CT Only: Jump Drive and Combat Damage

[snrdg082102]

Evening all,

Between infojunky and Donald McKinney's input about the combat system I've forgotten to ask about a detail that appears to have been overlooked.

IIRC, the design and construction rules state that a non-starship can not be upgraded to a starship by installing a jump drive. In one or both of the design and construction rules there was mention that a starship's hull was a part of the jump drive system. Unfortunately, I have not been able to locate section or sections that my memory suggests is out there.

However, in JTAS 24 1985 is an article by Marc Miller titled 'Jump-space' pp. 34-38 states that "starship hulls contain as an integral part of their structure a network of wiring which maintains the jump field around the ship."

Neither the CT Book 2 Hit Locations/Critical Hits tables or CT Book 5 Ship Damage Tables Surface Explosion Table appears to account for damage to the network of wiring which maintains the jump field around the ship.

CT Book 2 does acknowledge hits to the hull, but does not appear to have, if there is any mention of the hull being mentioned, taken hull damage causing damage to the jump drive.

CT Book 5 does not that I can see consider damage to the hull.

Shouldn't damage to the hull or a surface explosion also damage the network of wiring which maintains the jump field around the ship?

 

[Supplement Four]

Shouldn't damage to the hull or a surface explosion also damage the network of wiring which maintains the jump field around the ship?

Damn, there's something fuzzy about this, out in the edges of my memory. I can't remember exactly where, but I remember something along the lines that ship can take damage to the hull up to about 20% of its surface before there is a jump field problem.

Maybe...probably...thinking of something written in the SOM (for MT, but mucho useable with CT).

 

[robject]

For CT purposes, you may assume that field generation is not in jeopardy as long as the ship can operate. Chalk it up to a very robust hull and drive system.

When you're outside of CT territory, you generally have to be more careful.

 

[whulorigan]

Damn, there's something fuzzy about this, out in the edges of my memory. I can't remember exactly where, but I remember something along the lines that ship can take damage to the hull up to about 20% of its surface before there is a jump field problem.

Maybe...probably...thinking of something written in the SOM (for MT, but mucho useable with CT).

From DGP/MT-SOM, p.14:

If a ship's outer hull is breached by a hole much larger than a meter, the jump field barrier may actually protrude into the ship. If the hull damage is extensive (more than 10% of the hull grid destroyed in a single location), there is a fair chance the jump transition will fail, and the ship will remain in normal space, unable to jump.

 

[GypsyComet]

IIRC there is an early TAS News item that describes the survivors of such a breach, and is what led to the hull grid becoming explicitly stated in MT.

 

[aramis]

Damn, there's something fuzzy about this, out in the edges of my memory. I can't remember exactly where, but I remember something along the lines that ship can take damage to the hull up to about 20% of its surface before there is a jump field problem.

Maybe...probably...thinking of something written in the SOM (for MT, but mucho useable with CT).

You are... SSOM discusses jump grids and hull damage. TNE makes a differentiation (IIRC, it's in the Ref's data in Regency Sourcebook) between grid-based and coil based, and I knew GM's making the distinction from well before TNE.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning all,

Thank you for the quick feedback and clearing up my question.

 

[Supplement Four]

From DGP/MT-SOM, p.14:

Ah, yes. That's it. That's what I was trying to remember.

 

[Patron Zero]

I've always had it as an observed protocol IMTU, that a ship preparing to enter jump-space perform a visual inspection of the hull for any damage to the various antennas and other exposed components of the J-drive.

The inspection in-conjunction with an operations and network check-test also ran before attempting entry to J-space.

 

[Carlobrand]

IIRC there is an early TAS News item that describes the survivors of such a breach, and is what led to the hull grid becoming explicitly stated in MT.

Traveller Wiki mentions items in Challenge:
http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/TNS_1112

But there's no mention of the nature of the incident that caused the ailment. Next mention, which I think is in an MT or TNE supplement, is some reporter in 1118 who says he was investigating jump sickness and was held by the Imperials for 6 years.

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/TNS_1118

but he gets off'ed, so we don't get any new info.

 

[GypsyComet]

Traveller Wiki mentions items in Challenge:
http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/TNS_1112

But there's no mention of the nature of the incident that caused the ailment. Next mention, which I think is in an MT or TNE supplement, is some reporter in 1118 who says he was investigating jump sickness and was held by the Imperials for 6 years.

http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/TNS_1118

but he gets off'ed, so we don't get any new info.

I'm recalling more than what is quoted, but I'll have to dig into my paper archive to find it.