Ship Construction Times

[whartung]

I'd expect most of the work on starship building, mostly large ones, to be made by robots in orbit, and the time to be quite less than current one for seaships.

Well it's an interesting issue.

Obviously, the most fundamental thing impact construction time is assembly time. Taking to components and bolting them together.

This is readily witnessed by anyone building a Lego kit.

That said, using the Lego kit as an example, it's not ready out of the box for assembly. At least not efficient assembly. Which is why many will take the time to sort the kit before assembling it. It would be a curious experiment to time the assembly of a kit starting with the initial bags of Lego vs sorting them first and see how much, if any, the net assembly time is reduced.

Next, you have the planning stages of which assemblies you can "throw mothers at". For example, each weapons turret could likely be assembled in parallel. Given enough material, space, and labor, you can assemble 1000 turrets in the time it takes to assemble a single turret.

The assembly line is probably the ideal compromise of space, labor, and assembling things in parallel, but not as efficient time wise as pure parallelism. Of course you can have multiple assembly lines.

And, it's fair to say that the assembly of weapon turrets should have no impact on assembly of ships. The ship crews are simply inserting the turrets, not making them.

Next you have dependencies. Can't do anything without a keel, for example. You can't wire the ship without the conduits laid, but you can wire it without a power plant in place.

So, some things are just going to have to wait. I know there's a term of art for these blockers, but it eludes me. "Critical Path" I think. Get this ONE THING done, and it opens up lots of others.

Finally, the prospect of robots. General Purpose robot industrialization is something I don't think we quite grasp.

Industrialized robots making more industrialized robots. If you have the material, this scales really well. And costs will just get cheaper and cheaper to the point of just being the cost of the raw materials, because the labor is "free". "Free" energy plus "free" labor.

100's of robots working drone-swarm-like to maneuver large ship components in zero-g. There's not "unlimited" space in orbit, but there's an awful lot. Building a dozen dreadnoughts simultaneously with "free" labor, it will go quite quickly, with few mishaps.

I really don't think we quite grasp an abundance economy like that.

 

[Grav_Moped]

I really don't think we quite grasp an abundance economy like that.

Agreed. And to the extent we don't, it'll feel unrealistic when translated into game terms.

 

[Condottiere]

Some components need lead time.

If I had to pick one, it would be the spinal mount.

And maybe the capital turrets.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Some components need lead time.

If I had to pick one, it would be the spinal mount.

And maybe the capital turrets.

Drives. Might be standardized so there could be some "in the pipeline," but likely only possible by diversion from other planned production.

 

[Condottiere]

If you had to customize engineering for single spaceships or specific classes.

The jump drive would be the most finicky, and I'm thinking of the Tigressii.

 

[Grav_Moped]

If you had to customize engineering for single spaceships or specific classes.

The jump drive would be the most finicky, and I'm thinking of the Tigressii.

Under LBB5, you could have standard drives, but their maximum rating would be limited by TL.
Let's say you build the LBB5 analog of the Size F Jump Drive (about 14Td).
It would provide the following performance in the listed size hulls:
Jn: Hull Tons:
1 700 at any TL that could build it (9-15)
2 466 but only if built at TL-11+
3 350 but only if built at TL-12+
4 280 but only if built at TL-13+
5 233 but only if built at TL-14+
6 200 but only if built at TL-15

I could see "LBB5 standard" drives built to TL-12 specs, since J-3 covers most requirements and suitable TL maintenance facilities aren't uncommon.
Standard power plants would be TL-9 or TL-13, depending on the local technology base.

You might not see them for BCS-sized ships though; most likely for ships 2000Td, Jump-3 and below.

 

[whartung]

Some components need lead time.

If I had to pick one, it would be the spinal mount.

That doesn't mean that it takes longer than the hull its to be installed into. It can certainly be done at the same time as the rest of the ship.

One might argue that the gun tube is part and parcel to the ship, while the projector is the part built outside and installed as a whole piece. Any wiring or other necessity done to the gun tube can be done while it's assembled. All of the can be done before the projector shows up, they just need to have access to be able to install it.

And, we should be clear, it's reasonable for some ship systems to be like a "boat in a basement". Installed in such a way that they're not easily coming out. My father did work on equipment for submarines, and he basically learned the lesson that it's normal to cut holes in things and weld them shut again, so he didn't necessarily need to plan so much for that part of the install.

