Ship Design

[Winterwolf]

I have a question? I've collected the blueprints for dozens of ships over the years Star Trek Star Wars Traveller. My question is almost all ship have the bridge on the top most forward deck. I can see it being there if the ship is say a scout or shuttle, but you don't need it there on a cruiser with a view screen to maneuver the safest place is deep in the center of the ship.

 

[Sturn]

I agree, this would be an option. Modern submarines, akin to spaceships in water, have "bridges" without a viewport. To justify it for game purposes, I think spaceships would often have viewports because of the nature of Man wanting to see with his own eyes what is out there. When closing on a space station, landing on a world, etc it would be nice to actually see what you are doing with your own eyes, not just trust or rely on the digital information. You know, someone could hack into the computers and send false images to that digital view screen.

The US Space Shuttle has front viewports, even though they probably could have easily done without.

 

[robject]

It's an opportunity, actually: map out new versions of starships using a protected, central bridge, rather than an outside, exposed one.

 

[PFVA63]

Hi

It could also be that Traveller ships might have a bridge located for good visibility when docking or maneuvering, but during battle alot of combat operations could be handled by an internal Combat Information Center (CIC) type space within the hull.

Here are some images of a 2000 dton ship that I have been working on.

http://members.cox.net/psjn/Prof1.jpg
http://members.cox.net/psjn/Dks1.jpg
http://members.cox.net/psjn/Dks2.jpg
http://members.cox.net/psjn/Dks3.jpg
http://members.cox.net/psjn/Dks4.jpg

The Purple spaces are for main control spaces, with the top deck being a normal bridge. The next lower deck houses the Admiral's Bridge. And below this will be a CIC (where the primary gunners, etc are located) as well as the ship's office and comms center. I don't have the spaces fully laid out yet, but hopefully you can kind of see what is intended. Admittantly, the CIC here may not be as low as it could be, but I suppose it could be relocated a deck lower, switching places with the accommodations below.

Regards

PF

 

[Sturn]

It could also be that Traveller ships might have a bridge located for good visibility when docking or maneuvering, but during battle alot of combat operations could be handled by an internal Combat Information Center (CIC) type space within the hull.

2300 AD included a ship section called the, "TAC". I think it stood for Tactical Action Center. It included weapons stations, remote ops, and sensors. The Bridge only included the Helm, Navigation, and Comms.

 

[Yavin_Prime]

I have to agree with what is said above, most people like to watch what's happening outside so forward view ports are kinda a thing of want rather than need.

I could see a ship that has two bridges, similar to that of the USS Enterprise-D in Star Trek, a battle bridge if you will. So if you know you're going into a combat situation you just head down to the battle bridge untill things are safe. However if the enemy is going to puncture your hull it dosn't matter where you are on the ship chances are the battle isn't going in your favor.

 

[BlackBat242]

Navigation bridge = where the ship is maneuvered from. Also called the Pilot House.

BDC (Battle Direction Center) = where the ship is fought from. Also called CIC (Combat Information Center).

In small ships they are the same place, and in Traveller the combat system is such that it makes no difference where in the ship they are.


In large ships, at least the BDC will be near the center of mass, to protect it from damage... and there might well be a Secondary BDC some distance away, but still buried deep in the hull.

Often there will an Auxillary Control Center (AuxCon) to back up the primary navigation bridge. This can easily be incorporated into the SBDC.


On the USN carrier CV-61 Ranger, AuxCon was located at the very front center of the bow, just below the flight deck. There are armored portholes that can be opened to allow for visual navigation of the ship if the Pilot House and Admiral's bridges in the island are damaged.

In newer carriers, this space is berthing, and AuxCon is also located in the island, but is separated from the Pilot House by an armored bulkhead.

 

[Yavin_Prime]

I have to agree it seems smart to have more than one command center. It dosn't have to mean your ship has been crippled but knowing computers and other electronics all you need is one thing to go worng, one bit of metal flying into a computer core or a terminal and suddenly you're blind and in the heat of battle you don't have time to troubleshoot damage and repair it. So in reality it'd be wise to have more than one port to control a ship.

 

[Patron Zero]

Auxilary Systems

I've had a few house designs of starships that have included am astrogation 'bubble'. essentially a hardpoint with an 'unarmed' turret fitted with navigational gear.

Mind I consider all Scout/Couriers to have a 'pop-up' astrogation bubble in the avionics section forward of the bridge in the standard Suleiman layout.

Nothing like eyeballing you position with a view of naked stars !

 

[CosmicGamer]

In large ships, at least the BDC will be near the center of mass, to protect it from damage... and there might well be a Secondary BDC some distance away, but still buried deep in the hull.

Justification for locating the bridge close to the exterior and sensors.
1) cost for extra wiring, possibly signal amplifiers, special high strength and high security conduits (see below)
2) security - again, extra wiring running through the ship which possibly allows someone more opportunity to physically access it.
3) reliability - again, extra wiring running through the ship which gives more points of failure
4) fault tolerance for when sensors are down if there is no auxiliary control center
5) accessibility (and maybe some security)
- when visitors and inspectors come aboard they don't have to traverse a distance within the ship
- if an emergency exit is required there isn't a distance needed to travel to exit the ship
- harder to get large pieces of equipment in and out of the bridge both during construction and later if things need repairs or replacing (I've heard stories of navel vessels having to be be cut apart to get equipment in that doesn't fit through passages and hatches - the shop I was in [on an aircraft carrier] had a special hatch in the deck and overhead for passing large pieces of equipment through; although we used it more often to move pallets of supplies instead of humping it through the passageways.)

