Question Help needed on official ship design as found

[DaveChase]

I have been playing around with different ideas on designing ships and the layout of said ships.

I know that many of you are good at this type of thing and have seen your work

I am basing my designs off using CT/HG (Book 2/5).

My question is dealing around the Modular Cutter, primarily the modules.

I have the JTAS #6 and have GURPS Modular ship book and blue prints as reference (I figure if they did all the work then I would only need to convert.

My problem comes from the detailed designs of modules. How the hell to they expect those layouts to actually fit with in the 6m dia of a Module?

Am I missing something, being anal or ???

Help.

Thanks

Dave

 

[DaveChase]

I have been playing around with different ideas on designing ships and the layout of said ships.

I know that many of you are good at this type of thing and have seen your work

I am basing my designs off using CT/HG (Book 2/5).

My question is dealing around the Modular Cutter, primarily the modules.

I have the JTAS #6 and have GURPS Modular ship book and blue prints as reference (I figure if they did all the work then I would only need to convert.

My problem comes from the detailed designs of modules. How the hell to they expect those layouts to actually fit with in the 6m dia of a Module?

Am I missing something, being anal or ???

Help.

Thanks

Dave

 

[The Oz]

GT uses the English system of measurement: feet/yards and pounds/tons. CT used the metric system, as you know. The GT stuff I have uses hexes for the deckplans and each hex is one yard.

Perhaps this is where your trouble is? If the GT Modular Cutter plans are in yards, and not in the 1.5 meter squares of CT, they might look too big. Imagine the GT plans as being shrunk by a third and you might find a better fit.

 

[The Oz]

GT uses the English system of measurement: feet/yards and pounds/tons. CT used the metric system, as you know. The GT stuff I have uses hexes for the deckplans and each hex is one yard.

Perhaps this is where your trouble is? If the GT Modular Cutter plans are in yards, and not in the 1.5 meter squares of CT, they might look too big. Imagine the GT plans as being shrunk by a third and you might find a better fit.

 

[DaveChase]

Originally posted by The Oz:
GT uses the English system of measurement: feet/yards and pounds/tons. CT used the metric system, as you know. The GT stuff I have uses hexes for the deckplans and each hex is one yard.

Perhaps this is where your trouble is? If the GT Modular Cutter plans are in yards, and not in the 1.5 meter squares of CT, they might look too big. Imagine the GT plans as being shrunk by a third and you might find a better fit.

Conversion is not a problem

It comes down to actually fitting all those deck plans in a cylinder. Even giving the 1ft+ extra to the diameter those plans do not leave a lot of head room in a cylinder.

But thanks for the thoughts

I do appreciate it

Dave

 

[DaveChase]

Originally posted by The Oz:
GT uses the English system of measurement: feet/yards and pounds/tons. CT used the metric system, as you know. The GT stuff I have uses hexes for the deckplans and each hex is one yard.

Perhaps this is where your trouble is? If the GT Modular Cutter plans are in yards, and not in the 1.5 meter squares of CT, they might look too big. Imagine the GT plans as being shrunk by a third and you might find a better fit.

Conversion is not a problem

It comes down to actually fitting all those deck plans in a cylinder. Even giving the 1ft+ extra to the diameter those plans do not leave a lot of head room in a cylinder.

But thanks for the thoughts

I do appreciate it

Dave

 

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

You coud think of the modular but as not being a cylinder exactly; it could be a more of a box. Think of a stick of butter with the corners mushed in. That should give more space inside, shouldn't it?

 

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

You coud think of the modular but as not being a cylinder exactly; it could be a more of a box. Think of a stick of butter with the corners mushed in. That should give more space inside, shouldn't it?

 

[CarlP]

Forget the cylinder! They aren't sexy. The Eagle from Space 1999 is sexy. And it makes an excellent modular cutter. Take a look!

http://www.starbeast.net/Carl/modular_cutter.htm

It ain't going to fit into a 6m diameter cylinder, so I guess the Broadsword is outta luck.

