• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Reconstructing the Kinunir in MT

Major B

SOC-14 1K
I’ve finally finished the conversion of the Kinunir to MT statistics. Actually it was easier than the SDB conversion I did before this, mostly because the design is TL15 making the power plants much smaller. The design worksheets and vessel data sheet are posted in the file library here, and all the rambling below explains how I came up with what you see on the sheets.

Various statistics for the Kinunir are listed in Adventure 1, Book 5, and Supplement 9. Where these disagree I indicate the source.

I tried to stay as true to the original in Adventure 1 as I could. Were I designing a ship from scratch I would have made some different decisions, but with that said the end product is not a bad ship for an internal/frontier security role, though I would not be using Kinunir in a fleet action if I had a choice. I’ll walk through the design worksheet as the specifications are listed on the sheet, not in the order I calculated them.

To start with, the hull tonnage in the sources varied so I used 1,250 tons as listed in S9 and B5 rather than 1,200 (from A1). The hull volume listed in A1 (16,800) is too high for a 1,200-ton hull (should be 16,200). S9 also gets the volume wrong (17,500) as a 1,250-ton hull at 13.5 kl per ton should have 16,875 for volume. I extrapolated the hull weight and cost since the design is non-standard and came up with 382.5 MT and MCr 1.688 respectively.

The listed hull configuration is 2 (multiply hull cost by 1.1) and the hull is streamlined (no added cost). Since it is a TL15 design I used bonded Superdense armor (G) and kept the armor at minimum (40) since the sources all say Kinunir was unarmored.

I divided the power plant into 3 parts (normal maneuver-NM, combat maneuver-CM, and combat weapons-CW) to allow me to calculate fuel needs separately (more on that later). I see this as one power plant with three power output settings to choose from rather than as three different plants.

The Kinunir is listed as having a 4G maneuver drive but I didn’t see full power as necessary for normal daily operations. 2G should be good enough for that. I had to extrapolate the sizes for the maneuver drive since the hull is non-standard, coming up with 62.5 drive units for 2G and 137.5 for 4G. I calculated the specs for the 2G drive and powered it in the NM category. Then I subtracted the 2G from the 4G drive unit number and used the result to calculate the specs for the rest of the 4G drive. This is powered in the CM category. I hope this part makes sense - like the power plant, there is one 4G maneuver drive that can operate on two power settings, normal and combat.

Next I calculated the additional power needed for an agility of 4. This was added to the CM power category to ensure that at the end, the vessel would still have enough excess power for full agility. If the vessel had been built at a lower TL I probably wouldn’t have been able to make this work, but for this design it did.

The Kinunir is listed with Jump 4 so I built that plant in. Then I added TL15 avionics, system-range maser and radio communications, and backups for the two comm. systems. As for communications, the originals did not list anything for sensors, so I chose a top-of-the-line suite for TL15. That package includes interstellar-range passive EMS, far orbit-range active and jamming systems, a TL15 high-pen densitometer, and TL14 neutrino sensor. I added one backup system for each sensor and electromagnetic masking. Since the power required is so low, all sensors and commo are powered in the NM category.

For weapons, I matched the original mix of turrets (there are no bays). Personally I’d make different choices but that is subject to debate. The two particle accelerator and eight laser turrets are powered in the CW category but the missile turrets are powered in the NM category so are always available. I built in a missile magazine (the A1 deckplans showed a magazine) with 20 battery-rounds. I calculated the weight of the magazine for all nuclear missiles. If HE missiles are carried the weight will be less.

Next I installed the factor-7 nuclear damper (though B5 and S9 call for only a factor-5 damper) and factor-1 black globe generator listed in the original design. I powered them both in the CW category. These screens were problematic. The nuclear damper is the biggest power draw on the vessel, and the black globe drove up the crew requirements far above the original (this system alone added 44 personnel to the gunnery crew compared to five for the nuclear damper and two for the offensive weapons). If this was a scratch design I’d probably choose a stronger nuclear damper and drop the black globe in favor of more armor, but again that is a subject for debate.

Next I put basic environment, artificial gravity, and inertial compensators in the hull. Basic and advanced life support I put in all but the fuel tanks, saving some space and power draw. I had to do some fudging when it came to air locks. The plans in A1 only listed one air lock but also mentioned two garbage dessicators as possible entrances. I calculated the dessicators as air locks to account for the space and added one more above the original description for a total of four (two normally useable).

I didn’t calculate additional tonnage for the clamshell doors over the pinnace bay egress as I figured that was part of the 130% calculation for interior space. Similarly, the original called for bay doors in the vehicle bay and a drop floor under the cargo bay but I did not add anything to the spec sheet for these features.

B5 and S9 listed the Kinunir with a model 7/fib computer but I put a model 8/fib in this design as it reduced the crew, which was well above the original’s in size. Next I put in two backup computers, two large holodisplays, and two HHUDs. These last two items were more than was required for control but the minimum I thought necessary to control the bridge (large holodisplay), screens (large holodisplay), gunnery (HHUD), and engineering (HHUD). Next, I installed electronic circuit protection.

