Starship Production

[robject]

I like the flavor of a "production log" to go along with a starship class and deckplan. You know, a table that lists:

Production No.   Builder/Shipyard   Name   Keel Laid Down   Disposition

Anyone have ideas for filling these out? How often should I use well-known shipyards or builders, versus using "new" ones I create out of thin air? And what kind of little Library Data blurb would be appropriate for describing my own, "new" builders?

So far, I've got three new builders named, but I haven't located them. I have specified which ship classes they produce, and what nomenclature they use when naming new ships of a particular class. I'm thinking I'll need a bit more -- just enough to create some background and set up a potential point of interaction for players. Less than one page, preferably one paragraph.

 

[coliver988]

Kinunir

Kinunir had this though I like disposition better. There are several Star Trek fan sites that do this so you can 'register' your ship. A sort of land grab for starships.

 

[robject]

Thanks - very helpful; I should have looked there myself.

Leviathan uses this structure:

Dispositions - a text block stating that all ships are in service with a few exceptions, then item-lists the exceptions and their circumstances.

Construction Registry - the table, containing (Number, Name, Laid Down, First Flight, Owner, Status).

So A4 improved on the formula by listing the owner of the ship, and relegating the builder to the footnotes. I think this is an improvement because this speaks to the current use of the ship: if you happen upon it, you'll know with whom you're likely to be dealing.

In A4, unfinished ships have a dash instead of a number, and First Flight is blank. Status values include the phases "on order", then "building", "fitting out", "in service", and "lost DATE" where DATE is the year lost, and "lost" is a blanket term for missing/captured/destroyed/etc, detailed in the "Dispositions" textblock.

Notes

Here, A4 notes that all of its merchant cruisers were built by the same yards. So the shipyard is a footnote, and the registry contains the owner. A few additional notes detail circumstances around some of the ship owners.

 

[robject]

So my structure will be like so:

ID, Name, Laid Down, First Flight, Owner, Disposition

ID starts with a builder's abbreviation, and tends to be nonstandard. Example: BT-1200, Baraccai Technum #1200.

Disposition is one of these codes, and optionally with a date (especially for mishaps):

OO: On order
BU: Building
FO: Fitting Out
IS: In Service
C: Captured <date>
D: Destroyed <date>
M: Missing <date>
L: Lost <date>
X: Scrapped <date>

 

[mike wightman]

Check out the table in the AHL supplement too Rob.

 

[coliver988]

if this could be set as a database/web resource it could also be useful for additional background material for others. Doing that, you may want to keep 2 versions, your version & a public version that others could add to so that we could register any ships we want into a sort of Lloyds listing (I saw this thread either on this or another board about tracking current ship dispositions that explained a bit how it started and why).

Sort of like http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/new_02_22_2002.html or http://startrekwiki.wetpaint.com/page/Star+Ship+List?t=anon or any of dozens of other sites.

 

[far-trader]

Hmm, I vaguely recall such a collection/database being talked about if not actually set up for Traveller at one point. Can't recall who or where though...

 

[robject]

Check out the table in the AHL supplement too Rob.

...which uses a "Notes" field instead of Disposition codes. Very flexible for large lists with highly common data.

 

[robject]

if this could be set as a database/web resource it could also be useful for additional background material for others. [...]

Hmm, I vaguely recall such a collection/database being talked about if not actually set up for Traveller at one point. [...]

Enjoy. Primitive but functional.

http://eaglestone.pocketempires.com/ships/register.pl

Warning: it'll do some rudimentary date validation...