Massive Luxery Liners?

[spinwardpirate]

Or, at the very least, large luxury liners...

I've been dreaming up a Traveller campaign, and I find myself in need of a luxury liner. Performance doesn't really matter. What matters is that it a) has lifeboats/lifepods and b) carries a few hundred passengers.

Stats don't matter. Deck plans would be nice. Game system... preferably MGT, but I'll settle for others.

Thanks.

 

[robject]

Maybe find some inner deck layouts from the Titanic?

 

[Andrew Boulton]

There's the 5000dt King Richard on the Apocrypha CD.

 

[abomination]

I've been looking into the same thing.

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=19813

There are Queen Mary deckplans on line somewhere as well.

 

[abomination]

I've also been putting some thought into types of accommodation.

Suites for 1st class. Staterooms for high & middle.

Coffin bunks for 3rd class / steerage

As well as low passengers.

The coffin bunks are similar to those in Japanese hotels, and are standard for crew IMTU. They self seal in the case of decompression. The only difference between those for the crew & passengers is the crew can open theirs from the inside in an emergency (once they've donned vacc suits natch). The passengers have to await rescue. The philosophy of this is the same as not putting trap doors in the roof of lifts anymore. The untrained would be in far more danger if they were able to escape into the lift shaft or in our case hard vacuum.

In the case of your liner doing a "Titanic" many of the poorer passengers would be trapped & slowly suffocating. It might be something to add to your "rescue" adventure

Alternatively your party might find hundreds of decomposed bodies trapped & still listening to awful muzac & a "please remain calm & await further instructions" message.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Best designed with GT:Starships. That book has elements for a generation ship / large space station like

+ Farm
+ Park
+ Housing
+ Plaza

each at IIRC 10000dton. Since GT:ST has "Luxury" as an option (Generally x5 price and 1/2 passenger capacity) that solves the liner problem.

Build a massiv beast that carries two or three classes of passengers, one in the above modules (Luxury class)

Escape capsules etc. are also part of the construction system and the system is nice and easy even compared to HG

Made even easier by the GMV software from Tom Bont

 

[abomination]

Escape capsules etc. are also part of the construction system and the system is nice and easy even compared to HG

Whole staterooms could be "ejected" although it might be expensive as a lot more internal walls would need to be bulkheads.

C21st liners are constructed in this way, with the ship yards installing prefabricated suites into a ready built framework. It shouldn't be too hard to engineer them to be spat out in a crisis.

 

[spinwardpirate]

That's an interesting idea, especially since I only want one in order to "sink it" and leave the characters stranded on a planet. If they knew some of the cabins were capable of reentry, that would send them on a hunt for surviving cabins, with the possibility of finding some useful goods therein.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Whole staterooms could be "ejected" although it might be expensive as a lot more internal walls would need to be bulkheads.

C21st liners are constructed in this way, with the ship yards installing prefabricated suites into a ready built framework. It shouldn't be too hard to engineer them to be spat out in a crisis.

Same with our office. The problem is that the only stable thing is the framework, the divider walls are well insulated but not very sturdy. Same is likely with prefab suits. In Traveller the cabins are a bit more rugged so say they are build like the "appartment in a container" sets the german military is using. Still not that stable and lacking many critical systems:

To be ejected and survive both vacuum and re-entry they need a lot of add-ons like heat shielding(1), breaking/control thrusters(2) and a landing system(3) not to mention an independent life support(4) and if you intend for more than two passengers you'll also need extra couches(5)

Basically you start building cabins as 5dton Life boats attached to a framework. Extremely costly. It works better than escape capsules and lifeboat if and only if the passengers spend the majority of time in their cabins. Since we are talking luxury liner the "passengers" are likely the Rich and Useless so most won't.

