Smallcraft in 1977 Book 2 [p17]

[robject]

Mike said something very interesting in the Darrian TL16 thread -- he mentioned that the progression of jump-capability from 1 to 2 to 3 directly implies a High Guard context... or perhaps more correctly, a "mature" non-proto-Imperium view of Charted Space and Traveller as a whole.

Intrigued, I cracked open 1977's Book 2, to page 17, which talks about smallcraft, to see if there are any clues about how it explains the different accelerations in these small hulls.

1. Life Boat. 20 tons, 1G, 3 passengers, 5 ELBs, 5 tons fuel.
2. Ship's Boat. 30 tons, 6G, 5 passengers, 12 tons cargo, 9 tons fuel.
3. Pinnace. 40 tons, 5G, 8 passengers, 12 tons cargo, 12 tons fuel.
4. Cutter. 50 tons, 4G, 12 passengers, 15 tons cargo, 15 tons fuel.
5. Shuttle. 95 tons, 3G, 30 passengers, 80 tons cargo, 9 tons fuel. "Capable of cargo transfer in vacuum."

"The above are standard designs; other non-starships may be designed in ac- cordance with the starship design rules, but leaving out the jump drive.
...
"All non-starships consume fuel at the rate of 10 kilograms (1/100th of a ton) for each G of acceleration for ten minutes, regardless of mass or cargo carried."

* * *

So by 1977 rules, these smallcraft were designed using starship rules... except for a special flat-rate fuel rule. By that rule, each ship had this duration -- since the typical combat round in 1977 is 10 minutes:

Life Boat: 500 G-turns.
Ship's Boat: 900 G-turns.
Pinnace: 1200 G-turns.
Cutter: 1500 G-turns.
Shuttle: 900 G-turns.

* * *

Fuel usage is different than that in 1981 LBB2, where the smallcraft appear to be designed at least partly using High Guard rules.

* * *

The Life Boat "should" be 6G. It's the only craft that doesn't appear to play by the rules. No big deal I guess.

 

[Grav_Moped]

"The above are standard designs; other non-starships may be designed in ac- cordance with the starship design rules, but leaving out the jump drive.
...
"All non-starships consume fuel at the rate of 10 kilograms (1/100th of a ton) for each G of acceleration for ten minutes, regardless of mass or cargo carried."

Wait.

Unless there's context missing, ALL non-starships (both small craft and those built under the LBB2:'77 rules) had the same fuel burn rate?

The required fuel capacity for non-starships (100Td+,no Jump drive) would be different under LBB2:'77 but the fuel burn rate would be same as the small craft burn rate?

 

[mike wightman]

I think when LBB:2 77 is talking about building non-starships using the ship construction rules it refers to only 100t+ spaceships rather than small-craft.

As to fuel burn rate I think the 10kg per g is meant to be for small-craft only with 100t+ spacecraft (non-starships) using the burn rate given on page 6 - 288 burns (a burn is a 10 minute turn's worth) with its maneuver drive or 48 hours of continuous thrust at the m-drive g rating.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The required fuel capacity for non-starships (100Td+,no Jump drive) would be different under LBB2:'77 but the fuel burn rate would be same as the small craft burn rate?

No:

Fuel is also used by the maneuver drives of non-starships. When used in such vessels displacing under 100 tons (ship's boats, shuttles, pinnaces, etc) 10 kilograms (1/100th of a ton) of fuel is sufficient for 1G of acceleration for 10 minutes.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

So by 1977 rules, these smallcraft were designed using starship rules... except for a special flat-rate fuel rule.

No, the Starship Design system can only make ships of 100+ Dt.

Some of the smallcraft appears to use an A-drive package (Ship's Boat, Pinnace, Cutter), but some don't (Life Boat, Shuttle).

 

[robject]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1977 B2, non-starships were any tonnage, but were primarily implied to be "Ship's Vehicles" of less than 100 tons, with the only examples in the book being small craft.


LONG BORING TEXT

Mike and Dilbert!

It helps if you read the page yourself -- I've omitted context. Believe me when I say that when 1977 Book 2 uses "non-starships" it specifically includes small craft -- and the term "small craft" isn't introduced until combat damage (p34) -- the term used throughout the design section is "Ship's Vehicle"). I feel that most of page 17 was implicitly written to show how to deal with the exception of sub-100t hulls. (After all, you don't need much extra rules to explain 100t+ non-starships.)

1. We are used to seeing 100+t hulls when we see the word non-starships, and yet in 1977 B2 it has a wider scope.

2. The term SMALL CRAFT came into being while Marc was writing the SHIP DAMAGE part of the ship combat section. The DAMAGE section was written separately from, perhaps later than, the ship design section and earlier part of the combat rules (which uses the term "Ship's Vehicles" still).

3. We're used to having the tools all finished out for us. Clearly 1977 CT took a looser approach, deferring implications to the referee. If I were generous, I would say that they knew there was a lot of stuff in the sci-fi world that they would like to see, but deferred and only dealt with the bare essentials. This virtue of laziness allowed them to grow the system as needed.

And I'll say that such deferral is not necessarily a bad thing.

