Is there an upper limit to streamlined hull displacement?

[JimMarn]

I don't know if Starship Wanderer on my Traveller site will fold under stress or not. It is miles long, miles wide, and miles deep. It can hold thousands of people.

Bussard Ram jet engines, one on each side of the ship.

I just like drawing large ships... have to have room for a lake or two. But the turning radius is a bit much...

 

[Carlobrand]

I don't know if Starship Wanderer on my Traveller site will fold under stress or not. It is miles long, miles wide, and miles deep. It can hold thousands of people.

Bussard Ram jet engines, one on each side of the ship.

I just like drawing large ships... have to have room for a lake or two. But the turning radius is a bit much...

Depends on how it's designed to take the stress. I presume it's built to take the stress of its own engines. Whether or not it's built to take stress in another direction depends on what stresses the engineers were anticipating and what stresses it encounters. The only thing I can think of that might impose a force other than the direction of thrust - besides that gradual turn - would be trying to set it down sideways on some planet or getting hit by a very large mass. Otherwise, it can be thought of as just an immensely huge building.

 

[Ulsyus]

Traveller ships up to 1000000t (and bigger since there is no upper limit in HG2) can throw themselves around at 6g.

If they can withstand the forces of combat manoeuvring then they can easily manoeuvre inside an atmosphere if they are streamlined.

Hear hear. If they can build cities that have CG and can float about the place, then a vessel's CG combined with its M-drive should be able to get it down to a planet and back up again.

 

[atpollard]

Hear hear. If they can build cities that have CG and can float about the place, then a vessel's CG combined with its M-drive should be able to get it down to a planet and back up again.

I agree to a point.
There is also no free lunch.

I am familiar with the structural design of a building. I can design the structure to resist gravity, and snow loads, and furniture loads and wind loads and seismic loads and people loads and cars on the rooftop parking deck and the weight of water flooding the parapets because the roof drains are clogged.
I also know that it is possible to design a floating building called a cruise ship (although the details are beyond my experience).
I do not believe that it is possible to build a cruise ship for the same price as a static building of comparable volume. There is a cost for that extra capability to withstand different stresses in different axis.

Likewise, that mega-ship that lands will cost significantly more per dTon than the megaship that offloads its cargo at the highport. The starship design rules may or may not not reflect this reality, but it should exist.
So land your million ton streamlined ship if it makes you happy, it is far from impossible in the Rules as Written, but acknowledge that it should not come without a cost ... there is no free lunch.

 

[robject]

There is also no free lunch.

Agreed. I also think that the volume + MCr cost of streamlining and landing gear should buy that lunch. This is an acceptable simplification (because landing gear doesn't HAVE to imply the ability to land on a significant gravity well, but the Burrito Principle strongly suggests taking that leap anyway).

 

[Carlobrand]

... The starship design rules may or may not not reflect this reality, but it should exist. ...

High Guard provides the dispersed structure at a 50% savings in hull price if you don't plan to land the ship. For warships similarly restricted, the close structure can be armored, is available at a 40% savings, and can actually handle fuel skimming (though possibly with some risk, if AHL is to be accepted); a basic sphere will do the same at a 30% savings (though apparently a sphere can be "grounded," if Broadsword is to be accepted). If you want to land, the traditional needle-wedge or cone configurations come at a 20% premium over the usual hull cost, or you can get a basic saucer (flattened sphere) for a 20% discount; I believe Timerover mentioned the benefits of a pancake shape. Just let your architect know what your preference is.

I'm not honestly sure why anyone would want a cylinder, nor why they'd pay a premium for a needle or cone when the saucer is quite adequate unless they're expecting to receive meson fire.

 

[atpollard]

High Guard provides the dispersed structure at a 50% savings in hull price if you don't plan to land the ship. For warships similarly restricted, the close structure can be armored, is available at a 40% savings, and can actually handle fuel skimming (though possibly with some risk, if AHL is to be accepted); a basic sphere will do the same at a 30% savings (though apparently a sphere can be "grounded," if Broadsword is to be accepted). If you want to land, the traditional needle-wedge or cone configurations come at a 20% premium over the usual hull cost, or you can get a basic saucer (flattened sphere) for a 20% discount; I believe Timerover mentioned the benefits of a pancake shape. Just let your architect know what your preference is.

I'm not honestly sure why anyone would want a cylinder, nor why they'd pay a premium for a needle or cone when the saucer is quite adequate unless they're expecting to receive meson fire.