(1) Traveller ships with their huge power plants and "thrust from power" engines don't aerobrake. They can simply use their engines to kill speed and gently glide down since they don't have limited burntime

(2) Unless you give each cabin a proper hull shape (like an Apollo capsule i.e) and even then they likely need breaking thrust to leave orbit

(3) Normal ships have their engines and gravitics. Great stuff but VERY power hungry. And the reactor stayed with the mothership

(4) Same for life support. Stayed with the mothership

(5) No power plant, no life support => No Accelleration Compensation

 

[abomination]

I was really just thinking out loud.

I can't see too much of an issue with the passengers not being in their cabins. At the first sign of trouble they would be asked to return there. Just like the seat belt sign on an air liner.

Do life boats need to be able to re-enter?
Surely the minimum requirement is to keep the occupants alive for a few days until they are rescued. Basically somewhere to go when the ship becomes uninhabitable. All they need power for is heat / light, maintaining a breathable atmosphere & a distress beacon.You could do that with batteries & solar cells.

Of course it would only work for staterooms next to the hull. Occupants of internal cabins would need to be evacuated in some other way. or maybe not if they are poor .

 

[tbeard1999]

I was really just thinking out loud.

I can't see too much of an issue with the passengers not being in their cabins. At the first sign of trouble they would be asked to return there. Just like the seat belt sign on an air liner.

Do life boats need to be able to re-enter?
Surely the minimum requirement is to keep the occupants alive for a few days until they are rescued. Basically somewhere to go when the ship becomes uninhabitable. All they need power for is heat / light, maintaining a breathable atmosphere & a distress beacon.You could do that with batteries & solar cells.

Of course it would only work for staterooms next to the hull. Occupants of internal cabins would need to be evacuated in some other way. or maybe not if they are poor .

My large passenger ships have 1dton "shelters" scattered throughout. A shelter is an airtight box (capable of being locked from within). It has an independent, battery powered air and temperature supply good for 48 hours for 4 people. 8 gallons of drinking water, food concentrates for 120 man-days and a rudimentary toilet are provided. Longer duration shelters are 2dtons, but contain power, food, water and air for 14 days for 4 people. If external power is available, the shelters can go indefinitely since air is reprocessed and water is recovered from the air and waste system. A limitation is that shelters lack airlock doors, so unless you have a vacc suit, your're locked in. If you have a vacc suit, you can cycle the air back into the storage tanks (preserving the air) and then leave. Note that shelters are self-contained (other than a power hookup which works in lieu of batteries if power is available).

I don't really see the point of lifeboats in space. Unlike ocean going ships, spaceships can't sink. So I really don't see the benefit in "abandoning ship" in the most common spaceship disaster situations -- meteor strike, critical system failure, drive failure, etc.

 

[flykiller]

I don't really see the point of lifeboats in space. Unlike ocean going ships, spaceships can't sink. So I really don't see the benefit in "abandoning ship" in the most common spaceship disaster situations -- meteor strike, critical system failure, drive failure, etc.

sure they can sink. if the ship is incoming and drives fail with half an hour to planetside with 30 miles/sec of vector remaining, then shelters won't help and it would be nice to be able to get everyone off before the ship sinks 500m into the ground.

(interesting thought. in the above scenario an M4 ship coming in at max deceleration for the sake of economic efficiency would be in a flight profile far beyond what an M2 lifeboat could handle.)

also, they can sink into the void of space. if the ship is half-way on an in-system transit and drives fail with 4000 miles/sec of vector laid on, and lots of rescue capacity is not available, it could wind up as a flying dutchman in the outer system.

lifeboats allow self-rescue. shelters assume effective and timely external help is on-call. if a ship operates only in highly civilized areas and never makes planetfall and never places itself in a gravity well or high-vector profile then perhaps it makes no sense for that ship to carry lifeboats. otherwise it will.

(check out my lifeboat deckplan, linked in my sig below)

 

[aramis]

At which point, flykiller, you may as well simply have vacc suits and/or rescue balls with gravitic "parachutes"... because if the ship is gonna die, odds are any lifeboat will too, unless it's PURELY a drive issue.

