CT Only: Supplement 7 Express Boat Tender

[snrdg082102]

Howdy HG_B

The one thing I always thought strange was the need for a pop-turret on a gov ship of a standard, widespread design. It ins't like it has to hide the weapon from authorities or, that it doesn't become generally known so as to obviate any surprise factor.

The scout service needed turrets and the only ones available were pop-up turrets. Better yet, the guys that sold the scout service the mobile turrets also cut a deal for the pop-up turrets.

 

[HG_B]

Howdy HG_B



The scout service needed turrets and the only ones available were pop-up turrets. Better yet, the guys that sold the scout service the mobile turrets also cut a deal for the pop-up turrets.

:rofl:

 

[mike wightman]

Hello again Carlobrand,

The smallest drive letter for a 1,000 ton vessel under Book 2 1st editions rules is type H. Using Book 2 2nd edition you are correct the smallest drive letter is E.

I'm getting the impression that many of the Supplement 7 designs used the first edition of Book 2.

There is no way S:7 could use the '81 revision design rules. S7 is copyright 1980 so it had to be the '77 rules used.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning aramis,

There are several missing components... like the data banks on the XBoat, the pop-turrets on the tender, the barbettes on the Gazelle and SDB...

No joy yet on finding information on the data banks and communicators carried by the X-boat. I did dig up something on the barbette and pop-up turret.

The Gazelle's barbette per JTAS 4 page 19:

"THE BARBETTES

The barbettes and their particle accelerator weapons are not specifically covered in Traveller Book 2. They are a variant drawn from the material in High Guard, and grafted onto Book 2."

Challenge #25 Bait: Q-Ships in Traveller page 33 1986 provides the following information about the express boat tender's pop-up turret.

"Design and Construction

For extra combat power, Q-ships typically carry a maximum number of turrets, with any turrets over and above the usual number of a merchant ship being in the form of pop turrets such as those found on x-boat tenders. The pop turrets installed on Q-ships do not move except to extend and retract, and they include special stabilizing gear (tonnage equal to turret tonnage, MCr 0.1 per ton). Thus, these pop turrets do not suffer any penalties when fired."

The pop-up turret on the Q-ship doesn't rotate and from what I gather the x-boat tender's pop-up turret does rotate. Per Challenge 25 the stabilization for the non-rotating turret used 1 ton of space and has a cost of MCr 0.1per ton.

Does that mean the rotating pop-up turret on the x-boat tender takes up 2 tons of space and has a cost of MCr 0.1per ton or may be MCr 0.2?

In the x-boat tender's deck plans the two mobile turrets appear to be single mount turrets and the pop-up is a triple mount.

Am I identifying the turrets correctly?

Would the mobile turret's traveling gear have a similar cost as that of the pop-up turret?

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning Mike Wightman,

There is no way S:7 could use the '81 revision design rules. S7 is copyright 1980 so it had to be the '77 rules used.

I was fairly confident the Supplement 7 for the most part used Book 2 1st edition, but to be on the safe side I hedged my bet. ;-)

The Gazelle's barbette however was pulled from HG 2nd edition.

The origins for communicators an data banks, and the pop-up turret.

I did find some information on the pop-up turret in Challenge #25 pages 32-33 and 38. Challenge #25 was published in 1986.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello Hans Rancke,

It sounds like someone is being rules-lawyeringly oblivious of reality. That's just what I surmised would be the case. Even so, I'm surprised that the required tonnage is that much bigger. We're talking 1000T to carry 400T, or 250% of volume. That's more than the 200% employed in the rule for carrying craft in empty weapons bays.

Book 2, either edition, allocates storage space at the tonnage of the carried small craft and vehicles. My best guess is that hulls >=100 tons are being carried using the same concept.

Supplement 7 sets the ship/vehicle bay's maximum storage capacity at 600 tons with a dimension of 40 meters long x 28.5 meters wide x 12 meters high. Using only the x-boats tonnage the four fit nicely in what is effectively a 600 ton cargo hold.

Throwing in the dimensions for both the ship/vehicle bay and the x-boats
makes getting them to fit a bit more interesting.

Book 2 limits ship's to one ton turret weapons which in Supplement 7 means that the carrying of craft in empty weapons bays don't apply.

Of course I'm sure that when I get around to running the express boat tender through Book 5 I'll have some surprises.

Can you fit the necessary drives, accomodation, and fuel tankage into a 1400T design with a 1000T bay? If so, that seems the best fix, keeping the deck plan but changing the statistics. Perhaps one could even make it a 1500T design, relying on the "10% slop" rule of deck plan drawing. Otherwise, a complete redesign seems indicated, with actual customized cone-shaped 100T bays designed to hold X-boats and nothing but X-boats.


Hans

Under Book 2 77 and 81 standard hull using letter H drives and power plant requirement for a main compartment of 835 tons and an engineering section of 165 tons the answer I've come up with is no.

The engineering section has 80 tons of space available for upgrades while the main compartment is over by 51 tons with a cargo capacity of 60 tons. An 85 ton cargo deck, per the Consolidated CT errata puts the main compartment over the capacity by 76 tons.

