AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
A 20 Dt craft with a hangar for a 30 Dt craft, that's Tardis-level impressive!
And it's streamlined and not streamlined at the same time!
OK, it's your house rules, so whatever floats you boat.
CT Only: Fixing the Type T Deck Plans?
- Thread starter Grav_Moped
- Start date
And it's streamlined and not streamlined at the same time!
OK, it's your house rules, so whatever floats you boat.
Maxim 11: Everything is air-droppable at least once.
- Seventy Maxims of Maximally-Effective Mercenaries
Exactly. Hence the "hide it in the deck-plan margin of error" idea.
This. It only matters if the tonnage with/without the carried craft crossed the boundary between hull size categories (for example, an A2 Far Trader trying to tow a 20Td Launch on external grapples).
And then you get to the Gazelle and... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited:
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
NO.
That's EXTERNAL docking.
20 ton craft docking EXTERNALLY with a 30 ton craft.
20+30=50 tons of combined craft.
You're not putting a 30 ton craft INSIDE a 20 ton craft.
By the way, has anyone seen my facepalm emote?
I keep needing it for some reason ...
Not really.
It's merely reading comprehension level impressive instead.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Why do you assume I have bothered to read what you have written?
Last time I checked you insisted that your external docking was some version of Dispersed Structure configuration (without being a configuration), and hence unstreamlined:
But, hey, that was two weeks ago, your house rules may have changed since then, how would I know?
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Because ... COURTESY ...
But, if you aren't going to bother extending even the barest minimum of courtesy to read (and comprehend) what is written, then all I have to say to you is ... Good day, sir.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
On a more positive note, I've been revising my previous effort at deck plans and have come up with what looks like a promising engine room for any ship mounting standard Jump-F (35 tons), Maneuver-H (15 tons) and Power Plant-H (25 tons) drives all laid out in a single deck.
35 + 15 + 25 = 75 tons * 2 = 150 deck squares (roughly)
So I worked out an engine room that is 19 x 8 = 152 deck squares and simply filled up the rectangle.
I even went so far as to try and make the jump drive (centerline) as close to 35 tons/70 deck squares as I could, and even included the detail of the 6 tons of jump capacitors (LBB5.80) used in Jump-3 drives in the 400 ton form factor. The power plant and maneuver drives come as port/starboard pairs flanking the jump drive, and I have the power plant(s) forward with the maneuver (HEPlaR) drive(s) exhaust system aft on a linear throughput line. There's even a high power EPS conduit between the two power plants for crash energizing the jump capacitors to jump.
I've been using snippets of parts from Starship Geomorphs 2.0 to make the drives with (now that I've figured out a method to copy/paste reliably using my meager tools to creatively assemble them) and I'm rather pleased with the result. There's even 2 work stations crammed in the the engine room (and engineers had better not be claustrophobic!).
This engineering deck arrangement can then become a "reusable standard" for any other ships of a similar hull size and configuration.
Basic idea is to put all the drives and crew living/work spaces on the main deck, leaving the upper deck for embarked small craft and external docking points for towing external loads, and then doing essentially the same again as the cargo bay on the lower deck.
Enjoy.
After getting the engine room space finalized, I can start roughing out the rest of the ship and populating it with "stuff" to make a proper deck plan out of it. Still need to make some decisions about upper/lower deck access arrangements, how to rework the crew areas forward of the drive room and more, but it's coming along.
35 + 15 + 25 = 75 tons * 2 = 150 deck squares (roughly)
So I worked out an engine room that is 19 x 8 = 152 deck squares and simply filled up the rectangle.
I even went so far as to try and make the jump drive (centerline) as close to 35 tons/70 deck squares as I could, and even included the detail of the 6 tons of jump capacitors (LBB5.80) used in Jump-3 drives in the 400 ton form factor. The power plant and maneuver drives come as port/starboard pairs flanking the jump drive, and I have the power plant(s) forward with the maneuver (HEPlaR) drive(s) exhaust system aft on a linear throughput line. There's even a high power EPS conduit between the two power plants for crash energizing the jump capacitors to jump.
I've been using snippets of parts from Starship Geomorphs 2.0 to make the drives with (now that I've figured out a method to copy/paste reliably using my meager tools to creatively assemble them) and I'm rather pleased with the result. There's even 2 work stations crammed in the the engine room (and engineers had better not be claustrophobic!).
This engineering deck arrangement can then become a "reusable standard" for any other ships of a similar hull size and configuration.
Basic idea is to put all the drives and crew living/work spaces on the main deck, leaving the upper deck for embarked small craft and external docking points for towing external loads, and then doing essentially the same again as the cargo bay on the lower deck.
Enjoy.