By "building the ship around it", the system definitely sits on the critical path to completion. At some point the will be ready for the spinal projector, and it better be sitting near by ready to install. But, it the build time of the projector should be much less than the entirety of the project, even up to that point, so, done properly, the build time of the projector and tube should not delay ship building overall.

 

[Condottiere]

There's a reason I picked out capital turrets and spinal mounts: warships are built around their weapon systems.

However, going by Trillion Credits, since major systems require fifty percent plus cost to just install a replacement, compared to a minor one of ten percent, I'd use those as indicators which would be most important to consider.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Under LBB5, you could have standard drives, but their maximum rating would be limited by TL.

I don't think that is necessarily so:

LBB5'80, p22:
Drives: Three types of drives are required for starships– maneuver drives, power plants, and jump drives. Non-starships may omit the jump drives. Some ships (such as express boats) omit the maneuver drives. All ships require power plants. Custom-built drives must be produced and installed while observing restrictions as to tech level and interior space. It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2.

As far as I understand LBB5 drives are "custom drives" and LBB2 drives are "standard drives". Note that "custom drives" are limited by TL, "standard drives" are presumably used as in LBB2 where any shipyard can install any drive with any performance, regardless of TL.

I would assume the available standard drives are limited by the max TL of the civilisation, so the Imperium has access to TL 15 standard drives and J-6, but the Zho and the Solomani does not, but that is not explicitly spelled out in the rules.


I personally tend to enforce the LBB5 TL rules on LBB2 drives, but that is mostly to prevent nearly all Imperial ships using Z drives by default.

 

[Grav_Moped]

I don't think that is necessarily so:

As far as I understand LBB5 drives are "custom drives" and LBB2 drives are "standard drives". Note that "custom drives" are limited by TL, "standard drives" are presumably used as in LBB2 where any shipyard can install any drive with any performance, regardless of TL.

I would assume the available standard drives are limited by the max TL of the civilisation, so the Imperium has access to TL 15 standard drives and J-6, but the Zho and the Solomani does not, but that is not explicitly spelled out in the rules.

Makes sense.

I personally tend to enforce the LBB5 TL rules on LBB2 drives, but that is mostly to prevent nearly all Imperial ships using Z drives by default.

I view the cases of LBB2-rating > LBB5 TL-rating-limit as quirks of a poorly-understood technology (since Jump is the tech most affected). They work, but it's not known why they work. One could probably somehow handwave it as something akin to the T5 TL Stage Effects rules, but without the big drawbacks (needs more expensive hull, always acts like it's doing full-range jumps even at shorter distances).

My personal implementation of it is to constrain the edge cases to the simplest hulls (sphere, flattened sphere) because the in-universe engineers and naval architects lack the confidence (and knowledge) to make complex jump fields for the edge cases.

The problem with Z drives is that they're limited to a rating of 6. This constrains Agility to no more than 5, (even with the small maneuver drive and power plant fuel allocation), if you've got a mod/3 or larger computer -- let alone any energy weapons. And they're Factor 6 only up to 2000Td. That does create a niche for heavily-armored 2000Td dual-missile-battery ships or riders though...


The idea of "standard custom (LBB5) drives" is that a stockpile of such drives could exist (or be created), so the drives do not need to be a limiting factor on construction. This doesn't mean that there is in fact such a stockpile available for any specific ship one wants to build, or for a proposed fleet.

 

[Condottiere]

You have to bear in mind that you can bundle engineering components.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The problem with Z drives is that they're limited to a rating of 6. This constrains Agility to no more than 5, (even with the small maneuver drive and power plant fuel allocation), if you've got a mod/3 or larger computer -- let alone any energy weapons. And they're Factor 6 only up to 2000Td. That does create a niche for heavily-armored 2000Td dual-missile-battery ships or riders though...

If you don't look too closely at the errata, there's Emergency Agility; combines nicely with missile armaments.
Otherwise we could use a LBB5 power plant with the Z drives.

But I was thinking about commercial ships, like the Hercules-class (or a J-2 cousin). Or even better, a LBB5 ship with cheaper hull and larger standard rebate, but still LBB2 Z drives, see below.