By the way, page 17 (ALL of page 17) is THE page devoted to "Non-Starships". Page 18 starts on a new discussion about missiles, sand, and "repair parts".

NON-STARSHIPS (top of page!)

Space-going vessels which do not have jump drive are classed as non-starships. Non-starships include some ship’s vehicles, as well as interplanetary ships. The basic characteristics of non-starships are described below:

Life Boat: [...]
Ship's Boat: [...]
Pinnace: [...]
Cutter: [...]
Shuttle: [...]

The above are standard designs; other non-starships may be designed in accordance with the starship design rules, but leaving out the jump drive. Such vessels may not be converted to take a jump drive at a later time. Construction cost is calculated at 50% of the price for a similarly equipped starship.

All non-starships consume fuel at the rate of 10 kilograms (1/100th of a ton) for each G of acceleration for ten minutes, regardless of mass or cargo carried.

A non-starship described above can support its passengers for up to 30 days in space. Beyond that time, air, food and water begin to run out. The passenger capacity cannot be increased, due primarily to design constraints, and potential overload of life support equipment. At the end of 30 days, throw 9+ each day to prevent the recycling machinery from breaking down. If it does fail, it must be repaired on the same day (throw 9+ to repair; DM: +1 per level of mechanical expertise, once per day) or the air is exhausted and the passengers will suffocate.

(Bottom of page! End of subject!)

For a little more clarity, skim to page 21, checklist item 7, "Ship's Vehicle", element G.

7. Ship's Vehicle. Select one or more vehicles, as desired.
A. Ship's Boat. Requires 30 tons, and costs CR 16.
B. Pinnace. Requires 40 tons, and costs CR 20.
C. Cutter. Requires 50 tons, and costs CR 28.
D. Life Boat. Requires 20 tons, and costs CR 14.
E. Air/Raft. Requires 4 tons, and costs CR 6.
F. ATV. Requires 10 tons, and costs CR 3.
G. Other. Custom designed non starship, costs as necessary.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In 1977 B2, non-starships were any tonnage, but were primarily implied to be "Ship's Vehicles" of less than 100 tons, with the only examples in the book being what we now call "small craft".

The definition is clear:

The Engineering Section: Each starship is fitted with a power plant (to provide internal power and power for the maneuver drive), a maneuver drive (for interplanetary travel), and a jump drive (for interstellar jumps). Each is essential to the definition of a starship.

3. Non-starships may be constructed using the basic rules for starship construction, but omitting the jump drive. ...

NON-STARSHIPS
Space-going vessels which do not have jump drive are classed as non-starships. Non-starships include some ship’s vehicles, as well as interplanetary ships.

Starships have jump drives, so are 100+ ton.
Non-starships are any spacecraft without jump drives, regardless of size.

 

[mike wightman]

I wish I had the 77 edition electronically - my CT cd doesn't include the original 77 rules or the 79 version of HG then it would be easier to quote from them.

I agree that the rules as written do not distinguish between smallcraft and 100t+ non-starships, and that the fuel use rate of 10kg per gturn is correct.

The idea of using the construction rules as written to build the smallcraft have a couple of problems:
no sub-100 standard hulls, so every smallcraft has to have a custom hull
no drive performance table so should every sub-100t ship should be treated as 100t for drive performance?
a 20t minimum bridge size...

 

[robject]

Compare with 1981:

Page 17's header is SMALL CRAFT, and includes the details we're used to seeing now. It also omits any suggestion about designing your own (moving the non-starship definition and rules).

Small Craft are still lumped under "Ship's Vehicles", but the term is somewhat subordinate by now.

Non-starships, meanwhile, are completely subordinated under the standard design rules as specific rules clarifications when called for -- Definitions on p12, Engineering on p13, Crew on p16.

In addition, there is a very clear rule on page 21 that helps us with both Non-Starships and Small Craft:

In order to build a non-starship, the hull tonnage must be at least 100 tons and the jump drive is omitted; pricing remains otherwise the same. This design and construction procedure does not apply to small craft, but the standard small craft shown on pages 17 and 18 may be customized to a great extent.

 

[whulorigan]

I wish I had the 77 edition electronically - my CT cd doesn't include the original 77 rules or the 79 version of HG then it would be easier to quote from them.

You are aware that the 2nd (current) release of the CT-CD does include both of those, correct?

(As well as Special Supplement 3 - Missiles Revised, and "Special Supplement 4 - The Lost Rules", containing a detail of changes/differences/omissions between, '77, '81, TTB, and Starter Traveller).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

There is no possibility of building small craft with LBB2'77, e.g. there are no passenger accommodations for small craft (acceleration couches as they were later known).

The hull size rules are vague, but presumably you must use on of the hull sizes on the Drive Potential table. There is no rule that say what drive performance a 50 ton or 150 ton hull gets.

If we can build non-starships of less than 100 tons, then we can build starships of less than 100 tons...

 

[robject]

B2'77 SMALL CRAFT DESIGN


CREW + EMPLACEMENTS PER RULES
Per the rules, a pilot is required.
If you add an emplacement, it's a turret + fire control = 2 tons.
The pinnace has a "non-turret mount" = 0 tons. I assume a -DM to hit.