After getting the engine room space finalized, I can start roughing out the rest of the ship and populating it with "stuff" to make a proper deck plan out of it. Still need to make some decisions about upper/lower deck access arrangements, how to rework the crew areas forward of the drive room and more, but it's coming along.
Attachments
Edited (second pass)
ETA 3: Is a canon Cutter streamlined without a cutter module installed?
So, the rules don't allow for this. That said, drop tanks can be installed while retaining the parent vessel's configuration (and thus streamlined status), so in theory an external cargo pod could also be streamlined. It'd look a little silly, and would require paying streamlined hull costs for the pod.
ETA 3: Is a canon Cutter streamlined without a cutter module installed?
Last edited:
Ok, sling the Ship's boat externally (370Td hull but stats as 400Td) underneath between a pair of drive nacelles (and perhaps fuel to fill them out).
Looks cool, probably aerodynamically stupid (supersonic wave drag and all) but cool.
Alternately, sling it under the needle-like forebody, with a retractable fairing covering the transition from the cylindrical small-craft hull to the sloped front edge of the lower deck.
Looks cool, probably aerodynamically stupid (supersonic wave drag and all) but cool.
Alternately, sling it under the needle-like forebody, with a retractable fairing covering the transition from the cylindrical small-craft hull to the sloped front edge of the lower deck.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
More like the rules don't properly address it.
It's not that the rules DISallow it with an explicit prohibition (or even a head fake in that direction) ... it's more a case of the rules not addressing the concept (properly) in the first place.
The closest you get to it is L-Hyd drop tanks, which are explicitly external and thus drive performance gets reduced.
Well, if you can stick a drop tank on a ship ... is there anything else you dock with and transport externally?
The rules are resoundingly silent on the option, aside from L-Hyd drop tanks (and even then, you have to work out the drive reductions yourself).
LBB A5, p14 explicitly states that drop tanks "inherit" a ship's existing hull configuration (the tanks are built to match) yielding what amounts to conformal tanks.
If you account for the tonnage of small craft as part of the basic design (counting it as "internal" allocation, even if it actually isn't) the ship's drives are going to be rated for the combination (370+30=400 in this example). Drive performance doesn't go up when the small craft leaves, but it doesn't go down either when the small craft is docked.
Whether a docking point is an internal hangar with doors and pressurization or merely just a conformal negative space to nestle up against the hull doesn't make any meaningful difference to LBB5.80. Those kinds of differences are essentially "fluff text" on the design, because the math for it doesn't change.
This is EXACTLY what the Close Escort does with its Gig.
See that big triangle underneath behind the ventral particle barbette?
Guess what that is.
Look at the DA1 Annic Nova deck plans. The only way to load cargo is directly from one of the two pinnaces. There is no other cargo door. I mean, well, yeah, you could toss break-bulk cargo from a shuttle's cargo hatch into the docking receptacle, then shove it sideways into the cargo bay... but you really don't want to be doing that.
One of the two reasons it shouldn't have a fourth hardpoint?
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
A little more tinkering around with my deck plan and I decided to move the engineering crew stations out of the drive room.
So I moved them "across the hall" forward of the engine room. I used the "remote weapon control" module (2x2 squares) and just decided that it can work just as well as an engineering station, so the engineers don't have to be IN the drive room all the time. They still have easy access (they're right next (iris) door) so it's not like it's a long trip. The enclosed stations would allow the engineers a ... less hazardous location to do their drive systems monitoring from (where they won't get irradiated by jump fields).
I also added a couple of maintenance panel access points to the aft bulkhead. Requires EVA to use them, but that's maintenance hatches for you.
Then I added a third remote weapon station in the center for the ship's Gunner so they don't have to run around between turrets, sitting in each one to fire them. All turrets can be controlled from the centralized workstation forward of the drive bay (provided a Gunner with sufficient skill is aboard, but there's only 2 batteries on the Patrol Corvette I'm building for).
And the criticism of a lack of unpowered access between decks has been taken, resulting in a vertical hatch + grav lift combination, now that I've sized the entire compartment to be compatible with the upper and lower decks.
Outboard iris valves are there for access to the fuel purification system (a pending later addition).
So right now I'm up to a 22x8 block of hull allocation which is ready for future development as time permits.
So I moved them "across the hall" forward of the engine room. I used the "remote weapon control" module (2x2 squares) and just decided that it can work just as well as an engineering station, so the engineers don't have to be IN the drive room all the time. They still have easy access (they're right next (iris) door) so it's not like it's a long trip. The enclosed stations would allow the engineers a ... less hazardous location to do their drive systems monitoring from (where they won't get irradiated by jump fields).
I also added a couple of maintenance panel access points to the aft bulkhead. Requires EVA to use them, but that's maintenance hatches for you.
