Starship Interiors
- Thread starter Mithras
- Start date
The Hunt for Red October
Ship interiors
The ship interiors I use depends on the origin and use of the ship. Passenger liners I look to modern cruise ships. Military fighting ships I Keep interiors clean with all piping along companionway ceilings with cross bars for bracing and ladder use. Damage control/repair is a priority. Tramp freighter means anything goes, economy and ease of use is prime concern. Passenger areas have fresh paint when needed, other areas get paint only to control rust.
Many things matter, but always "Form Follows Function", Planet, shipyard, corporation, race matters, but physics trumps all, followed by budget and safety.
If it can be done without paint, it will be bare metal. If a cheap plastic screen will do, it will be rejected because it will not last! Long term economy also means robust construction. This is not a cheap saloon in a western movie, no way to get replacement furniture in the wherever.
Nothing combustible will be used unless no other replacement exists at the yard. Fire in space is a new level of horror. Everyone remember Apollo 1 Launch pad fire? 15 seconds start to finish, leaving 3 highly trained humans very dead. It can be assumed most planetary space programs will have similar experiences leading to similar safety standards.
Areas will be separated whenever possible unless a truly alien design, or a design meant to mess with the players heads. What ship designer wants untrained people to have access to the power plant controls?
The interiors I use vary wildly within these restrictions. Paint color, types of metals exposed, padded surfaces, deck plates can be nearly anything depending on origin. It is always a good idea to keep track of interior decorating schemes for continuity by race, use, yard. It's a big universe with many solutions to every problem.
The ship interiors I use depends on the origin and use of the ship. Passenger liners I look to modern cruise ships. Military fighting ships I Keep interiors clean with all piping along companionway ceilings with cross bars for bracing and ladder use. Damage control/repair is a priority. Tramp freighter means anything goes, economy and ease of use is prime concern. Passenger areas have fresh paint when needed, other areas get paint only to control rust.
Many things matter, but always "Form Follows Function", Planet, shipyard, corporation, race matters, but physics trumps all, followed by budget and safety.
If it can be done without paint, it will be bare metal. If a cheap plastic screen will do, it will be rejected because it will not last! Long term economy also means robust construction. This is not a cheap saloon in a western movie, no way to get replacement furniture in the wherever.
Nothing combustible will be used unless no other replacement exists at the yard. Fire in space is a new level of horror. Everyone remember Apollo 1 Launch pad fire? 15 seconds start to finish, leaving 3 highly trained humans very dead. It can be assumed most planetary space programs will have similar experiences leading to similar safety standards.
Areas will be separated whenever possible unless a truly alien design, or a design meant to mess with the players heads. What ship designer wants untrained people to have access to the power plant controls?
The interiors I use vary wildly within these restrictions. Paint color, types of metals exposed, padded surfaces, deck plates can be nearly anything depending on origin. It is always a good idea to keep track of interior decorating schemes for continuity by race, use, yard. It's a big universe with many solutions to every problem.
There are a couple of YouTube mariners out there on freighters. The amount of room their officers get is mahoosive; the enlisted get a fair bit of room too, and the communal living spaces are larger than you might expect as well, compared to military vessels. But, of course, air is cheap inside a type 6 atmosphere 
There are a couple of YouTube mariners out there on freighters. The amount of room their officers get is mahoosive; the enlisted get a fair bit of room too, and the communal living spaces are larger than you might expect as well, compared to military vessels. But, of course, air is cheap inside a type 6 atmosphere
Volume is cheap when your propulsion system's effectiveness is based on waterline length, not interior volume.
This. +1.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Actually, water line length is primarily critical if you want a fast ship. For most freighters, running at much over 20 knots is not economical in fuel, and the critical length for that speed is 400 feet. On a big container ship or one of the Great Lakes 1000 foot bulk carriers, frictional resistant of the underwater hull and hull cleanliness is a much bigger factor. Body shape also becomes a factor at higher speeds, and the basic box of a container ship or bulk carrier is not a problem at slow speeds, but to drive it faster would cost either a better hull form or a lot more power.
Good info -- I was thinking in terms of fast boats and ships, not barges or container ships.
That said, Traveller ship drive effectiveness is a function of power/volume, and waterborne vessels drive effectiveness is a function of power/displacement tonnage (which may only loosely correlate to gross register tonnage or total enclosed volume)
That said, Traveller ship drive effectiveness is a function of power/volume, and waterborne vessels drive effectiveness is a function of power/displacement tonnage (which may only loosely correlate to gross register tonnage or total enclosed volume)
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I remember that too. Three very good men died in that fire.
Whenever this comes up, I'm moved to reflect on the 3 major "space" movies. "The Right Stuff", "Apollo 13", and "From the Earth to the Moon (FtEttM)".