 

[tbeard1999]

sure they can sink. if the ship is incoming and drives fail with half an hour to planetside with 30 miles/sec of vector remaining, then shelters won't help and it would be nice to be able to get everyone off before the ship sinks 500m into the ground.

That doesn't strike me as one of the more likely threats a ship will face. Even if the distance is relatively close, maneuvering thrusters alone can change a vector significantly enough to avoid plunging into a planet's atmosphere.

So I still don't think that lifeboats are particularly likely.

also, they can sink into the void of space. if the ship is half-way on an in-system transit and drives fail with 4000 miles/sec of vector laid on, and lots of rescue capacity is not available, it could wind up as a flying dutchman in the outer system.

lifeboats allow self-rescue.

If that's a real concern, wouldn't a backup 1-G maneuver drive make far more sense?

Consider a 1000 ton liner that carries 10 crew and 145 passengers. It would need six 20-ton launch/lifeboats (26 people each) -- 120 tons and MCr84.

But a backup 1-G drive would cost MCr20 and take 9 tons. Add a backup powerplant and fuel (16 tons + 10 tons fuel; MCr40) and you're still only allocating 29% of the tonnage and 75% of the cost of all these lifeboats.

(All Book 2 numbers; HG numbers are about the same at TL15).

shelters assume effective and timely external help is on-call. if a ship operates only in highly civilized areas and never makes planetfall and never places itself in a gravity well or high-vector profile then perhaps it makes no sense for that ship to carry lifeboats. otherwise it will.

Well, lifeboats only make sense if there's a need to leave the ship. I just don't see such a need being a realistic requirement in space. I think that shelters or redundant drives are a far more cost effective solution.

Of course, lifeboats ARE dramatic, which may be the best argument for having them...

 

[sabredog]

Emergency Low-berths for the passengers? in case it hasn't already been mentioned...I haven't read the whole thread, but agree that life boats in space are pointless unless its just to get the players down on to the planet for the rest of the adventure.

it'd be just as easy to have emergency power sources start up the emer-low berths and fire up a rescue beacon to make the liner easy to find. All the ose little life boats will be harder to locate and where would they go anyway if there aren't any worlds close enough for supporting life?

 

[flykiller]

... you may as well simply have vacc suits and/or rescue balls with gravitic "parachutes" ....

looking up book 2/4/5 prices, lifeboats would be cheaper. and faster.

... because if the ship is gonna die, odds are any lifeboat will too ....

to know the odds, one must know the factors. and since disasters are unpredictable, the odds are unknown.

Even if the distance is relatively close, maneuvering thrusters alone can change a vector significantly enough to avoid plunging into a planet's atmosphere.

I'd like to see the math on that one. not being flippant, this could be a great exercise in pilot/navigation.

If that's a real concern, wouldn't a backup 1-G maneuver drive make far more sense?

yes, if fuel and power plant are still available. if you have lifeboats then it doesn't matter if they aren't.

Well, lifeboats only make sense if there's a need to leave the ship. I just don't see such a need being a realistic requirement in space.

I can almost _hear_ some liverpool shipyard program financial manager saying something similar about the titanic ....

I think that shelters or redundant drives are a far more cost effective solution.

say, 320 crew/passengers. say 1 dton/shelter, say 0.5MCr each, for 320 dtons at 160 MCr total.

compare with lifeboats: 10 lifeboats at 20 + 6 dtons each (don't forget the boat bay), each boat costing 12MCr, for 260 dtons at 120MCr total.

All the ose little life boats will be harder to locate ....

beacons. radios. pilots. formations.

... where would they go anyway if there aren't any worlds close enough for supporting life?

a good question. imtu lifeboats are basically nothing more than a lowberth bay mounted on a gig, so even that angle is covered as well as it can be by anything else.

once again. lifeboats allow self-rescue. shelters simply buy time for external rescue efforts. if your tu is rich in emergency services (such as might be the case with the regular runs between mora and fornice) then of course lifeboats may not be a good choice. otherwise they will.

