Non OTU: Military Ships and Crewing

[PFVA63]

Timerover - all the gangways should be part of stateroom space except those entirely within a compartment dedicated to some other element... but there are almost none of those on the 378 WPG.

Also, ship's laundry, tho' it looks like you included that.
It looks like you cut out the Peacoat stores or the stores abeam them. Both of which should be included. I'm not certain if you included all the study areas, either.

Also note, the bottom deck might not be full height. It looks to be mostly bilges and sumps, which are often not full height; it looks like you may have treated it as a full height deck. Also, most of the deck is outside the dotted full height line.

Nice work, tho'.

Hi,

Here’s a figure where I’ve tried to overlay the areas that I’ve considered ontop of the original dwg for the ship. I’ve made the borders a bit bigger to help make them stick out more.



Link to larger scale image http://www.mnvdet.com/Other/378-2.png

Anyway, what I’ve tried to include, starting from the topmost deck is;

02 Level - The Captain & (I believe Chief Engineer’s State Rooms and cabins. These items were not included on the original drawing but I estimated their fore & aft extents from a separate report I had on sanitary spaces and I believe that what is shown is close to the area provided on this deck.
01 Level – The EO and XO staterooms and attached meeting rooms, plus a fan room to port and starboard

Mn Deck – 8 Officer Staterooms plus the passageway between them, the wardroom, the ward room pantry, the CPO Mess, the sick bay, and the passageways between them, the ship’s store and scullery and the passageway immediately around them, the crew’s mess and the galley. On this deck I did not include the Supply Office, the Ship’s Office, the Ex Office, the DC Office or the passageways in way of those spaces.

2nd Deck – the General Stores space (including the screened off portion forward), the Laundry, Barber Shop and 1st LT’s Office (and passageways in way of these spaces), the Officers? And CPO staterooms on this deck plus the passageways in way of them, plus the Crew’s Berth spaces and Studies both fore and aft of the Engine Room and associated spaces. On this deck I did not include the Hawsers Handling Room (or anything forward of it, the Ord Office (near the Barbershop), or anything aft of the aft Crew Berth space.

3rd Deck – the Sea Bag Stg Space, the Pea Coat Stg space and the Store Room and Stores spaces (plus passageways adjacent to that space, the Crew’s Berth’s and Study, the Air Conditioning Shop, the Freeze and Chill (Food) Storage spaces, plus the passageway and vertical trunk that access those spaces. I did not include the Flammable Stores, Bosun’s Stores, the Cargo Space or the Bow Prop Rm, as well as the Fire Control Room, the unlabeled space across from it, nor the passageway that separates them, the EE Shop and Stores, the Machinery Shop and Tool Rm, the Comm Stores, the ISS Rm, or the Engineering Stores.

For the tankages, as noted previously, rather than trying to scale something off the picture I took some info that I had from a Sanitary/Sewage study for the ship.

I hope this helps clarify what I did.

Regards

PF

PS. Its PFVA not Timerover, but no problems, I have trouble with names all the time

 

[HG_B]

For crew/passengers on a Tramp type I use 6 tons/stateroom.

2 for the stateroom, 1 for passages, 2 for messing/recreation and 1 for life-support.

 

[warwizard]

Some rule sets specifically have volume, mass, power, and cost for life support broken out seperate from that of the accomodations. (TNE and T4 FF&S) This would allow one to scale the life support up or down based on ship's mission, from basic heat and lights all the way to cows in space. The only problem I have with thoes rules as written is that they are based on the volume of the areas to be provisioned with the services rather than on the mass of the creatures to be supported. (I say mass due to variance of the body size of the sophonts that may be crew, 10 Droyne = 1 Kkree?).

Another thing to concider is the crew's tolerance of close contact with other crew members. If you will think of the personal space a typical human from a low population density has compared to that of a person from a high population density. This is not a minor issue, the person from a low density area will have a personal space that may be as much as 10 feet (3+ meters), whereas the person from a high density will feel comfortible at 1 foot. Forcing crew members to come closer than they are comfortible with due to the tightness of the spaces will cause fights and other morale problems.

So the planetary navy of that population 7 agriculatural world may devote more volume to the spaces where the crew works, while that population A industrial world, well they cram em in cheek to cheek and the crew like it like that.

