Proposed Ship mission codes

[AnotherDilbert]

The original AHL deck plans illustrate launch tubes nicely and match your description.

I hadn't thought of that, but that's a nice illustration.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Most of the modern aircraft carriers have common hangers that the craft are maneuvered around in, and they launch quite rapidly.

Current CV hangars are quite a lot larger than Traveller hangars.

Take a random CV hangar at 209×34×8 m ≈ 57 000 m³
https://science.howstuffworks.com/aircraft-carrier6.htm

According to wiki it can house about 90 aircraft, so about 600 m³ per aircraft.

A F/A-18 is very approximately 20 m³, so the hangar is something like 30 times as large as the aircrafts... In effect each aircraft has it's own "Launch Tube"...


A Traveller hangar of 110% of craft volume is a form-fitting cubby with an inch or so to spare in each direction, absolutely no room to move around or even open a hatch.

 

[Condottiere]

Naval aircraft got bigger and more complex, so any architecture that provided larger elevators, hangars and ceilings were, future proof.

And you can always park them on the flight deck, or in our case, hang them off clamping docks.

 

[aramis]

Yes, but it's reasonable for large craft carrying many small craft, e.g. the Tigress.

The Tigress is not likely to have 300 small cubbies with 300 individual hatches through the armour, one for each fighter. It would be more like a parking garage with individual parking spaces and a lot of empty space for the craft to move to/from the parking space to a larger hatch, and that's what a Launch Tube is, just empty space.

Note that Launch Tubes cost the same as Hangars, next to nothing (MCr 0.002 per Dt). I can't see that any complex machinery is implied.

An M-drive equipped small craft obviously doesn't need a small amount of extra shove out the hatch.

No, it's NOT reasonable. Exterior cradles, however, are.

Until one gets to percentages of hull higher than OTU Fleet Speed capital ships, the surface area ratios are best served by nose-in cradles.

THe only reason excuse for them is the setting-rules require them due to a very unrealistic restriction on number of launches.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

No, it's NOT reasonable. Exterior cradles, however, are.

In TNE, that keeps track of surface area of ships, large high-performance ships are chronically short of surface area.

In general I would agree exterior grapples are quite useful, but an internal hangar protects the craft under the carrier's armour, presumably a good idea if the carrier is going into the line of battle. Inside the carried craft are also accessible for repairs and maintenance during jump, which seems a good idea for a naval carrier.


A TNE Tigress, something like this:

Uses more than 200 000 m² more surface area than the available 177 000 m².

The Launch Tubes only saves about 35 000 m², but it's a start...

In general large ships are short of surface area, wasting it on small craft hatches is not really affordable.

 

[kilemall]

I prefer LoGH launch facilities, something like the Space Above and Beyond system but without ridiculous articulated cockpits.