 

[Patron Zero]

Fifth Element Style

Not wanting to do the deck plans or even attempt the stats but the luxury space liner from the film, The Fifth Element would not be out of place in a Traveller setting.

 

[aramis]

Not wanting to do the deck plans or even attempt the stats but the luxury space liner from the film, The Fifth Element would not be out of place in a Traveller setting.

Maybe not in YTU...

using the 5:1 minimum, and that there are at least seats for 500... that's at least 2500 tons, and it's luxery, so double that... it's out of place in most any SSTU... as it's probably 7-10 KTd.

 

[tbeard1999]

looking up book 2/4/5 prices, lifeboats would be cheaper. I'd like to see the math on that one. not being flippant, this could be a great exercise in pilot/navigation.

It's very, very hard to hit a planet by accident. Nearly impossible, I'd say. Here's why:

At 1-G acceleration, a ship will take about 333 minutes (5.5 hrs) to travel to a Size 7 world from 100 diameters distance (Book 2 p10). It is assumed to accelerate for half the trip, then decelerate for the remainder of the trip.

First comment -- seems to me that prudent starship operation would require the pilot to *not* aim at the dead center of a planet. Rather, he'd choose a trajectory that would insert the ship into orbit (or bounce out of orbit in the case of a drive failure).

At the midpoint of the journey, the ship is going 360,000 kph (The world is about 500,000 kilometers away). If something goes bad right then (the worst time), the ship has about 1.4 hours before it hits the planet). But here's the deal -- the ship will miss the planet because its initial trajectory assumed it would decelerate to the planet. Failing to decelerate will result in the ship arriving an hour *early* and the planet simply won't be there.

In fact the entire course is remarkably well designed to avoid accidental crashes into a planet. The ship must "lead" the planet (i.e., aim itself where the planet will be in 5.5 hours). Any error after the midpoint of the trip will result in the ship arriving *before* the planet gets there. Any error before the midpoint can be corrected by thrusters easily -- if its even necessary. For that matter, it is highly unlikely that a breakdown *before* the midpoint will occur at the exact second needed to put the ship on a collision course with the planet.

Assume that thrusters produce 1/10G acceleration. In 30 minutes of thrust, these thrusters can shift the ship's trajectory by 1620 km. If the ship shuts the thrusters off at that point and simply coasts for 4 hours, the total trajectory shift will be 12,900 km. More than enough to miss a planet. But as noted, the odds of a ship's drive breaking down at the *exact* moment needed to produce a collision are essentially nonexistent.

Remember that the ship's course will produce a rendezvous with the planet only if the ship accelerates at an exact acceleration for an exact amount of time and decelerates at an exact deceleration for an exact amount of time. Any change in this will cause the ship to miss the planet. And while the ship may wind up on course to hit something else, the odds are very remote -- space is HUGE and objects are TINY by comparison. Planets are like individual grains of sand on a gym floor--nearly impossible to hit by accident. And even if the ship winds up on a course to hit something else, it should have many hours to adjust its course. Thrusters can do this easily.

So...dramatic though they are, lifeboats make little sense in Traveller. IMHO of course.

Note that the escape pod in Star Wars was a *plot device* to get the droids on Tatooine.

I can almost _hear_ some liverpool shipyard program financial manager saying something similar about the titanic ....

As shown above, a ship in space is in an UTTERLY different environment (and threat environment) than Titanic in 1912.

 

[flykiller]

As shown above, a ship in space is in an UTTERLY different environment (and threat environment) than Titanic in 1912.

yeah, but the people are the same. "don't worry, we've thought of everything, it's all under control, nothing can go worng."

later I'll see if I can run the approach vector math. sounds like fun.