SS Carrion

[far-trader]

Now then, still interested in a TNE version Badbru?

It might not work and it's been a while since I played with FF&S for a ship but I might give it a shot and see if it falls together or falls apart

 

[mike wightman]

Another nice design Dan

When are we getting the deck plans

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by far-trader:
I'll pick a couple of missed nits on Liam's to get the ball rolling and incite his rage to find something to pick at mine

I noticed that you have 44T for the small craft hangers. Not exactly wrong, if it's considered a 2000T ship, but I'd cut some slack and say you could get away with just the required 40T since the primary hull is less than 1000T.

The other nit is you seem to be forgetting to add the volume of the computer core itself to the total for the computer. Just a 0.4T oversight, so no big worry really

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
First nit:
Hangars have to be IIRC size of smallcraft +10%, 20dtn tugs, = 22dts per, x 2 seperate hangars = 44dt. NOW if we grappled them externally, and subtracted 40dt from the 1400dt payload mass, we'd have another 44dt inside saved.

second nit:
I did? Oops.

 

[mike wightman]

For T20 ship construction:

110% is for a large craft - starship - hanger aboard a bigger ship.

For small craft the amount of space required depends on the size of the carrying craft...

up to 1000t - small craft hanger requires space equal to the small craft's volume;

over 1000t - small craft hanger requires space equal to 1.3 x the small craft's volume.

 

[Badbru]

Yes Dan, I'm still keen on someone having a stab at it for TNE, someone other than me

I hate fiddling with drives rated fro two (or more) differing displacement ratings.

It does look like a handy ship for a variety of purposes not limmited to its original design specifications. I could drop one into one TNE PE tomorrow who would use it as an SDB tender/deployer.

 

[mike wightman]

I find that the Brilliant Lances Technical Booklet is best for designing a TNE ship initially

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Badbru:
Yes Dan, I'm still keen on someone having a stab at it for TNE, someone other than me

I hate fiddling with drives rated fro two (or more) differing displacement ratings.

It does look like a handy ship for a variety of purposes not limmited to its original design specifications. I could drop one into one TNE PE tomorrow who would use it as an SDB tender/deployer.

I agree the idea does/would lend itself to many other uses

I had a quick look a TNE version and may have to rework the original a bit to try for a hat-trick* but it looks maybe doable

* In this case the same ship in three different rules sets (though CT and HG/T20 are closer so that wasn't too unexpected.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
I find that the Brilliant Lances Technical Booklet is best for designing a TNE ship initially

Never had BL (friend did and I had a look at ages ago) but I do have the design sheets around. Can't recall if they were much help or not

But I never found FF&S difficult to use. Of course I don't work out the design to 6 decimal points either tending to round to 1 or 2 at most.

As for the deckplans, well I had an bit of inspiration a couple nights ago but, like a dream (and maybe it was), the details are gone

Anyway, I'm tired of boxes so I may stretch out in a different form this time, just need a shape to get me going. Half toying with a ring(s) dispersed structure but that means it loses the atmosphere interface ability with all it's benefits for wilderness refuelling and possible recovery of hard-landed ships Not sure which way to go

 

[mike wightman]

How about a horseshoe shaped, streamlined hull form?
A bit like the ship from Galaxy Quest...


The BL Technical booklet has all the same charts and tables as FF&S, they are just closer together so there is less flipping backwards and forwards.
A little errata has been included as well IIRC.

 

[endersig]

What about two wheels connected by several rods? Let me explain. Take two rings that are parrelel to each other, than connect them with a few rods that are perpendicular to them. This would take up much more space in ports, but it is still a small ship. It can also then encapsulate (sort of) the ship it is salvaging. Beef up it's engine a bit, and you can feesebly grab salvage and lug it around "inside" this thing

 

[Liam Devlin]

Originally posted by far-trader:

[SNIP]

Anyway, I'm tired of boxes so I may stretch out in a different form this time, just need a shape to get me going. Half toying with a ring(s) dispersed structure but that means it loses the atmosphere interface ability with all it's benefits for wilderness refuelling and possible recovery of hard-landed ships Not sure which way to go

=================================================

My advice, go with the streamlined version. Otherwise limits vessel recovery to space only ops. Now for lowest bidder options, USL hulls save ya crmps, then the TUGS have to be streamlined for the planet side ops recoveries.

My version of this for MTU--both are streamlined, which fits the paramilitary make the vessel do more than just one thing option, like we see today.

And no,
you cannae incite me to rage Dan, we've known each other too long for that.

As for TNE-ship uses..recovery of vessels, emplacement of bases, SDB's, colony modules, all sorts of stuff this ship could be put to doing within her payload needs...every PE would kill to have one..and if a another cropped up in a nearby PE, worth the stealing!

YMMV as always..

 

[far-trader]

Yep, one of the concepts is kinda like you describe endersig. Basically two seperate wheels that together make a 600T streamlined saucer like hull (with a hole in the middle of course), basically a donut (mmmmm, dohhhnuts

). Then to carry loads a series of struts and/or cables seperate the hull in two and stretch to surround the load.

But calling a donut streamlined is rule bend so I'm not sure. I would like to keep it streamlined though. So, opinions...

Is a donut concievably Streamlined in CT parlance (Fully Streamlined in T20 and Airframe in TNE)?

 

[endersig]

Well, here is a bit of stretching, but I've never been one of those "Strict Adherance" guys

.
What you've described is a cylinder, which isn't completely streamlined. But, if you were to make one ring slightly smaller than another (sort of a net, if you will. Look at a basketball hoop) then you have the frame of a cone... which IS streamlined
Also, it would depend how the rings are shaped. If they are indeed like donuts (sloping rings)... one could argue that the donut is just merely a flattened sphere. Without a center, yes, but still a flattened sphere .

For Book 2 Streamlining... the rules are vague to say the least. Pay for the streamlining, and anything can be streamlined.

 

[far-trader]

Yeah, I thought cylinder would best describe it too. And in all but HG cylinders can be fully streamlined, so maybe it's not too big a stretch

Hmm, or actually make it a saucer with a trailing ring to loop the load.

Nah, I like the donut idea better

 

[endersig]

A donut is just a really short, fat cylinder, that is missing it's center, so it is the same thing

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Actually, one of the classic "That thing flies?" paper airplane designs is two loops with a "rod" connecting them. The bigger loop goes in front, and it flies kinda nice. Here's a spot telling you how to build one.

Hmmmm. Now I'm going to have to give that a look for a ship....

 

[flykiller]

The bigger loop goes in front

nope. the smaller.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Doh! You're right. I will post my starship version of a paper airplane somewhere on The Fleet soon.

Edit: Just posted here.