Accommodations were another problem because the MT crew calculations resulted in a much bigger crew than the original (45 crew + 35 Marines in the original compared to 74 crew + 35 Marines in this conversion). I did not have the space for even double-occupancy staterooms for all the crew so I settled on one stateroom for the Captain, Small staterooms for the mid- to high-rank officers and senior NCOs, double occupancy for the junior officers and mid-level NCOs, and bays with bunks for the 70 remaining crew and marines. There was no mention of low berths in the original so I did not add any.

I put the same complement of carried craft that was shown in the original design. I used the air raft from the Imperial Encyclopedia and used the Astrin APC in 101 vehicles to calculate the space needed for the grav APC. All vehicle volume was calculated at 150% of the vehicle volume. The A1 design called for a 35 Td pinnace, but I used the 40 Td model from the Imperial Encyclopedia, calculated at 130% per the design sequence.

I calculated fuel requirements as follows: NM power for 30 days (720 hours), CM power for 12 hours, and CW power for 24 hours. Jump fuel I calculated per the design sequence table. This gave me roughly half the fuel stores I would have needed for running the entire power plant for 30 days.

The original design had fuel scoops and a purifier so I installed those. A purifier large enough to process a full jump tank in six hours was too big to fit, so I cut it back to 24 hours. This left just over 246 kl of leftover space, which translates into 18.3 tons of cargo capacity, smaller than the original design’s 63 tons but still enough for the role I see for the vessel.

Total cost for the recalculated design is MCr 1,606 which is somewhat more than the original’s cost shown as MCr 1,337 in B5 and MCr 1,350 in S9.

So that’s how I recalculated it. The worksheet has all the numbers and the data sheet has more notes about some of the particulars. Take a look at the file, check the numbers and let me know if I need to correct anything, and feel free to use it.
 
This looks really good!

But you don't think that the Imperium REALLY sent a single Kininur all the way from the Spinward Marches to the Vegans do you?

(IMTU the Regal Splendor is used for Imperial Black Ops.)
 
Major B said:
The hull volume listed in A1 (16,800) is too high for a 1,200-ton hull (should be 16,200).
Ah, not technically. CT uses the 14 cubic metre dTon, not MT's 13.5 kl/volume dTon. Thus:

1,200 dTons hull * 14 cubic metres = 16,800 cubic metres.

This effect has been discussed elsewhere on these boards - specifically, here. So technically A1 was correct with respect to LBBs 2 and 5.
 
In fact, only MT uses the 13.5 cubic meter DTon.
TNE, T4, T20 use 14 cumets.
CT doesn't specifically state 14, but official conversions use 14. Striker does mention 14 Cumets/Td.
GT uses 500 CuFt... somwhere between the two.
 
CT doesn't specifically state 14, but official conversions use 14.

Book 2, pg 13 states:
"The Hull: Hulls are identified by their mass displacement, expressed in tons.
As a rough guide, one ton equals 14 cubic meters (the volume of one ton of liquid hydrogen)."*

Book 5, pg 21-22 states:
"The Hull: The foundation of the starship is the hull, into or onto which all other components are placed. Hulls are identified by their mass displacement (expressed in tons; one ton equals 14 cubic meters) and by their configuration."*

*Quotes taken from the CT CD version of the rules (first edition may be different).
 
Thanks for the correction guys - I did not remember that the volume calculation was different in the CT books.
 
Thanks for the correction guys - I did not remember that the volume calculation was different in the CT books.
No problemo :) It's just one of the many, many small, highly irritating things that crop up in Traveller when trying to convert from one system to another. And it's not something that is widely known/advertised within the actual books themselves, so it's a bit of walk-in-trap.
 
Looking for some more info

I've fixed a couple of typos on the Kinunir redo. Before I post the corrections I wanted to add in one more detail that I left off the first copy... but I need more information to do that and haven't been able to find it yet.

The drop capsules for the second squad (in A1 these are located in the forward section of A-deck) are what I want to add. According to the description there are 5 drop tubes with capsules in place, plus 10 more capsules stored.

I found some stats for drop capsules in DonM's errata but these look much smaller than the capsules described in the consolidated equipment list. Also, the errata entry only covers the launch-ready capsules, not the volume of the extra capsules.

I found descriptions for drop capsules in the Wiki, but those are much heavier than those described in the errata, and the Wiki entry does not provide volume for the capsules or the necessary details for the drop tube / launcher system.

Can anyone provide either houserule or OTU stats for drop capsules and the launcher systems? MT stats would be best for me, but I'll take anything available and convert them if I have to.

I hope someone has already worked this out and can provide it. If not, I'll make something up and post it here for feedback.
 
Drop capsules appear in striker design sequences, as an addition to HG. THAT should be your primary source, and is Don's.
 
Drop capsules appear in striker design sequences, as an addition to HG. THAT should be your primary source, and is Don's.

Thanks aramis. Found them on page 43 of Striker Book 2.