The idea of "standard custom (LBB5) drives" is that a stockpile of such drives could exist (or be created), so the drives do not need to be a limiting factor on construction. This doesn't mean that there is in fact such a stockpile available for any specific ship one wants to build, or for a proposed fleet.

Sure, if that makes economic sense.

Perhaps ersatz A drives to repair or upgrade Scouts or Free Traders? A TL15 power plant would save quite some space aboard, at not too bad a cost.



Cheap LBB5 Z drive transport, something like this:

MT-E722232-000000-00000-0        MCr 668       5 000 Dton
bearing                                           Crew=28
batteries                                           TL=12
                    Cargo=3520 Fuel=1020 EP=100 Agility=1

Single Occupancy                                  3 520       835
                                     USP    #      Dton      Cost
Hull, Unstreamlined Custom             E          5 000        
Configuration       Dispersed          7                      250
                                                               
Jump Drive          Z                  2    1       125       240
Manoeuvre D         Z                  2    1        47        96
Power Plant         Z                  2    1        73       192
Fuel, #J, #weeks    J-2, 4 weeks            2     1 020        
                                                               
Bridge                                      1       100        25
Computer            m/3                3    1         3        18
                                                               
Staterooms                                 28       112        14
                                                               
Cargo                                             3 520        
                                                               
Nominal Cost        MCr 835,00           Sum:     3 520       835
Class Cost          MCr 175,35          Valid        ≥0        ≥0
Ship Cost           MCr 668,00                                  
                                                               
                                                               
Crew &               High     0        Crew          Bridge    10
Passengers            Mid     0          28       Engineers     3
                      Low     0                     Gunners     0
                 Extra SR     0      Frozen         Service    15
               # Frozen W     0           0          Flight     0
                  Marines     0                     Marines     0
                                                               
                                                               
Estimated Economy of Ship     Standard                                    
       Ship price     Down Payment         Mortgage       Avg Filled
       MCr 668,00      kCr 133 600        kCr 2 783              80%
                                                               
Expenses per jump                       Revenue                
Bank              Cr 1 336 000          High         Cr         0
Fuel              Cr   510 000          Middle       Cr         0
Life Support      Cr    56 000          Low          Cr         0
Salaries          Cr    51 360          Cargo        Cr 2 816 000
Maintenance       Cr    26 720                                  
Berthing          Cr     5 000                                  
                                                               
Summa            kCr     1 985                      kCr     2 816
                                                               
     Income potential per jump     kCr 831                  
  Yearly yield on down payment     15,5%

Quite profitable at J-2 with standard freight rates...

 

[Grav_Moped]

I still dislike intermixing LBB2 and LBB5 drives.

The relevant quote, "It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2" from LBB5'80, p. 22, suggests that the drives are used as a set. Otherwise, this provides an opening for LBB5 power plants to use fuel at the LBB2 10Td/Pn per month rate* -- which could drop fuel requirements to as low as 0.2% per Pn (at 5KTd) or raise it to 10%/Pn (at 100Td).

The other side of this is that the only reason not to use LBB2 maneuver drives in ships where they're beneficial (which is anything where TL allows it) is that it incurs the 10Td/Pn power plant fuel allocation -- which is a penalty in ships below 1000Td, though it's still likely a favorable tradeoff most of the way down.

However, the question then becomes, outside of a literal reading of the rules, why the LBB2 maneuver drive causes higher or lower power plant fuel consumption than the LBB5 version when it presumably requires the same input power. Note that the text states "...such drives..." rather than specifying "power plants" even though the fuel requirements for jump drives are identical between the two versions, and apparently maneuver drives don't use fuel at all (except by conversion to power in the power plant).

It's significant that no canonical ship uses intermixed drives, despite it being highly advantageous in many cases.

-------------
*by driving LBB2 jump and maneuver drives

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I still dislike intermixing LBB2 and LBB5 drives.

You do as you wish, of course.

The relevant quote, "It is possible to include standard drives (at standard prices) from Book 2 if they will otherwise meet the ship's requirements; such drives use fuel as indicated by the formulas in Book 2" from LBB5'80, p. 22, suggests that the drives are used as a set. Otherwise, this provides an opening for LBB5 power plants to use fuel at the LBB2 10Td/Pn per month rate* -- which could drop fuel requirements to as low as 0.2% per Pn (at 5KTd) or raise it to 10%/Pn (at 100Td).