 

[CarlP]

Forget the cylinder! They aren't sexy. The Eagle from Space 1999 is sexy. And it makes an excellent modular cutter. Take a look!

http://www.starbeast.net/Carl/modular_cutter.htm

It ain't going to fit into a 6m diameter cylinder, so I guess the Broadsword is outta luck.

 

[CarlP]

Forget the cylinder! They aren't sexy. The Eagle from Space 1999 is sexy. And it makes an excellent modular cutter. Take a look!

http://www.starbeast.net/Carl/modular_cutter.htm

It ain't going to fit into a 6m diameter cylinder, so I guess the Broadsword is outta luck.

 

[CarlP]

Forget the cylinder! They aren't sexy. The Eagle from Space 1999 is sexy. And it makes an excellent modular cutter. Take a look!

http://www.starbeast.net/Carl/modular_cutter.htm

It ain't going to fit into a 6m diameter cylinder, so I guess the Broadsword is outta luck.

 

[Malenfant]

I think the 1999 Eagle is an excellent example of a modular cutter. In the series we saw passenger modules, winch modules, medical modules, combat modules, science modules...

Apparently the nosecone cockpit section can detach from the rest of the ships as an escape pod.

And yes, it's a damn sexy ship

.

 

[Malenfant]

I think the 1999 Eagle is an excellent example of a modular cutter. In the series we saw passenger modules, winch modules, medical modules, combat modules, science modules...

Apparently the nosecone cockpit section can detach from the rest of the ships as an escape pod.

And yes, it's a damn sexy ship

.

 

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

Funny, I was going to mention Space:1999 but wasn't sure who'd remember it ... I mean, I was watching that when i was maybe six years old. I actually had one of these back then.

But yes, I wouldn't feel the need to make the module sections always be cylinders. They just need to be able to attach to the cutter part. I imagine you could theoretically design a jump-capable module to drag your cutter around, although precisely why you'd do that is left as an excersize for the reader.

In fact, it would be interesting to see some really creative modules. I don't have the SJG product about the modular cutter - is it worth checking out?

 

[FlightCommanderSolitude]

Funny, I was going to mention Space:1999 but wasn't sure who'd remember it ... I mean, I was watching that when i was maybe six years old. I actually had one of these back then.

But yes, I wouldn't feel the need to make the module sections always be cylinders. They just need to be able to attach to the cutter part. I imagine you could theoretically design a jump-capable module to drag your cutter around, although precisely why you'd do that is left as an excersize for the reader.

In fact, it would be interesting to see some really creative modules. I don't have the SJG product about the modular cutter - is it worth checking out?

 

[DaveChase]

Originally posted by FlightCommanderSolitude:

In fact, it would be interesting to see some really creative modules. I don't have the SJG product about the modular cutter - is it worth checking out?

I like the Modular Cutter book, just wish the pictures were color instead of black and white. Lots of deck plans in it: each listed type of TL 10 modules have a deck plan in the book. They are all hexes though instead of squares.

I would agree that non-cylinder modules would be much easier but
My questions and issues have to deal with the cylinder type modules

BTW the Modular Cutter book address the non-cylinder type of ships and even has the Ling Corp (orginial Cutter company) with a non-cylinder designed module ship

Dave

 

[DaveChase]

Originally posted by FlightCommanderSolitude:

In fact, it would be interesting to see some really creative modules. I don't have the SJG product about the modular cutter - is it worth checking out?

I like the Modular Cutter book, just wish the pictures were color instead of black and white. Lots of deck plans in it: each listed type of TL 10 modules have a deck plan in the book. They are all hexes though instead of squares.

I would agree that non-cylinder modules would be much easier but
My questions and issues have to deal with the cylinder type modules

BTW the Modular Cutter book address the non-cylinder type of ships and even has the Ling Corp (orginial Cutter company) with a non-cylinder designed module ship

Dave