Mercenary Starships and Spacecraft

[Anthony]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
How do you fit 11 people in 4 dtons of armored vehicle? If you figure a person is roughly 2m^3 with no gear and stacked in like sardines 11 people is almost 2 tons, just in warm bodies.

A person is roughly 0.1 m^3 in real volume, though they can't be packed that tightly. A human in a bench seat, however, can easily be fit into a region 0.4m wide, 1m front to back, and about 1.25m high (total 0.5 m^3) and will have some stowage space available under the seats, though you will need a passage with an elevated roof for getting people in and out, so a realistic volume figure is somewhat highier. In any case, however, it's trivial to fit 11 people in less than one dton.

Traveller has as history of vastly overestimating the amount of space required for people.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
How do you fit 11 people in 4 dtons of armored vehicle? If you figure a person is roughly 2m^3 with no gear and stacked in like sardines 11 people is almost 2 tons, just in warm bodies.

A person is roughly 0.1 m^3 in real volume, though they can't be packed that tightly. A human in a bench seat, however, can easily be fit into a region 0.4m wide, 1m front to back, and about 1.25m high (total 0.5 m^3) and will have some stowage space available under the seats, though you will need a passage with an elevated roof for getting people in and out, so a realistic volume figure is somewhat highier. In any case, however, it's trivial to fit 11 people in less than one dton.

Traveller has as history of vastly overestimating the amount of space required for people. </font>[/QUOTE]A current APC with bench seats can apparently hold more people than one would expect based on Traveller vehicle sizes. (Though I would suggest .45 meters is closer and a little mroe if you are wearing full body armor.

However, an air\raft with a capacity of 4 people, in Traveller is 4 tons. A Speeder is 6 dtons and has a capacity of 2. Acceleration couches, which appear to be the standard, not bench seats, are .5 tons each (Including occupant and Life Support for that occupant). Meaning that an 8 person squad is going to take up 4 tons just in seating. Add a three person crew and you are up to 5.5 tons, without accounting for controls, weapons, engines, fuel, armor, sensors, etc.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
However, an air\raft with a capacity of 4 people, in Traveller is 4 tons.

Now, if you look at pictures of an air/raft, it's about the same size as a modern convertible car. A good-sized modern car might be 5 meters long, a bit under 2 meters wide, and about 1.5 meters tall -- in other words, it fits within a 1 dton box. In addition, it's not a box shape; actual volume that is within the shell of the car is closer to 0.5 dtons.

The main reason GURPS Traveller vehicles are smaller than CT is because they use realistic volume for seats, crewstations, and the like.

 

[mbrinkhues]

An example for a Mercenary unit that can act as a "Pocket Army"

Grav Infantry Platoon

Each Platoon has four Squads
Each Squad is one Grav APC (2 Crew, 1+6 Dismount)

=> 4 Vehicles, 1 Leutenant, 1 Sergeant, 2 Corporals, 32 Soldiers

The Grav-APC used above has a TacMissile Launcher and a Anti-personal weapon

Artillery Platoon

4 Light Artillery Vehicles using Multiple Rocket Launchers with reloading systems. Based on the Grav-APC.

=> 4 Vehicles, 1 Leutenant, 1 Sergeant, 2 Corporals, 8 Soldiers

Light tank Platoon

4 light tanks or assault guns for tank-hunting. The example unit uses assault guns based on the APC

=> 4 Vehicles, 1 Leutenant, 1 Sergeant, 2 Corporals, 4 Soldiers

HQ Platoon

1 Grav APC equiped as a mobile HQ/FDC
2 Grav APC as supply carriers
2 Grav APC as a MASH/Corpman vehicle
2 Grav APC as maintenance shop
4 Closed Air/Raft

=> 7 Vehicles, 1 Captain, 2 Leutenants, 3 Sergeants, 9 Corporals, 34 Soldiers

This results in a basic unit size of

35 Vehicles (assuming 3 Infantry Platoons)
9 Officers (1 Captain, 8 Leutenant/First Leutenant)
9 Senior NCO (Staff Sergeant and above)
21 Junior NCO (Corporal, Lance Corporal, Sergeant)
176 Soldiers (Soldier, Private, Private 1. Class)

=> 216 Soldiers needing

9 Individual Cabins
19 Double Cabins
22 8-Mann Bunkrooms (Better: 44 4-Mann BR)

at the minimum. Assuming 4dton per APC (as per GT construction) and Hangar Storage we end up with 140dton for the vehicles and 230dtons for crew space. Add in some space for briefing room, sickbays etc.