DRIVE PERFORMANCE
Small craft all use Maneuver "A" + Power "A" = 5 tons.

Up to 39 tons: 6G
40 to 49 tons: 5G
50 to 66 tons: 4G
67 to 95 tons: 3G
96+ tons: 2G

COCKPIT and PASSENGER SEATING
I suggest these modules:

(0) Cockpit: 3 tons. Also has 3 passenger "jump-seats". This is VERY UTILITARIAN.
(1) Small bridge: 10 tons. Also has 3 passenger seats.
(2) 2 passengers, an emergency compartment, and an airlock. One ton.
(3) 5 passengers and an airlock. One ton.
(4) 9 passengers and an emergency compartment. One ton.

The emergency compartment has emergency air, life bubble, what-have you.

EXAMPLES

Life Boat
Tons Component
---- ----------------
(20) Hull
  5  A drives [B](1G*)[/B]
  5  ELBs
  5  Fuel
  3  Cockpit + 3 pass
---- ----------------
 18**

Ship's Boat
Tons Component
---- ----------------
(30) Hull
  5  A drives (6G)
 12  Cargo
  9  Fuel
  3  Cockpit + 3 pass
  1  2 pass + ec + a/l
---- ----------------
 30

Pinnace
Tons Component
---- ----------------
(40) Hull
  5  A drives (5G)
 12  Cargo
 12  Fuel
 10  Sm Bridge + 3 pass
  1  5 pass + a/l
---- ----------------
 40

Cutter
Tons Component
---- ----------------
(50) Hull
  5  A drives (4G)
 15  Cargo
 15  Fuel
 10  Sm Bridge + 3 pass
  1  9 pass + ec
  2  turret
---- ----------------
 48**

Shuttle
Tons Component
---- ----------------
(95) Hull
  5  A drives (3G)
 75  Cargo***
  9  Fuel
  3  Cockpit + 3 pass
  3  27 pass + ec
---- ----------------
 95

PROBLEMS

* The acceleration is unexplained.
** Two tons unaccounted for.
*** The Shuttle as written is "impossible". "Resolved" with a retcon.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Sure, we can build a new smallcraft design system, based on the LBB2'77 system. We would need a completely new drive table and drive potential table, like in MgT1.

But it is not the LBB2'77 system.


And we already have a better system in LBB5 (or MgT1 if you prefer lettered drives), so why bother?

 

[mike wightman]

If you go by the rules as written all of the small non-starship examples must be robots since none of them have crew...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

If you go by the rules as written all of the small non-starship examples must be robots since none of them have crew...

Perhaps it's not in the craft description, but they still need someone to pilot them:

Other crew positions may be created depending on the facilities of the starship: for example, a starship with a cutter would have a position for cutter pilot (and possibly cutter gunner) in addition to the normal positions. Generally, specific jobs or tasks require crew members to perform them.

 

[mike wightman]

Look at the life boat again - it can carry a total of 23 persons - 3 conscious passengers and 20 in emergency low berth (whatever they are since they are not defined in the ship construction chapter).

I agree that crew are implied for the cutter, but the life boat sure looks automated to me...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Life Boat and the Cutter are described the same; with a "passenger" capacity.

The "passenger" capacity is a life support capacity, see the bottom of p17.

Presumably it includes any crew.


If you want your Life Boat to go anywhere specific, you need a Pilot. If we use the rest of CT, that can of course be a robot (brain).

 

[robject]

The shuttle is "difficult".

Shuttle. 95 tons, 3G, 30 passengers, 80 tons cargo, 9 tons fuel. "Capable of cargo transfer in vacuum."

89 tons for [cargo + fuel] leaves 6 tons for drives, pilot, and 30 passengers.

5 tons for the drive => leaves 1 ton for pilot + 30 passengers.

Can't be done.

Therefore, I assume there was a calculation mistake. 95 tons was a deliberate choice, and I think it had to do with the drives (more on this later).

But then I think the mistake was made, and I think the mistake is this:

Marc forgot about the power plant.

Thus he allocated
* one ton for the maneuver drive
* two tons for the pilot's seat and 3 jump seats, perhaps
* 3 tons for 27 passengers


Since "95 tons" is NOT the mistake, I recommend taking it out of cargo, which is what 1981 does. Our revised Edition One stats are therefore:

Shuttle. 95 tons, 3G, 30 passengers, 75 tons cargo, 9 tons fuel. "Capable of cargo transfer in vacuum."

 

[robject]

Small craft require a pilot who must have at least ship's boat-1.

Thus the cockpit.

 

[robject]

Look at the life boat again - it can carry a total of 23 persons - 3 conscious passengers and 20 in emergency low berth (whatever they are since they are not defined in the ship construction chapter).

I agree that crew are implied for the cutter, but the life boat sure looks automated to me...

Ah I missed on the drives. Did I do that with all of them?

No, just the lifeboat. That's easily fixed by downgrading from a cockpit to just the pilot station.

But I agree it ain't clean. It is doable though.