolidated Errata. I have a paper copy and PDF copy of the Referee's Manual. I was using the PDF copy that I thought I had updated with the errata, unfortunately I missed the entry.

My paper copy is MT Referee's Manual 1987 2nd printing and has the following entry: "Do not install any more control panel add-ons than you expect to have crew members."

MT small craft can be operated by one crew member and can have more than one control panel as determined in Step 8. I expect my character to be the only crew member operating the craft which means and makes no sense that I cannot add-on to the second control panel.
 
Hello aramis,

When I clicked the Quote button on Post #915 from I believe to be Jan. 03, 2016 at 11:36 PM I got a blank box. Drat, I think the web gremlins got bored and have come back to mess with me.

Thank you for directing me to MT Referee's Manual p. 60 and MT Consolidated Errata. I have a paper copy and PDF copy of the Referee's Manual. I was using the PDF copy that I thought I had updated with the errata, unfortunately I missed the entry.

My paper copy is MT Referee's Manual 1987 2nd printing and has the following entry: "Do not install any more control panel add-ons than you expect to have crew members."

MT small craft can be operated by one crew member and can have more than one control panel as determined in Step 8. I expect my character to be the only crew member operating the craft which means and makes no sense that I cannot add-on to the second control panel.
Essentially, a crew member can only use one add-on at a time. That's the errata. Any extra provide no benefit.
 
Based on the information I have a single seat fighter has one HUD. A dual seat fighter can have a HUD for each crew member. Extrapolating from this information 10 MT control panels could each have a HUD. So I guess there is no limit other than space, cost, weight, and power requirements.

I'm lazy so I will only use one add-on per control panel.

One person can use many Control Panels (12 m³).
One person can use only one Add-on.
A craft need no basic Control Panels, it can have only Add-ons.

ConsolidatedMTErrata for p60 said:
Page 60, left column, Controls and Bridge Section, Panel Add-ons (clarification):
Panel add-ons can be installed to augment a craft’s control panel needs. The power and volume requirements of an add-on are usually superior to that of straight control panel units for a given CP value. In all cases, a control panel add-on can act as a direct replacement for weaker control panel units.
However, as a rule of thumb, do not install any more control panel add-ons than you expect to have crewmembers.
It is a bit ridiculous to install 10 large holodisplays when you only expect to have one crewmember.

ConsolidatedMTErrata for p81 said:
Page 81, Step 3, Computers (clarification and correction):
...
As a rough guide, the maximum number of control panel units that one person can operate and monitor is 12 kiloliters.
 
Back
Top