EDIT: Physical wiring could be replaced by wireless but that has it's own cost and security issues.

 

[HG_B]

I've had a few house designs of starships that have included am astrogation 'bubble'. essentially a hardpoint with an 'unarmed' turret fitted with navigational gear.

Mind I consider all Scout/Couriers to have a 'pop-up' astrogation bubble in the avionics section forward of the bridge in the standard Suleiman layout.

Nothing like eyeballing you position with a view of naked stars !

I do it like in GT. There are numerous(redundant) small pop-up sensors on the hull. The bridge is in the safest part of the ship. Redundant computer & routing. There is really nothing to see by looking through a 'window'.

 

[Selandia]

Actually, every wet ship have an emergency steering station near the rudder engine to offset any damage to the bridge steering station or communication between the rudder engine and bridge steering station. They also have a way to communicate between that station and a look-out/"bridge" station

Every multi mega credit biggy big capital ship would have an aux-bridge and stations near the attitude thruster as part of its damage control capability.

The "view port" bridge, aka navigation bridge in most above posts would be there as the emergency conning position on most warship, for when the sophisticated screens/sensors reporting system is not combat damaged, it offer lot less dead angles and a lot more info than viweports and your good old back-up: eyesballs #1 and is best burried where unlikely to be easily damaged.

The helms of a Dreadnought will seldom dock its monster with a station. It will "swing at the buoy" (geo stationary orbit) when not in repair and will be carefully set in place by tugs if put in dry dock or "alongside". A bump by such giant would be catastrophic and ultimate care will be taken. Supply will be brought by spaceship that will dock with the monster, (it is not an aircraft carrier that "come along" the admiral's barge, its the reverse).

Selandia

 

[Orr]

Justification for locating the bridge close to the exterior and sensors.

All of those are ignored when building warships and that is what is missing here.

The location of the bridge on a small ship will be different than the location of the bridge on a large ship and the location of a bridge on a warship will be different than the locations of a bridge of a civilian ship.

One size does not and will not fit all because all have different needs.

One good recent example of this is GURP's reworking of the classic Type-T patrol cruiser. For too long deck plans had that warship's bridge in the "bug eye blisters" of the long narrow bow. GURPs improved things very much when it moved the bridge to an armored box within the main hull.

 

[Winterwolf]

the thing that got me started thinking about this was looking at an old set of FASA deck plans for the Zhodani Strike Cruiser. And there was the bridge deck A forward. That got me thinking about the ships in Star Trek both the Feddy and Klingon have their bridges not only on the top deck but they stick up and they don't even have windows or view ports.

 

[HG_B]

the thing that got me started thinking about this was looking at an old set of FASA deck plans for the Zhodani Strike Cruiser. And there was the bridge deck A forward. That got me thinking about the ships in Star Trek both the Feddy and Klingon have their bridges not only on the top deck but they stick up and they don't even have windows or view ports.

That's because the artists are stuck in wet Navy mode circa 20th century.

 

[BillDowns]

Or, based on the TV series and movies, for Star Trek anyway, once the shields are gone, Federation Photon Torpedoes or Klingon Disrupter Bolts are going through the ship, so where you place the bridge really does not matter.

Similarly, if you are using CT's High Guard combat, Radiation Damage from nuclear-tipped missiles or Particle Weapons or Meson Guns really won't care where that bridge is or how much armor is around it.

 

[Prometheus]

Or, based on the TV series and movies, for Star Trek anyway, once the shields are gone, Federation Photon Torpedoes or Klingon Disrupter Bolts are going through the ship, so where you place the bridge really does not matter.

Similarly, if you are using CT's High Guard combat, Radiation Damage from nuclear-tipped missiles or Particle Weapons or Meson Guns really won't care where that bridge is or how much armor is around it.

Very true

 

[shadowcat20]

Even buring the CIC in the center of a ship is no safe thing in combat. A meson gun targets the center of mass so will be a serious threat. Near the surface also allows the crew to bail if things go south easier.

From running the numbers in Striker with Ships weapons VS Armor ratings it's interesting. A standard missile will burst on the surface as Penatration is not great enough for standard ships hull. Bay Missiles are heavier so will punch thrupoug a bit. A energy weapon can blast through most armor close up but is still a surface burst. Lasers cut right through so can penatrate deep into the ship. Nothing about Parrticle Accelerators in Striker so It should penatrate but not sure how far. Meson Guns blow from the inside out so they go deep.

So Surface Bridges near one end or the other are safer from Meson gun bursts and radiation but are at risk from more standard weapons.

Multi bridges seems to be the best answer. Flag Bridge, Aux Con, Bridge, Emergency Bridge, Running Bridge, CIC, CAC. All sorts of names for them.

EDIT: Missed the second page of posts...sigh