But that entry raises more questions than it answers. The Striker data lacks weights and power requirements and the volumes and costs vary considerably from the MT Errata entry.

MT Errata said:
Page 82, Step 10, Subordinate Craft (addition): The requirements for a drop capsule that is ready for use is: power=0.001Mw, volume=0.4 kl, weight=0.2 tons, price=Cr80,000.
[FONT=Arial,Arial]

[FONT=Arial,Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial]
Striker Bk 2 said:
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial]A launch facility takes up 1 ton of displacement, costs Cr10,000, and stores 1 capsule. Additional launch-ready storage takes up 1/2 ton and costs Cr1,000 per capsule. Additional capsules beyond the capacity of the launcher may be carried as cargo, at 1/2 ton each.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial][/FONT]
So, the launcher from the errata displaces .4 kl while the launcher from Striker takes up 13.5 kl - quite a difference.

[FONT=Arial,Arial]So, the questions I have now are:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial]1. Which seems like a better estimation - the Errata entry of the Striker rule?[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Arial]2. If Striker is a better estimation, what would a good approximation be for power requirement and weight?
[/FONT][/FONT]
 
Remembered another question after I posted,

3. If the Errata entry is a better estimation what would be a good approximation for the volume, weight, and cost for an extra jump capsule?
 
0.4 kl is a very small volume for a launcher - smaller than a coffin. How can the "gun" be smaller than the "bullet"? I would use Striker.

What is the power requirement for a sandcaster?
 
A Sandcaster draws 1 MW per launcher, so a triple turret would draw 3 MW.

That sounds more reasonable than .001 MW.

Any thoughts on how much of that 13.5 kl is the capsule and how much is the launcher itself? Here's a rough bit of figuring:

A cramped vehicle crew space = 2 kl. If you figure the jumper needs extra room for his armor and minimum gear that should at least double to 4kl.

Add extra volume for the capsule, electronics, and the armor I'd guesstimate going up by about a factor of 1 or 2 - 2 would bring the total volume of the capsule to 8 kl.

Using the hull design tables, a hull with that volume is between .5 and .75 Td and would weigh somewhere in the neighborhood of .9 MT and cost Cr2,900.

The Striker entry states that the assault capsule is armored to factor 20. Taking that to the hull table means multiply cost and weight by 5.95 so the hull now weighs 5.355 MT and costs Cr17,255.

If the armor is bonded superdense there is no change to price but weight is multiplied by .14, bringing it down to .75 MT.

Add in a bit for the weight of the on-board electronics and gravitics and the weight should probably go up to at least .9 MT (back where we started).

That would make the assault capsule have: vol=.8 kl, wt=.9MT, cost=Cr25,000 (thats a SWAG - but higher than the cost cited in Striker of Cr10,000).

The standard capsule (unarmored) would have the same weight and volume but cost Cr2,500 (another SWAG - Striker says Cr2,000).

The high survivability capsule (with ECM and armor value of 28) has the same voume (it has to fit in the same launcher), weighs 1MT (need to do some math to see if thats a good estimate), and costs Cr75,000 (Bumping up the Striker cost of Cr50,000).

Do those sound like reasonable numbers?
 
The launcher should weigh 2Mg per KL, not counting the capsule being launched.

The power requirement should be akin to a sandcaster OR LESS.

The mass of the capsules should be figured from their volume and AV, as you did.

Once you get them figured, post them on the MT errata threads.
 
I'm designing the capsule using the vehicle design rules, starting with the assault capsule (standard and high-survivability models to follow).

Have a coupla stiking points I'd like to get some feedback on.

First, looks like this will all fit into a .5 Td sphere easily. The hull ends up costing just under KCr25 and weighing .46 MT.

Standard grav modules provide .1 G thrust for maneuverability and only cost just over KCr3.

No Comm, Sensor, Weapons, or Screens = easy. A roomy passenger position takes up 4 kl of the 6.75 available.

The power plant is a problem, not due to size but cost - it adds KCr41.5 which puts this out of the price range for a "disposable" system. I'm going to try to replace the power plant with fuel cells - it will cost much less though the fuel will take up more space. Problem is I need to reduce the power needed.

The other power draws are:

Basic environment(minimal power needed but is this necessary if the trooper is in battle dress? BD provides heat but Basic Environment also includes lighting.)

Basic Life support (already removed this since the BD provides life support).

Inertial Compensators (this draws nearly as much power as the grav drive - is this necessary if the trooper is strapped in?)

Control Panels (I use electronic panels since there is no on-board computer - changing the power to fuel cells will reduce the number of control panels significantly (it is currently at 22))

As it stands now I still have .19 kl of unused space.

Any thought on the need for Basic Environment and/or Inertial compensators?
 
Did you mean 2MT per kl?

Megagrams, aka tons metric. Mg is the proper SI abbreviation. (Tons is a borrowed term and not actually proper... but is commonly accepted and interchangable.)

MT would bee 1E6 times too much, being MegaTons.
 
Back
Top