 

[HG_B]

Another thing to concider is the crew's tolerance of close contact with other crew members. If you will think of the personal space a typical human from a low population density has compared to that of a person from a high population density. This is not a minor issue, the person from a low density area will have a personal space that may be as much as 10 feet (3+ meters), whereas the person from a high density will feel comfortible at 1 foot. Forcing crew members to come closer than they are comfortible with due to the tightness of the spaces will cause fights and other morale problems.
.

Not really. Case in point. U.S. subs. Crewed by people from high density and low density backgrounds.

 

[Darkwing]

Hi,

I'm not really trying to prove "that giving everyone a 2-man hotel room is feasible and in keeping with current practice" but rather I'm just trying to show that allocating 2dtons of space per person isn't really excessive for a warship or patrol vessel.

Fair enough. But the deck plans show what looks like a hotel room, then the books handwave off that it supposedly includes a lot of other things, so trying to show it as reasonable comes across to me as that.

As for "CHT, water, ac plant, and fan rooms should be considered engineering or life support, not berthing" if the Traveller rules made allowances for such that would make sense to me, however in the rules that I'm familiar with "engineering spaces" seem to be limited to "Power Plants", "Jump Drives", "Maneuver Drives' and "Fuel Processors". And since things like the Collection, Holding and Transfer (CHT) tank and fresh water systems will be probably pretty greatly dependent on the number of personnel carried I think that considering them as part of accommodations space instead of as part of engineering spaces would make sense to me.

Much of that equipment is in engineering, and whatever's spread out elsewhere is still mostly the responsibility of the engineers IRL. And house rules adding stuff isn't out of bounds.

As for the A/C plant, refrigeration and fans rooms I could see the possibility that these may be in part based both on accommodations and part on just overall hull size and/or other factors, but in a Traveller setting they kind of seem to fit the bill of being (at least to a large part) "life support systems" and on a Traveller type ship I would kind of suspect that there would have to be systems at least a little similar in concept to treat, recirculate and reclaim the "air" whose size will be based in a large part on the number of personnel onboard (as well as refrigeration for the food stuffs. etc).

Based partly on habitable volume size, and partly on expected number of personnel to support, yes, I'd agree.

As far as stores being "cargo", if the Traveller rules sets being used requires a certain amount of "cargo" space to be carried on a ship to serve as the "stores" required to support the crew that would be fine, but if that is not the case then space for "food", "linens", "spares for lighting", "filters", "office supplies" etc would all have to come out of somewhere.

well, those items are essentially cargo, just cargo for the ship, not cargo for customers. Or if you're not willing to add house rules, consider them part of the Ship's Locker, and make it bigger.

Instead to me it kind of shows that if a person were serious about trying to provide spaces to account for pretty much everything that might be required to support a "crew" onboard it might actually be a real challenge to fit all those spaces in.

Now try adding Repair Lockers, engine control rooms, laundry, the paint locker, Bos'n Locker, chart room, radio room, CIC, machinery spaces, electronics spaces, workshops, et alia. Yeah, it can be fun and frustrating to try to draw out everything that should be there.

PS. As far as a "Traveller standard" for which to compare to, I think its probably important to ask what we mean by that and whether we are talking about any specific "canon" rules or whether we are talking a mix of rules and assumptions on compartment sizes.

Not really. The various versions seem to me to be pretty comparable on living space.

PPS. Sorry about the size of the drawing. I had tried to scale it down, but have it clickable to enlarge, but I think I did something wrong. Anyway the drawing came from this site http://www.uscg.mil/history/plans/coastguardplansindex.asp (about 1/2 way down under Cutter, Tender, Lightship & Vessel Plans:) and can be downloaded in large scale either as a pdf or a jpg.

Thanks for the link!

 

[Darkwing]

Some rule sets specifically have volume, mass, power, and cost for life support broken out seperate from that of the accomodations. (TNE and T4 FF&S) This would allow one to scale the life support up or down based on ship's mission, from basic heat and lights all the way to cows in space. The only problem I have with thoes rules as written is that they are based on the volume of the areas to be provisioned with the services rather than on the mass of the creatures to be supported. (I say mass due to variance of the body size of the sophonts that may be crew, 10 Droyne = 1 Kkree?).

