Idea for Change to Book 2 Designs

[infojunky]

You could look at this another way. Drive manufacturers build standard drives in big factories and get economies of scale. The others have to be built individually similar to hand-crafting research and development engines. Those shipyards like to install standard sized elements.

The only problem is that the "standard" drives can be split across multiple drive rooms (e.g. Lab Ship, Far Trader, Even Scouts) - so standard isn't so standard! But the idea sort of works. Those major factories are going to be important in the sector, and remarkably few and not-too far between

Well, a point to consider, the way drives are damaged. In that there is a slow erosion of capability implying that drives are somewhat modular. Thus that actual installation shape is mutable.

Though when I design ships I tend to design the drives as a unitary stack or stacks as is appropriate for the design.

 

[kilemall]

Assuming Alphabet Drives are canon, there probably has to be some Bureau of Standards that sets them, and does certification.

Right, some sort of interstellar ISO that includes power, performance, controls, fuel lines, interfaces etc.

 

[Grav_Moped]

This comes back around to the Standard Hulls, too.

Setting aside the mechanical issues (many do not fit any plausible drive suite) and the fact that in the game as actually played there are multiple variations (even in canon!) on each ship class, the rules themselves suggest that those hulls at each size should be nearly identical, varying only in whether or not they are streamlined.

This is of a piece with my view that the ship construction rules are manifestations of in-universe engineering and physics (and to some extent, regulations).

That is if you make drives of any arbitrary output, they'll conform to the formulae used to create most of the Drive Performance Table in LBB2 because that's how drives work. The letter drives are merely the ones that are in common production. LBB5 works differently, somehow (thus my desire to extend the Drive Table downward rather than accept HG drives in that role).

Standard hulls ought to be -- but aren't -- the ones used by the most commonly built ships of their respective tonnages (and therefore benefitting from the greatest possible efficiencies of scale in production, or even recycling of old hulls).

 

[Condottiere]

I think that the Imperium has the authority and reach to impose them, on the commercial sector.

For the military, it's probably the availability allows them to buy off the shelf.

Most editions have their own somewhat unique set of ship design rules, and the chances are, or should be, that you'd get a set of lowest common denominators, to have the largest possible customer base.

For the Vargr, they grab Imperium, or most other, vessels, in order to strip off those components in their chop shops, for commonality; otherwise, each of their manufactories produce their own customized machinery, if not made to localized standards.

 

[Dragoner]

This is of a piece with my view that the ship construction rules are manifestations of in-universe engineering and physics (and to some extent, regulations).

Truth is from a physics standpoint is that most hulls for pressurization reasons are going to be spheres or cylinders.

 

[Condottiere]

I think it will depend on how thick the hull is, in relation to volume.

What somewhat disturbs me is that the hull takes up zero volume, not accounting for advanced materials and/or armour plating.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Truth is from a physics standpoint is that most hulls for pressurization reasons are going to be spheres or cylinders.

Mostly. Or spheroids (squished or stretched for streamlining), or collections of spheres and cylinders/tubes if not streamlined.

A potentially more significant reason to use spheroids or relatively stubby cylinders is that Traveller space-drives' effects are volume-based (that is, so the hull occupies as much of the "jump bubble" as possible, and something similar for artificial gravity). This was how I explained my 600Td J-5 trader design looking like an over-inflated guitar pick, anyhow.

 

[Grav_Moped]

I think it will depend on how thick the hull is, in relation to volume.

What somewhat disturbs me is that the hull takes up zero volume, not accounting for advanced materials and/or armour plating.

Armor takes up space when it gets implemented in the rules.

In the LBB context, the volume of the hull's material might just be hiding in the 10-20% drafting-error margin...

 

[Dragoner]

Mostly. Or spheroids (squished or stretched for streamlining), or collections of spheres and cylinders/tubes if not streamlined.

A potentially more significant reason to use spheroids or relatively stubby cylinders is that Traveller space-drives' effects are volume-based (that is, so the hull occupies as much of the "jump bubble" as possible, and something similar for artificial gravity). This was how I explained my 600Td J-5 trader design looking like an over-inflated guitar pick, anyhow.

It is tough also, imagine kicking a soccer ball if it were a box.

 

[Condottiere]

Should be easier to banana it.

In vacuum.

 

[Grav_Moped]

It is tough also, imagine kicking a soccer ball if it were a box.

The thing is, not all of the ship has to be pressurized full time, so it isn't really a unitary bubble from that perspective. Most of it is, certainly. And the fuel tanks are at far more than 1.0 atmosphere of pressure (Liquid H₂ @ 123 PSI/850 kPa/8.48 bar).

 

[Grav_Moped]

Should be easier to banana it.

In vacuum.

Not sure what you meant here, but in vacuum it doesn't matter how much spin your kick puts on it, that ain't gonna curve its trajectory...

 

[infojunky]

Armor takes up space when it gets implemented in the rules.

In the LBB context, the volume of the hull's material might just be hiding in the 10-20% drafting-error margin...

Consider this, the thickness of a armored hull is far less in volume than the bracing required to support it. Well and for a unarmored hull as well. FF&S covers this... But for a CT-ish system not sure the level of detail matters.

 

[mike wightman]

Here is a radical idea for a change.

Scrap the fuel requirement.

The purpose of a ship is to get the group from adventure to adventure - micromanaging the ship is a pain for a lot of people.

 

[infojunky]

Here is a radical idea for a change.

Scrap the fuel requirement.

The purpose of a ship is to get the group from adventure to adventure - micromanaging the ship is a pain for a lot of people.

Not going to disagree too loudly.

 

[atpollard]

Ships should go GREEN and be 100% battery powered … this way you can keep the “fuel cost at port” trope by just paying for a RECHARGE. Cr1/dTon for STANDARD [7 days] and Cr5/dTon for FAST CHARGE [24 hours].

 

[daryen]

Here is a radical idea for a change.

Scrap the fuel requirement.

The purpose of a ship is to get the group from adventure to adventure - micromanaging the ship is a pain for a lot of people.

I don't disagree with this at all. But if you are going there, then a lot of other rules can be vastly simplified, too. Detailed ship construction, and detailed trade go out the window, too. Again, I don't have a problem with this at all. Just pointing out that this is a pretty fundamental change.

 

[The Oz]

I manipulate my players money supply to fit the adventure requirements. Fuel, cargo, pirates are tools for me to use for that.

Admittedly, I learned this the hard way, by playing RAW in the early days (1980s).

 

[Grav_Moped]

Here is a radical idea for a change.

Scrap the fuel requirement.

The purpose of a ship is to get the group from adventure to adventure - micromanaging the ship is a pain for a lot of people.

...and that's my issue with drop tanks.

I mean, yeah, the Spreadsheets in Space stuff can be tedious, but it's part of what makes Traveller, Traveller.

In the LBB2 rule set, fuel imposes "physical" (fictional, of course, but integral to the rules) limits on what is possible. You can't make a 100Td ship with 6G performance (well, you could, but...). You cannot build a J-7 ship, period.

If such things are possible, it's only through technology not currently known in-universe (Ancients, or other advanced aliens not yet encountered).

Drop tanks remove the "physical limit" on jump capability -- with them, the J-6 limit at TL-15 feels arbitrary. You could potentially have a prototype/experimental J-7 or higher drive. Even if it was big and costly, it could work.

That said, the LBB2 power/maneuver fuel rules need some adjustments for plausibility. Those adjustments need to maintain part of the "fuel is a constraint on maximum available performance" aspect, though!

 

[Condottiere]

You still have to pay for the infrastructure, and likely increased depreciation.