Then I added a third remote weapon station in the center for the ship's Gunner so they don't have to run around between turrets, sitting in each one to fire them. All turrets can be controlled from the centralized workstation forward of the drive bay (provided a Gunner with sufficient skill is aboard, but there's only 2 batteries on the Patrol Corvette I'm building for).
And the criticism of a lack of unpowered access between decks has been taken, resulting in a vertical hatch + grav lift combination, now that I've sized the entire compartment to be compatible with the upper and lower decks.
Outboard iris valves are there for access to the fuel purification system (a pending later addition).
So right now I'm up to a 22x8 block of hull allocation which is ready for future development as time permits.
Attachments
My fix for "lack of unpowered inter-deck access" is to assume that the elevator car has airtight manual hatches in its floor and ceiling. They're behind (well, below and above) removable access panels.
I like this (as noted in a few intervening posts).
Hence the idea of having a fairing on the front slope of the top deck (I had been thinking it'd be underslung, but it works on top as well).
The problem is that unless the cargo hold is in the middle of where I expect the crew quarters to be, the boat will need to be re-positioned for cargo transfer. Then again, it's not so much a problem as it is an inconvenience.
Last edited:
The trick is, the FASA design doesn't taper the top and bottom decks (at least on the plans).
It looks sorta like this (Sorry -- MS Paint, and I was in a hurry):
You know what's disappointing about all this?
The deckplan (aside from the wings; I'll check them shortly) is pretty darn close to the right size (counting squares).
Excluding fuel (and excluding the wings), it's about 246Td; it should be 240Td.
The upper deck (troop quarters, GCarrier bay, Ship's Boat hangar, 2 turrets) is 70Td.
It represents 56Td of components:
- 4 DblOcc Staterooms Troop Quarters (16Td)
- GCarrier (8Td)
- Ship's Boat (30Td) (note the ship's boat is about 26Td on plans)
-Turrets (2Td)
The main deck is 120Td.
It represents 131Td of components:
- Bridge (20Td)
- Mod/3 (3Td)
- 4 LoBerth (2Td)
- 8 Staterooms (32Td) for 10 personnel.
- Power Plant (25Td)
- Maneuver Drive (15Td)
- Turrets (2Td)
- Cargo (22Td)
The lower deck is 56Td.
It represents 63Td of components
- Jump Drive (45Td)
- Cargo (18Td)
The deckplan (aside from the wings; I'll check them shortly) is pretty darn close to the right size (counting squares).
Excluding fuel (and excluding the wings), it's about 246Td; it should be 240Td.
The upper deck (troop quarters, GCarrier bay, Ship's Boat hangar, 2 turrets) is 70Td.
It represents 56Td of components:
- 4 DblOcc Staterooms Troop Quarters (16Td)
- GCarrier (8Td)
- Ship's Boat (30Td) (note the ship's boat is about 26Td on plans)
-Turrets (2Td)
The main deck is 120Td.
It represents 131Td of components:
- Bridge (20Td)
- Mod/3 (3Td)
- 4 LoBerth (2Td)
- 8 Staterooms (32Td) for 10 personnel.
- Power Plant (25Td)
- Maneuver Drive (15Td)
- Turrets (2Td)
- Cargo (22Td)
The lower deck is 56Td.
It represents 63Td of components
- Jump Drive (45Td)
- Cargo (18Td)
Last edited:
I think the easy solution is to stretch the main deck by about 10-20% (6-12m; adds 2-4 squares by 5.5 squares; 5.5-11Td) and move part of the Jump Drive up to the main deck (in the form of power conduits or whatnot). Live with the oversized upper deck; maybe even make it taller to clear a thicker version of the ship's boat that's there. (Redesigning around a Traders and Gunboats Ship's Boat can be done, but will be a little awkward.)
Staterooms are about 4 deck squares each instead of about 6., and there are at least two shared heads (WC/bathroom). The office and chart room become a common area (galley/conference room). In the stretched portion there are two more staterooms ahead of the common area. The low berths move to the cargo bay, and the computer goes into their place.
Staterooms are about 4 deck squares each instead of about 6., and there are at least two shared heads (WC/bathroom). The office and chart room become a common area (galley/conference room). In the stretched portion there are two more staterooms ahead of the common area. The low berths move to the cargo bay, and the computer goes into their place.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Because ... COURTESY ...
Courtesy? That's funny!
Last edited:
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
I see what you mean.
Yes, but the original FASA version was only a little chunkier in the ass (from the original post):
Later version gained a bit of weight aft, presumably to accommodate the deck plans.
But, agreed, we could extend the top and bottom decks a bit outside the basic hull taper, but not very much I think.
When I look closer, the taper looks flatter than an ellipsoidal cross-section, more like a squashed hexagonal shape perhaps? That would make it easier to accommodate the decks within the hull shape.