Good point.

Another thing to concider is the crew's tolerance of close contact with other crew members. If you will think of the personal space a typical human from a low population density has compared to that of a person from a high population density. This is not a minor issue, the person from a low density area will have a personal space that may be as much as 10 feet (3+ meters), whereas the person from a high density will feel comfortible at 1 foot. Forcing crew members to come closer than they are comfortible with due to the tightness of the spaces will cause fights and other morale problems.

Formally, a petty officer's or chief's authority answers that, except when it has to go before the skipper. Informally, saturday night smokers...

 

[PFVA63]

Fair enough. But the deck plans show what looks like a hotel room, then the books handwave off that it supposedly includes a lot of other things, so trying to show it as reasonable comes across to me as that.

Much of that equipment is in engineering, and whatever's spread out elsewhere is still mostly the responsibility of the engineers IRL. And house rules adding stuff isn't out of bounds.

Based partly on habitable volume size, and partly on expected number of personnel to support, yes, I'd agree.


well, those items are essentially cargo, just cargo for the ship, not cargo for customers. Or if you're not willing to add house rules, consider them part of the Ship's Locker, and make it bigger.

Now try adding Repair Lockers, engine control rooms, laundry, the paint locker, Bos'n Locker, chart room, radio room, CIC, machinery spaces, electronics spaces, workshops, et alia. Yeah, it can be fun and frustrating to try to draw out everything that should be there.

Not really. The various versions seem to me to be pretty comparable on living space.

Thanks for the link!

Hi,

I don't have any problems with house rules at all. Basically, I was just trying to include stuff that seems crew/personnel related stuff as accommodations stuff whereas stuff more directly related to the ship (like the Bosun's stores, Paint locker, DC spaces, chart room, CIC, and radio room etc) I figured might instead as part of the "Bridge and Basic Controls" or something, since the basic Traveller rules that I've used in the past don't really seem to address where else those type things might be.

As for double occupancy standards, on the real world ships I've been on I've seen a wide range of single occupancy spaces ranging from a Captain's Cabin & Stateroom "Suite" to a relatively small space with a settee that converts into a berth plus a small desk and wardrobe, with sanitary spaces shared with the adjoining stateroom. And for double occupancy spaces I've seen stuff that ranged from a stateroom with two separate decent sized berths, two wardrobes, two desks, and it own dedicated sanitary spaces, down to spaces with only a settee (and upper pulldown berth) two small wardrobes or lockers and maybe a single small desk, or even a space with a two tier berth two lockers and little else, and with a shared sanitary space with the adjoining staterooms.

As such I guess that maybe I'm suggesting that rather than everyone on a Traveller ship having the exact same size double occupancy stateroom, the Captain (and maybe Chief Engineer) may have a single occupancy stateroom with dedicated sanitary space, department heads may have smaller single occupancy staterooms (with dedicated sanitary spaces), other officers with double capacity staterooms (with dedicated sanitary spaces), CPOs may have double occupancy staterooms with sanitary spaces shared with the adjacent staterooms, and crew may have little more than a two high tier of berths and two lockers, separated from adjacent tiers by partitions and a door, with a shared set of sanitary spaces "down the hall" and a nearby common space/lounge.

To me that kind of seems like it might meet a notional "double occupancy" level of accommodations for those crewmembers that double occupancy was specified while still trying to fit in stuff that might be expected to support that number of crew at an average rate of about 2dtons/person.

In the end though what I'm really trying to get across is that 2dtons/person isn't really as extravagant as it might seem on its surface because it seems to me that that 2 dtons/person has to potentially account for a lot of stuff.

 

[warwizard]

let's concider how big 2 DT is in something we're familiar with:

A motor home, one of the smallish ones to be sure, but the enclosed volume is about 2 Dt 2 1/3 m X 2 1/3 m X 5 m

pull down bunk over the pilot and navigation stations
bench seating and a table (removable) for a dining area, sink, cooktop, oven and microwave, and food chiller. Bench seating converts to two bunks.

sanitary facility

large bench seating area that converts to a double bed with a closable partition large enough to sleep 4

a wardrobe, drawers and lots of secured stowage compartments everywhere.