Additional forces that might or might not be used are:

Attack Speeder Platoon

6 Attack Speeders
1 Maintenance Vehicle
1 Supply Vehicle

=> 8 Vehicles, 1 Leutenant, 1 Sergeant, 6 Corporals, 8 Soldiers

This is often dropped if fighters are availabel

Light Firesupport Platoon

6 Light Mortars on Air/Raft
6 Anti Tank Missile Teams on Air/Raft

=> 12 Vehicles, 1 Leutenant, 1 Sergeant, 10 Corporals, 24 Soldiers

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
However, an air\raft with a capacity of 4 people, in Traveller is 4 tons.

Now, if you look at pictures of an air/raft, it's about the same size as a modern convertible car. A good-sized modern car might be 5 meters long, a bit under 2 meters wide, and about 1.5 meters tall -- in other words, it fits within a 1 dton box. In addition, it's not a box shape; actual volume that is within the shell of the car is closer to 0.5 dtons.</font>[/QUOTE]Which is the artists conception but there throughout canon, has never be a direct correlation between the pictures and the stats.

Even those items with deckplans don't always match the pictures. (Or the deckplans and pictures don't match the stats.)

Besides an air/raft has always had a decent amount of cargo room and that is never pictured.

The main reason GURPS Traveller vehicles are smaller than CT is because they use realistic volume for seats, crewstations, and the like.

Realistic compared to what? This is Science Fiction. What is real? How do you define real?

How big is a fusion plant? How big is a anti-gravity drive that provides both lift and thrust? How about life support requirements?

Seats, crewstations and the like always included the electronics behind the stations. They also include life support, artifical gravity and inertial compensation.

Sure if you want to build a M2 Bradley or a M113 then the numbers are likely to be off slightly, if you use Striker, MT or T20, but they can be done and the sizes are unlikely to be that far off. On the other hand anything beyond that tech level is nothing more than a WAG.

Further remember that DTons is carrying size on a starship, which is supposed to allow access to those vehicles. Since a vehicle is carried at its tonnage in a drive off configuration. There will be wasted space around it.

 

[atpollard]

In both Traveller and the real world, the amount of space required to accommodate a person varies greatly. The 0.5 dTons per person figure agrees fairly well with the First Class seating in a commercial airplane and BTL correctly points out that 0.5 dTons includes life support and other spaces (like the “refresher”). On the other hand, even CT recognized that 4 people could fit in a 1 dTon emergency low berth (The Traveller Book, pg. 61), so 0.5 dTons per person is not an absolute lower limit, even with life support.

 

[mbrinkhues]

At least in GT and IIRC TNE Size is real enclosed volume. Any vehicle storage needs extra space in those systems. A 4dton vehicle in GT would need:

4.1dton in a custom fitted bay that allows no external maintenance and only accepts this vehicle

6dton in a simple hangar bay/garage

8dton in a space dock that allows orbital deployment without evacuating th area or loosíng air

Maintenance gear comes extra.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by atpollard:
In both Traveller and the real world, the amount of space required to accommodate a person varies greatly. The 0.5 dTons per person figure agrees fairly well with the First Class seating in a commercial airplane

No it doesn't. A typical first class seat is about 2m long, 0.6m wide, and 1.5-2m high, for a total volume of less than 0.2 dtons.
http://www.seatguru.com/charts/intl_first_class.php

 

[atpollard]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by atpollard:
In both Traveller and the real world, the amount of space required to accommodate a person varies greatly. The 0.5 dTons per person figure agrees fairly well with the First Class seating in a commercial airplane

No it doesn't. A typical first class seat is about 2m long, 0.6m wide, and 1.5-2m high, for a total volume of less than 0.2 dtons.
http://www.seatguru.com/charts/intl_first_class.php </font>[/QUOTE]With all due respect, I disagree.