A standard hull using letter E drives per Book 2 81 the engineering section upgrade space goes up and the overage in the main compartment doesn't change.

Using a custom hull everything appears to fit with 4 tons of space left when cargo capacity is 85 tons and 29 with

In Book 2 2nd edition page 21 the deck plan leeway (slop) factor is plus or minus 10% to 20%. Final deck plans that come within 20% of the ship tonnage specifications should be considered acceptable.

 

[Patron Zero]

..... Salvaging this particular ship requires you to re-envision the ship as a dispersed structure tender. Lose the bay doors and open the bay to space so you don't have to enclose the entire bay in a jump field, and your ship becomes a 1000 dT tender docking four 100 dT ships, instead of a 1400 dT transport with an 800 dT bay that contains those four ships.

That where I'm seeing the tender as more a small-scale mobile 'drydock' of sorts as well as having a capacity to act as transport for smaller vessels it could clamp onto, and in a sense, 'tow' back to a more dedicated repair yard.

And as even as unattractive as real-world tow-trucks sometimes might appear, one as such in our shared Traveller settings would have not only a purpose but charms all it's own.

 

[rancke]

Book 2, either edition, allocates storage space at the tonnage of the carried small craft and vehicles. My best guess is that hulls >=100 tons are being carried using the same concept.

My point is that in this case it's a question of the rules being unrealistic. Very unrealistic. The only way you can carry irregularily shaped (and most regularily shaped) craft and vessels at their own tonnage is if you carry them in custom-designed bays (And even then you will probably need a bit of extra space).X-boats, for example, would need to be carried in cone-shaped bays with cupolas. And as we have just seen demonstrated, sometimes you'd need more than double the space to carry them.

Which means that the canonical design for the tender is demonstrably wrong no matter how legal it is by Book 2 (either edition) rules.


Hans

 

[aramis]

There is no way S:7 could use the '81 revision design rules. S7 is copyright 1980 so it had to be the '77 rules used.

It does make use of HG 1 for the Gazelle. Those Barbettes ain't exactly Bk2 weapons.

 

[snrdg082102]

Evening Hans Rancke,

My point is that in this case it's a question of the rules being unrealistic. Very unrealistic. The only way you can carry irregularily shaped (and most regularily shaped) craft and vessels at their own tonnage is if you carry them in custom-designed bays (And even then you will probably need a bit of extra space).X-boats, for example, would need to be carried in cone-shaped bays with cupolas. And as we have just seen demonstrated, sometimes you'd need more than double the space to carry them.

Which means that the canonical design for the tender is demonstrably wrong no matter how legal it is by Book 2 (either edition) rules.


Hans

I don't disagree that Book 2 rules are not realistic, however the x-boat tender's designer adhered to the approved rules. Under Book 2 rules the tender is built as a custom design, even though there are a large quantity of them floating around the TU.

Earlier in the discussion I mentioned that using AutoRealm I could fit three x-boats into the bay. To fit them into the bay the first faced towards the cargo deck and the third one was facing towards the fuel tank with the stern between the sterns of the first two.

Patron Zero sent me an PM and I reported on my efforts to re-draw the deck plans. Unfortunately, I miss counted the distance between the hull between the area by the lift shaft and the opposite wall in the captain's cabin.

From the bridge bump-out to the back wall of the my efforts come out to be 15 meters. From left wall to the right wall inside the bridge I get 12 meters.

From the wall with the turret airlock hatch to the other wall is 13.5 and from the wall to the left of the lift shaft and the outer bridge wall is 10.5 meters.

The bridge is 33 meters from left to right x 13.5 meters in the two section to the left and right of the bridge. Most of the bridge section measures 15 meters from the bumped out section.

If I haven't mucked the whole thing up the dimensions of the cargo deck, ship/vehicle bay, fuel tanks, and engineering measure 33 meters left to right and 13.5 meters from the bottom to the top.

The dimensions for the bridge and cargo deck are based on rotating the tender's diagram so the bridge is at the top and the stern is at the bottom of the page:

Bridge without bump-out: 33 meters by 13.5 meters by 3 meters
Bridge with bump out: 33 meters by 15 meters by 3 meters

Cargo Deck: 33 meters by 13.5 meters by 3 meters

The ship/vehicle bay, fuel tanks, and engineering cross sections are 33 meters by 13.5 meters. I have gotten around to the distance between any of there bulkheads.

Hopefully, I can make things fit the length of 60 meters.

 

[rancke]

I don't disagree that Book 2 rules are not realistic, however the x-boat tender's designer adhered to the approved rules.

Now we're just going in circles. I don't disagree that the x-boat tender's designer adhered to the approved rules, however, the deck plans are flat out wrong. They can't possibly be right.

Earlier in the discussion I mentioned that using AutoRealm I could fit three x-boats into the bay. To fit them into the bay the first faced towards the cargo deck and the third one was facing towards the fuel tank with the stern between the sterns of the first two.

But you can't fit them into the bay at 100% or even 150% of their tonnage and you can't fit four of them in there. So the deck plan demonstrates clearly that the design is faulty. You're as likely to square the circle as you are to make the X-boat tender work correctly.