AAAAAHHHHHH ... NOOOOOO!
Not the dreaded High Guard hull shapes.

What shape is

• the Beowulf (Type A)
• the Empress Marva (Type A2)
• a Launch
• a Ship's Boat
• a Fat Trader (Type R) ...

... I spit on your HG hull shapes!
... and who says a baseball ... a cannon ball ... a musket ball ... a "sphere" is not streamlined and incapable of traveling through the atmosphere?
Nonsense and rubbish!
The whole lot of it!

I am off to count deck squares until I can calm down.

 

[robject]

AAAAAHHHHHH ... NOOOOOO!
Not the dreaded High Guard hull shapes.

What shape is

• the Beowulf (Type A)
• the Empress Marva (Type A2)
• a Launch
• a Ship's Boat
• a Fat Trader (Type R) ...

Easy. Assume a sphere for all examples Got that one from physics class

No?

OK. How about a Wedge for each?

Uh, cylinder?

Hey man, this is just a game, approximate!

Hmmmm, ok seriously now.

[serious ON]

Wedge or slab, finned.
Disc or slab, finned?
Wedge.
Cylinder, winged.
Cylinder, winged.

[serious OFF]

Or whatever. Who cares?

 

[atpollard]

Easy. Assume a sphere for all examples Got that one from physics class

The irony is that this actually works best at reentry velocity.
It is just so annoying that they create these 'rules' for streamlined, partial streamlined and unstreamlined hull shapes that none of the ship's in the game seem to agree with.

It would have been so much better to just stick with 'streamlined', 'partial' and 'unstreamlined' and toss the geometry hook out the airlock ...
If it looks streamlined, then it is.
If it looks partially streamlined, then it is.
If it looks unstreamlined, then it is.

... getting back to really big ships landing:
compact forms (close to length=width=height ... whatever the shape) would have a structural advantage in being self supporting.
Pancake shapes would have an advantage in not crushing the landing pad ... just pick 40 acres, any 40 acres and set it down.

 

[SanDragon]

Just as long as your landing gear make a nice, perfectly geometric impression on that corn or wheat field...

 

[robject]

It would have been so much better to just stick with 'streamlined', 'partial' and 'unstreamlined' and toss the geometry hook out the airlock ...

It was a good attempt to add a dimension to ship design. We move on.

 

[Carlobrand]

AAAAAHHHHHH ... NOOOOOO!
Not the dreaded High Guard hull shapes. ...

MWAHAHAAAAA! You opened the door! I merely took shameless advantage of the opening! :devil:

What shape is

• the Beowulf (Type A)...

Blunted arrowhead

• the Empress Marva (Type A2)...

Kinda like an adobe brick I saw once, or I guess you could say rectangular prism with rounded sides

• a Launch...

Bullet, if you're talking about the one in The Traveller Book

• a Ship's Boat...

Torpedo

• a Fat Trader (Type R) ...

Kinda airplaney

... I spit on your HG hull shapes!...

Oh, their High Guard shapes! Well, lessee, they're all streamlined, and there are three streamlined options, so - roll 1d6 and divide by 2.

... and who says a baseball ... a cannon ball ... a musket ball ... a "sphere" is not streamlined and incapable of traveling through the atmosphere? ...

Apparently Marc Miller, Frank Chadwick, or John Harshman, if I read the credits right.

Me, I like the Book 2 approach. Charge for streamlining, including the structural reinforcement to fly in anything other than an engines-down hover mode in a gravity field, and including gravs or a thrust-vectoring system so you can land without needing a runway. Then I'd charge for landing gear, including a volume allocation of maybe a dTon per hundred. I like MegaTrav's idea of giving unstreamlined ships a maximum velocity in atmosphere of 300 kph and streamlined ships a maximum velocity in atmosphere of 1000 kph.

 

[Ulsyus]

I'm not honestly sure why anyone would want a cylinder, nor why they'd pay a premium for a needle or cone when the saucer is quite adequate unless they're expecting to receive meson fire.

What about the consideration of batteries that can bear on a single target? Do the different shapes offer benefits in that regard? Landing in a gravity well seems like it could be a bit of a luxury, but being able to bring fire to bear would be mission essential, wouldn't it?

 

[Carlobrand]

What about the consideration of batteries that can bear on a single target? Do the different shapes offer benefits in that regard? Landing in a gravity well seems like it could be a bit of a luxury, but being able to bring fire to bear would be mission essential, wouldn't it?