I see no implied set; plural is the correct form for an unknown number from 0 to many.

I don't understand what you mean: M-drives have no fuel requirement in either LBB2 or LBB5. Power plants have fuel requirements, so a LBB5 power plant has LBB5 fuel requirements, regardless of drives.

It's significant that no canonical ship uses intermixed drives, despite it being highly advantageous in many cases.

Take a look at the Fleet Courier (S9, p20). I can't make that work without a LBB2 M-drive. It certainly has LBB5 power plant fuel allocation.

Do we even have any example of a canon LBB5 ship explicitly using any LBB2 drive (apart from the Wasp class [Eurisko fleet, JTAS#10])?

 

[Condottiere]

It would work if there's a rationale why a different algorithm to calculate thrust or energy exists, instead of mix and matching what's most efficient.

It's a game, so different choices should reflect a balance between effect and costs.

 

[Grav_Moped]

It would work if there's a rationale why a different algorithm to calculate thrust or energy exists, instead of mix and matching what's most efficient.

It's a game, so different choices should reflect a balance between effect and costs.

Which is pretty much where I'm coming from.

LBB2 is optimized (to the extent it was optimized, and not merely hacked/retconned in second edition) around what's good for an RPG, and its combat system. The design penalty (aside from cost) for maneuver is the power plant fuel requirement (at 1KTd and below, especially in the lower tonnages, which covers most ACS-sized vessels.).

LBB5 is optimized to force (and enable) tradeoffs within its own abstract combat system. Maneuver is important, so maneuver drives get disproportionately larger with increasing Gs. Power is important, and TL is meant to be a dominant factor, so power plants can be (and for combatants, have to be) big and are TL-dependent on size. Jump drives serve mostly as either a means to break off from combat, or (in TCS) an arbitrary referee-/scenario-imposed requirement, so they can be smaller to free up space for other drive systems (and the 10%/Jn fuel requirement is the main penalty anyhow).

They are intended for significantly different purposes. It looks to me (though I'm sure others disagree) that LBB5 "grandfathered in" LBB2 drives to enable building LBB2 ships with LBB5 features (armor, screens, new weapons, diverse hull configurations) rather than to allow cherry-picking LBB2 components. I'll probably re-approach that in a separate post.

 

[Condottiere]

I don't think Classic spacecraft design works out, without a major overhaul, if you try and unify Adventure and High Guard systems.

Though once you adopt one, it should remain consistent.

The most egregious example would be High Guard jump factor one drive for hundred tonnes, being two tonnes (one plus one percent), or factor two at three tonnes, compared to ten tonnes for ye basic scoutship factor two.

 

[mike wightman]

Notice that the rule that book 2 drives may be used is absent from HG79 (I just spotted it also does not require military ships to use a fuel purification plant to avoid misjumps either).

 

[Grav_Moped]

I don't think Classic spacecraft design works out, without a major overhaul, if you try and unify Adventure and High Guard systems.

Though once you adopt one, it should remain consistent.

The most egregious example would be High Guard jump factor one drive for hundred tonnes, being two tonnes (one plus one percent), or factor two at three tonnes, compared to ten tonnes for ye basic scoutship factor two.

It's slightly more complicated than that, since (aside from drop tanks which screw it all up again), the size of a drive system includes its fuel.
LBB2, size A Jump in 100Td: 30Td ex power and pp fuel; LBB5, 23Td ex power and pp fuel. Slightly smaller difference as a percentage of the total.

But add in power plant and fuel (at TL9-12) and it gets worse.
LBB2: 10+4 (drives) plus 20+20 (fuel) for 54Td; LBB5 @TL9-12: 3+6 (drives) plus 20+2 (fuel) for 31Td. LBB5 saves 23Td for Jump+Power+Fuel.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Notice that the rule that book 2 drives may be used is absent from HG79 (I just spotted it also does not require military ships to use a fuel purification plant to avoid misjumps either).

But it does bring in the Jump Governor as an external hardware component for LBB2. Does it apply to LBB5 as well, or is it assumed to be integral to LBB5 drives?