If you divide the exterior volume of the fuselage of an aircraft (less the cargo volume) by your figure of 0.2 dTons per person you will not arrive at a figure even remotely close to the number of passengers and crew that it will seat. The missing 0.3 dTons per person includes the electrical system, the environmental controls, the galley, the circulation aisles, the rest rooms the wall and floor thickness, the movie screen, etc. (in CT all of these items, plus space capable life support, are included in the 0.5 dTon figure).

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by atpollard:
If you divide the exterior volume of the fuselage of an aircraft (less the cargo volume) by your figure of 0.2 dTons per person you will not arrive at a figure even remotely close to the number of passengers and crew that it will seat. The missing 0.3 dTons per person includes the electrical system, the environmental controls, the galley, the circulation aisles, the rest rooms the wall and floor thickness, the movie screen, etc. (in CT all of these items, plus space capable life support, are included in the 0.5 dTon figure).

According to Boeing, a 767-300 cargo freighter has 454 cubic meters of cargo space, consisting of 336.5 cubic meters on the main deck and 117.5 cubic meters on the lower deck. As it is structurally similar to the passenger version, we can assume that the 336.5 cubic meters of main deck is reasonably close to the size of the passenger cabin on a 767-300 passenger plane, As the cargo capacity on a 767-300ER is 106.8 cubic meters, we can call all the extra more passenger space, for a total of 346.7 cubic meters. Call it an even 25 dtons, and note that there's some basic cargo space in the passenger area.

A 767-300ER carries 218-351 passengers depending on layout. That works out to between 0.071 and 0.115 dtons per person.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family/specs.html

 

[mbrinkhues]

An airplane is a good example for a shuttle but IMHO not a good one for most grav vehicles or for most vehicles actually

Depending on the exact design of a passenger seat, they are little more than current day APC "bench seats". Quite a few Grav-Vehicles don't have the accelleration needed for G-Seats, neither the requirements for full life support.

Those are mostly restricted to some Imperial tanks, the same that can be dropped from orbit. Not a "must have" for grav vehicles either IMHO.

And my car sure has no passenger aisle or extra access space either

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by atpollard:
If you divide the exterior volume of the fuselage of an aircraft (less the cargo volume) by your figure of 0.2 dTons per person you will not arrive at a figure even remotely close to the number of passengers and crew that it will seat. The missing 0.3 dTons per person includes the electrical system, the environmental controls, the galley, the circulation aisles, the rest rooms the wall and floor thickness, the movie screen, etc. (in CT all of these items, plus space capable life support, are included in the 0.5 dTon figure).

According to Boeing, a 767-300 cargo freighter has 454 cubic meters of cargo space, consisting of 336.5 cubic meters on the main deck and 117.5 cubic meters on the lower deck. As it is structurally similar to the passenger version, we can assume that the 336.5 cubic meters of main deck is reasonably close to the size of the passenger cabin on a 767-300 passenger plane, As the cargo capacity on a 767-300ER is 106.8 cubic meters, we can call all the extra more passenger space, for a total of 346.7 cubic meters. Call it an even 25 dtons, and note that there's some basic cargo space in the passenger area.

A 767-300ER carries 218-351 passengers depending on layout. That works out to between 0.071 and 0.115 dtons per person.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family/specs.html </font>[/QUOTE]But what are the overal dimensions? (Which has to be taken into account when it comes to DTons.) Especially since the wings and tail don't fold. Again it fits in a starship in a drive off configuration.So it either has to drop out the bottom, (Losing all sorts of volume under the wings and under the tail.) Back out, losing all sorts of volume behind the wings, go out forward, losing volume in front of the wings and the tail, or go out the top. Then you have to be able to get in and out of the vehicle. (And perform maintenance.) I think you will find your volume is a bit larger than the number for cargo capacity.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
But what are the overal dimensions?

Utterly irrelevant to this discussion; everything else is part of the engineering section, not part of the passenger section. In any case, for a more relevant comparison, the total volume of a typical sedan is 0.5 dtons, the total volume it would take in storage on board a ship is about 1.0 dtons, or less if put in a specially designed compartment.

 

[veltyen]

Originally by BetterThenLife:
Especially since the wings and tail don't fold.

But can fold. Especially when space is at a premium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_wing

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
But what are the overal dimensions?