Not a bit of difference, sorry. I'm honestly not sure what the whole percentage-batteries-bearing business is: if they're saying a dreadnought can dodge and wiggle around as it likes and still bring the spinal to bear when the time comes, how hard is it to turn on one's axis and put everything on target(s)? And who says the targets are all standing over there like some re-enactment of the Battle of Jutland?

 

[GypsyComet]

I'm honestly not sure what the whole percentage-batteries-bearing business is: if they're saying a dreadnought can dodge and wiggle around as it likes and still bring the spinal to bear when the time comes, how hard is it to turn on one's axis and put everything on target(s)? And who says the targets are all standing over there like some re-enactment of the Battle of Jutland?

It isn't that they are all "standing over there", it means that any single target in any given bearing can only be shot at by a portion of the batteries on a large ship. The "Spinals always bear" rule is just making sure that regardless of what else is going on, if something is getting shot at the spinal is involved.

Remember, CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, not rocket science.

 

[Carlobrand]

It isn't that they are all "standing over there", it means that any single target in any given bearing can only be shot at by a portion of the batteries on a large ship. The "Spinals always bear" rule is just making sure that regardless of what else is going on, if something is getting shot at the spinal is involved.

Remember, CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, not rocket science.

Yes, but that's the point: it's abstract. Rules don't say you can only fire a portion of the batteries at any single target. Rules say you can only fire a portion of the weapons, period. Or have I been interpreting that wrong all these years?

 

[infojunky]

Yes, but that's the point: it's abstract. Rules don't say you can only fire a portion of the batteries at any single target. Rules say you can only fire a portion of the weapons, period. Or have I been interpreting that wrong all these years?

Well I have always figures the none Bearing batteries covered the batteries assigned to point defense...

Ok, couple of point towards earlier posts. Have any of y'all done any consideration of Size of ships as they relate to each other? Consider this, a 800 dTon ship only twice the outside dimensions of a 100 dTon ship of a similar configuration. Thus most likely size wise both ships can probable use the same size pad, So X sized pad is probably rated to support vessels up to 1000 dTons (whatever their masses are by your favorite construction systems)

As for the question of entering and operating in Atmosphere, I would say consider looking at the Covenant ships in HALO video game, in which LARGE ships freely operate in atmosphere but use Gravity dives for support. I can see largish ships operating this way.

Side note; have y'all ever considered things like Gravity Lifts for cargo movement to and from the aforementioned large ships?

 

[aramis]

Yes, but that's the point: it's abstract. Rules don't say you can only fire a portion of the batteries at any single target. Rules say you can only fire a portion of the weapons, period. Or have I been interpreting that wrong all these years?

I believe you've been doing it wrong. Then again, i've played several naval wargames, and the issue of batteries bearing has always been a limit on any single target...

 

[Selandia]

Note that fighting is not the only issue in space travel.

Option 1: unload at high port, pay docking fees and cargo handling cost; cargo shuttle to ground, pay docking fees for the shuttle at both high and down port as well as cargo handling for both loading and unloading.

Option 2: I go down the gravity well and unload, docking pay fee and cargo handling cost.

other options are possibles but require going through more sophisticated business models...at the peril of your campain becoming a adventure in accounting:CoW:

Put the figures that you think apply in YTU and you might wish to land or not your ship. Given T5, a 400t Unstreamlined hull 14 mcr + 4 mcr for lifter vs a 400t, 1G cluster at 6 mcr and it is all about costing/pricing 40 years of supplies and personnel loading, carrying, unloading, back and forth between Mainworld and Whereverhaffen station/colony/belt,/out-system client. Said Wereverhaffen may be having different starport, ath, grav conditions....

Optimized transport solution might create odd beast, Free trader are on the other hand are maid of all works and have odd caracteristic for some trades.

have fun

Selandia

 

[GypsyComet]

Note that fighting is not the only issue in space travel.

Option 1: unload at high port, pay docking fees and cargo handling cost; cargo shuttle to ground, pay docking fees for the shuttle at both high and down port as well as cargo handling for both loading and unloading.

Unless you are being paid for extended handling, once freight is off your ship it is the receiver's problem, just as it is the seller's responsibility to get the freight to you.

Speculative cargoes are another matter, as they belong to the ship until sold. Even then, if you have a buying broker on the ground who insists on ground-side delivery while on a world that requires orbital delivery, then the shuttle had better be a flat-rate service. Double charging the shipper for parking is a good way to kill business. In practice, that Broker will have a high-port office if he is serious about the business he's in.