So Motor home crew 2, plus 5 passengers, galley and fresher, and bunks 2Dt.

Family of 7 in a motor home for a week, not a problem, but for a year, perhaps not so good.

 

[rancke]

Family of 7 in a motor home for a week, not a problem, but for a year, perhaps not so good.

Family of 7 in a motor home with door barred and windows boarded up, for a week, perhaps not so good either.


Hans

 

[aramis]

let's concider how big 2 DT is in something we're familiar with:

A motor home, one of the smallish ones to be sure, but the enclosed volume is about 2 Dt 2 1/3 m X 2 1/3 m X 5 m
[snip]
Family of 7 in a motor home for a week, not a problem, but for a year, perhaps not so good.

that is a small van conversion or a camper on a pickup. At best, family of 5, and then one's sleeping on the floor in the aisle; alternatively, 3 small kids can share the drop-table. With 7, someone's in the driver and navigator's seats at almost all times. And the fresher is most likely just a commode and handwash station, no shower.

Since I can't find any 15' RV plans, but I can find some 8' camper plans (which aren't 8' long, by the way - they're 8' of bed-length, with 4' more cabover)... http://www.alaskancamper.net/pages/floorplans.html

And that 8' isn't good for a group of 4 adults, mind you. It's passable for 2 snuggly adults and 2 kids if it has the 2 short couches. It's ok for 3 adults if it's the one long fold down, two of whom are real friendly; you can get one extra adult on the floor in a pinch. Mind you... it's 8' x 11.5' x 6.5', + 4'x11.5'x2.5'... or about 20 cubic meters. 1.44Td. It's great for 1; I've lived in one for over a week once, and have several friends who have done likewise for much longer.

To get a shower, you go to the 10' long... and with the extended cabover... 25.7 cubic meters or so... 1.83Td... and have the short benches that unfold across the aisle to make another bed.

That's basically two 1Td bunks, and you can get them double occupancy, but it's a might cozy... the extra 0.17 Td would be the Air and Water recycling.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

In the end though what I'm really trying to get across is that 2dtons/person isn't really as extravagant as it might seem on its surface because it seems to me that that 2 dtons/person has to potentially account for a lot of stuff.

Since this is a long thread, I've lost the bubble on who's arguing what, but recall that canonically, 2dT is for the *actual* stateroom. The space allocated in a ship, per person (stateroom) is 4dT. Then, you subtract out the life support, etc.

Mind you... it's 8' x 11.5' x 6.5', + 4'x11.5'x2.5'... or about 20 cubic meters.

Are your trucks a lot wider than ours down in the lower 48, Aramis? Over eleven feet wide? (And, even that is a bit shy of 20m^3)

I'm not sure I agree with your premise if you're saying the full allotment for more than one person could be 2dT. If you mean the standard stateroom (4dT allotted, but only 2dT in the actual room), then I say yes - assuming 1-1.5dT of the rest is allotted to common areas.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Family of 7 in a motor home for a week, not a problem, but for a year, perhaps not so good.

Not so much. If you put 7 in that for a week, there wouldn't be 7 at the end of the week. The reason a motor home (RV) works is because it's just a place where you sleep and eat and play cards when it rains. Otherwise, you are out of it, under a sky, with relatively unlimited possibilities for movement.

Family of 7 in a motor home with door barred and windows boarded up, for a week, perhaps not so good either.

Exactly.

 

[rancke]

Since this is a long thread, I've lost the bubble on who's arguing what, but recall that canonically, 2dT is for the *actual* stateroom. The space allocated in a ship, per person (stateroom) is 4dT. Then, you subtract out the life support, etc.

Double occupancy of staterooms is assumed.


Hans

 

[aramis]

Since this is a long thread, I've lost the bubble on who's arguing what, but recall that canonically, 2dT is for the *actual* stateroom. The space allocated in a ship, per person (stateroom) is 4dT. Then, you subtract out the life support, etc.


Are your trucks a lot wider than ours down in the lower 48, Aramis? Over eleven feet wide? (And, even that is a bit shy of 20m^3)

I'm not sure I agree with your premise if you're saying the full allotment for more than one person could be 2dT. If you mean the standard stateroom (4dT allotted, but only 2dT in the actual room), then I say yes - assuming 1-1.5dT of the rest is allotted to common areas.