Utterly irrelevant to this discussion; everything else is part of the engineering section, not part of the passenger section. In any case, for a more relevant comparison, the total volume of a typical sedan is 0.5 dtons, the total volume it would take in storage on board a ship is about 1.0 dtons, or less if put in a specially designed compartment. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually it is relevant as a Bradley loses at least two tons of volume due to its shape but not necessarily to its required space aboard a starship. All that excess volume isn't passenger space. though opening doors and space to enter are important as well.

 

[BetterThanLife]

As for someone thinking that a bench seat is sufficient for a Grav vehicle and life support is unimportant. First a bench seat will make surviving a catastrophic drive system failure unsurvivable from as low as 100 feet altitude. Second an APC only travels at about 60kph. Even a G-Carrier travels at more than twice that and a crash at that speed is also unsurvivable on a bench seat.

Grav vehicles can reach orbit so Life support is fairly standard. Further these are military vehicles which means that life support is actually extremely likely, even if the vehicle is never intended for orbit as protection from an NBC environment. Also most military environments in the OTU do not have a breathable atmosphere. Even if you restrict your military actions to Primary world you will find that you need life support on about 60% of the systems in the OTU.

A Mercenary unit is unlikely to be able to make a living if they restrict their operations to places where life support is not required.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by veltyen:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally by BetterThenLife:
Especially since the wings and tail don't fold.

But can fold. Especially when space is at a premium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_wing </font>[/QUOTE]On a 767? Even on planes where the wing is designed to fold as part of the initial design there is still quite a bit of wasted space around it. It also weakens the structure and decreases available fuel. Further folding the wings requires quite a bit of space to go from flight profile to storage profile.

 

[alanb]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
A Mercenary unit is unlikely to be able to make a living if they restrict their operations to places where life support is not required.

Not necessarily. It isn't clear that there is huge competition in the mercenary market. Furthermore, it's quite conceivable that some units never leave their homeworld.

We also don't know the "typical" lifespan of a mercenary unit. A unit could, quite conceivably "make a living" through a single ticket.

In addition, we don't know how typical it is for units to specialise. While some units may be designed to be self-sufficient, there may be other units that provide specialist services. This is especially likely where such services involve high technology and/or difficult to acquire skills.

In that case, it might be justified for some units simply to concentrate on providing "guys with rifles".

Finally, even worlds with breathable atmospheres usually have oceans, where you need life support. But it's still quite likely for units not to bother having integral "wet navy" units.

 

[veltyen]

Originally by BetterThenLife:
On a 767?

I haven't seen a 767 on a mercenary starship.

Or on an Aircraft Carrier either for that matter.

On the other hand there are aircraft of a similar size (well, the low end of the same ballpark) that do fold, and for exactly the same reason, to fit in restricted spaces.

The next generation of supersized passenger craft may well fold, due to the cost of re-implementing aircraft handling facilities. There are a lot of 747 capable airports out there, often with very little space to expand.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
Actually it is relevant as a Bradley loses at least two tons of volume due to its shape but not necessarily to its required space aboard a starship.

That's a function of slope (which GT handles), and is irrelevant to the volume of a passenger compartment. In any case, the 'volume' of an object refers to internal volume, not the stowage space required to put it on board a ship.

As for someone thinking that a bench seat is sufficient for a Grav vehicle and life support is unimportant. First a bench seat will make surviving a catastrophic drive system failure unsurvivable from as low as 100 feet altitude. Second an APC only travels at about 60kph. Even a G-Carrier travels at more than twice that and a crash at that speed is also unsurvivable on a bench seat.

Assault helicopters have bench seats. In general, anything that can make a grav APC crash is a heavy weapon that will also gut the vehicle, killing everyone inside, so crash-worthiness is really an incidental objective. It's possible that APCs have something like roller coaster bars to hold people in place, but that doesn't add all that much volume, and it forces a rather small base seat.

APCs probably do have life support/NBC. However, all that necessarily means is air tanks and CO2 scrubbers. A limited duration life support system for a small system like an APC is less than 0.1 cubic meters per man-day, particularly since the soldiers will have their own NBC kits. In any case, APCs are rarely used on airless worlds; orbital bombardment is easier.

APCs are probably rarely used off of habitable worlds; orbital bombardment is easier against rockballs. When they're used,