Now, this is all taken as presented in the movies - how those reflect reality, I just can't say. I simply take them at their word.
In "The Right Stuff", Grissom was portray very poorly when the Mercury capsule was lost. The fundamental point of contention was that The Powers That Be blamed Grissom for the "blown hatch", whereas Grissom contended that the hatch "just blew". That he explosive bolts system securing the hatch failed somehow.
In TRS, it was mentioned how explosive bolts had been tested in aircraft for years, and never "just blew". Grissom was portrayed as being in disgrace.
In Apollo 13, Hanks as Lovell talked to his son about the Apollo 1 fire. About how there was a problem with the door, and reassured his son that they had fixed the door, so that his Dad wasn't in the danger the Apollo 1 crew was.
In "FtEttM", talking about the Apollo 1 fire, one of the folks was talking about the Apollo 1 hatch. The Apollo 1 hatch not only was oriented wrong (opening inward, instead of outward), it did NOT have explosive bolts. It did not have explosive bolts because, after analysis of Grissoms Mercury incident, it was ascertained that, indeed, the bolts apparently DID "just blow". They "just blew", and that was considered a risk on the Apollo capsule. If that did not happen, if they did not "just blow", if Grissom was not (apparently) disgraced by the event, Apollo 1 would likely have had the mechanism in place, that the crew could have used to potentially save their lives.
As the character in the episode said "I'm not a real fan of irony".
Peace to the crew, and their families.
This has what I think is a good stateroom for a passenger liner:
https://technology.todaypin.com/technology/artstation-sleeping-quarters-sam-brown/
And I also use a plethora of existing things for my ships. Current game group has what is really a Star Trek ship, but cleverly disguised as a 1000 ton Naval Lab ship (those big nacelles are just big fuel tanks so it *almost* works!)
https://technology.todaypin.com/technology/artstation-sleeping-quarters-sam-brown/
And I also use a plethora of existing things for my ships. Current game group has what is really a Star Trek ship, but cleverly disguised as a 1000 ton Naval Lab ship (those big nacelles are just big fuel tanks so it *almost* works!)
Proneutron
SOC-13
Other. Given the interior space constraints on Trav Star ships my interiors of the living spaces centres around multi-use design and safety. Fires while in Jump Space would be nasty indeed. Thus nothing flammable. Hideaway beds in staterooms, or the beds can turn into other types or furniture, etc. Holo-walls and the like in living areas.
BackworldTraveller
SOC-13
Steerage class on the Titanic is about the right size!
Styles...Vary depending on type of ship. Cargo vessels are very different to Passenger ones. Ones where the crew are employees differ from those where they are owners.
Whatever, given the size constraints, utilitarian. You have to be able to get under everything at short notice!
Styles...Vary depending on type of ship. Cargo vessels are very different to Passenger ones. Ones where the crew are employees differ from those where they are owners.
Whatever, given the size constraints, utilitarian. You have to be able to get under everything at short notice!
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Hmm, can't believe I didn't bring up the classic Pullman train spaces, just perfect for Traveller type spaces.
Sorry about the size, don't remember the syntax for sizing
.
This is a tour of the Amtrak roomette, this is even smaller then most Traveller staterooms and could fit 2 sleeping. Going to spend a lot of time in the common area I imagine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwEDLl_rhQ
This is a Superliner bedroom, I think more like most of our conception of a stateroom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO0JgEEe1pw
Sorry about the size, don't remember the syntax for sizing
.
This is a tour of the Amtrak roomette, this is even smaller then most Traveller staterooms and could fit 2 sleeping. Going to spend a lot of time in the common area I imagine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwEDLl_rhQ
This is a Superliner bedroom, I think more like most of our conception of a stateroom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO0JgEEe1pw
Last edited:
Proneutron
SOC-13
Mine are inspired by functionality requirements. For ships that can be far from help time wise in an emergency, safety is very important. Next, since space is at a premium is multi-use space. Especially in staterooms and common areas.
So, not counting an aircraft, assuming you can get someone to respond, what do you think is the longest someone would have to wait if they're out in a boat in the ocean and needed aid.
They just happen to be terribly remote, and need another boat to come up. What do you think would be the longest response time.
I guess we'd have to come up with an average boat speed, as most certainly some boats are much slower than others.
So, is 10 Knots a good number? A Coast Guard Cutter can do almost 20. A USN DD can do 30.
So, perhaps 15 would be a better number to go with?
Is it possible to be days away from ad hoc aid?
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I assume that you are able to communicate that you have lost power and need assistance. Depending on where you are at, you might be looking at a week to ten days. The southern part of the Indian Ocean would likely have the longest response time.