I took the measurement from the plans as best I was able to read it. I've seen some 11' wide campers on the road - campers mind, not the 8' wide truck underneath it. I suspect it's a typo on the plans, but they're low DPI...

 

[PFVA63]

Double occupancy of staterooms is assumed.


Hans

Hi,

Hans, thanks. That's what I was assuming for the 2dtons/person allowance.

Regards

PF

PS. As for the actual size of a stateroom, although I've seen a lot of drawings showing 2dton staterooms mentioned by Fritz-Brown, I've seen other sizes too, so I'm not fully sure if there is anything in canon (yet) that specifically says that the "staterooms" are actually 2dtons in size.

 

[BytePro]

...
PS. As for the actual size of a stateroom, although I've seen a lot of drawings showing 2dton staterooms mentioned by Fritz-Brown, I've seen other sizes too, so I'm not fully sure if there is anything in canon (yet) that specifically says that the "staterooms" are actually 2dtons in size.

Seem to recall some book recommending 2 dtons (MgT perhaps?).

LBB2 Reprint pg 21 has "When allocating space within the ship for deck plans, assume that only a portion of stateroom tonnage must actually be in staterooms; the remainder should be used for common areas and other accommodations for crew." (and "leeway of plus or minus 10% to 20%" overall)

 

[PFVA63]

Since this is a long thread, I've lost the bubble on who's arguing what, ....

Hi,

For the most part my point of view can be summarized ionto two or three items;

1st, the amount of space that a crew member may need (based on ocean going ships at least) has tended to increase over time, especially as ships and system have become more complex.

2nd, 2dtons/person (which seems to be equivalent to using Traveller standards for double occupancy doesn't really seem too excessive to me (at least in terms of deck space)

3rd, although I may not have made a big point of it in this specific thread, I tend to agree with others in that for a spaceship there may be a need for perhaps even more space than on an ocean going ship, since you don't have open spaces that the crew can also make use of. Specifically, to me it would seem that for a large space going fleet, you may have a total of tens of thousands of crew spread across all the ships and the chances of getting shore leave may be few and far between. As such, if a crew may be locked up in a ship for months at a time, and if the closest planet/station to replenish oxygen supplies. fresh water and other life support stuff may be days, if not a week or more away then total space requirements for the crew may be even more than that for real world ocean going ships.

Regards

PF

 

[BytePro]

Ah - found it...

All other [than captain/commanding] personnel on military vessels must be provided with the equivalent of half a stateroom each.
...
Staterooms actually average about two tons, but the additional tonnage is used to provide corridors and access ways, as well as galley and recreation areas.

So there's your 2 ton reference - and 1 ton for the majority of military. Considering that per 100 troops means 100 tons for other areas and factoring in economies of scale for life support and such, along with fleet tenders for consumables, I think such addresses your issue the 3rd.

Cheers!

 

[PFVA63]

Ah - found it...
So there's your 2 ton reference - and 1 ton for the majority of military. Considering that per 100 troops means 100 tons for other areas and factoring in economies of scale for life support and such, along with fleet tenders for consumables, I think such addresses your issue the 3rd.

Cheers!

Hi,

I guess that since it says that they "average" 2 dtons, they all won't necessarily be the same size and that some may be larger than 2 dtons and some may be smaller than 2 dtons.

As for my third point, from the stuff I've looked at for the USCG 378ft cutter I still have my concerns especially for ships that may be on independent deployments (like has been suggested for some of the Azhanti High Lightning class). for situations like this, the need to sustain life support in the event of damage etc would seem to suggest to me the need for back up oxygen and fresh water etc.

 

[Carlobrand]

Not so much. If you put 7 in that for a week, there wouldn't be 7 at the end of the week. The reason a motor home (RV) works is because it's just a place where you sleep and eat and play cards when it rains. Otherwise, you are out of it, under a sky, with relatively unlimited possibilities for movement ...

I'd be interested in peoples' experience of little seagoing cabin cruisers since - other than Apollo and suchlike, where we're talking about people trained to endure that setting - that's about as close to something you can't leave for a week that I can think of in the modern world.