Hans

 

[snrdg082102]

Hans,

Now we're just going in circles. I don't disagree that the x-boat tender's designer adhered to the approved rules, however, the deck plans are flat out wrong. They can't possibly be right.



But you can't fit them into the bay at 100% or even 150% of their tonnage and you can't fit four of them in there. So the deck plan demonstrates clearly that the design is faulty. You're as likely to square the circle as you are to make the X-boat tender work correctly.


Hans

Please explain to me why a space 40 meters long x 30 meters wide x 13.5 meters cannot fit an object that has a half sphere 12 meters in is 22 meters long or one that is 37.5 meters long x 24 meters wide x 7.5 meters high.

Yes, I changed the height from 12 meters to 13.5, of course the closed doors might act a clamp to hold the boat in place.

 

[rancke]

Please explain to me why a space 40 meters long x 30 meters wide x 13.5 meters cannot fit an object that has a half sphere 12 meters in is 22 meters long or one that is 37.5 meters long x 24 meters wide x 7.5 meters high.

Who says it can't? I'm saying it uses more space to do so than the objects it contains displaces.

It's also 20% more than you can fit in a 1000T vessel.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

It does make use of HG 1 for the Gazelle. Those Barbettes ain't exactly Bk2 weapons.

They aren't HG1 either - there are no PA barbettes in HG1.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hans,

Who says it can't? I'm saying it uses more space to do so than the objects it contains displaces.

It's also 20% more than you can fit in a 1000T vessel.


Hans

I still do not understand.

Here is how I am understanding the way the ship/vehicle works using Book 2 1980 and the nice round 14 cubic meters per displacement ton number.

The 1,000 tender, by the rules, has the capacity to hold 14,000 cubic meters of stuff. The bridge, computer, crew accommodations, cargo deck, fuel tankage, and engineering spaces take-up, my calculations may be off, 366 displacement tons or 5,124 cubic meters.

14,000 cubic meters - 5,124 cubic meters = 8,876 cubic meters or 634 tons left over for the ship/vehicle bay.

One 100-ton X-boat is 100 tons or 1,400 cubic meters. Four X-boats take up 5,600 cubic meters of space which leaves 8,876 - 5,600 = 3,276 cubic meters or 234 tons of space. That would allow 58.5 tons or 819 cubic meters of space dedicated to each X-boat being carried.

Supplement 7 lists the bay as being 40 meters x 28.5 meters x 12 meters or 13,680 cubic meters Candle flickers to light to feebly banish darkness (no electric light bulb on this one) as maybe understanding dawns.

Or am I still in the dark as usual.

 

[rancke]

The 1,000 tender, by the rules, has the capacity to hold 14,000 cubic meters of stuff. The bridge, computer, crew accommodations, cargo deck, fuel tankage, and engineering spaces take-up, my calculations may be off, 366 displacement tons or 5,124 cubic meters.

14,000 cubic meters - 5,124 cubic meters = 8,876 cubic meters or 634 tons left over for the ship/vehicle bay.

So far, so good. But...

One 100-ton X-boat is 100 tons or 1,400 cubic meters. Four X-boats take up 5,600 cubic meters of space which leaves 8,876 - 5,600 = 3,276 cubic meters or 234 tons of space. That would allow 58.5 tons or 819 cubic meters of space dedicated to each X-boat being carried.

...that's where the rules and reality part ways. Four X-boats actually, in reality, would take up 400T plus the empty space in between. If you use a 40x30x13.5 box to keep them in, they take up 1200T rather than 400T.

Supplement 7 lists the bay as being 40 meters x 28.5 meters x 12 meters or 13,680 cubic meters.

OK, that's 1013.33T rather than 1200T, and we can probably round it down to 1000T for the sake of simplicity. It's still the entire 1000T the tender is supposed to be with no volume left over for bridge, drives, accomodation, computer, etc...

My suggested fix is to keep the deck plans but make the tender big enough to have a 1000T bay.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

The most likely explanation is that someone at GDW goofed up. They give the bay dimensions the same values the ship should have (and note that it isn't a box, the curved sides make the overall volume a bit less).

The 60x30x12 in the stat block is just plain wrong - those are the dimensions for a 1500t ship.

A 600t bay is big enough to fit in the requisite 4 x-boats.

GDW were always getting their ship stuff wrong, just look at the deck plans for the 200t far trader lol.

 

[rancke]

A 600t bay is big enough to fit in the requisite 4 x-boats.

Perhaps it is. I can't say I've checked it out for myself. Inexorabletash's drawing and calculations says otherwise.


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

Sorry I should have finished my last post - a 600t bay is big enough for 4 x-boats, but they have to be arranged in a triangle of three facing one direction, and the fourth reversed into the gap between them, giving the x-boat tender a triangular cross section.

The cubic bay is not big enough for box volume of 4 x-boats.

 

[HG_B]

Sorry I should have finished my last post - a 600t bay is big enough for 4 x-boats, but they have to be arranged in a triangle of three facing one direction, and the fourth reversed into the gap between them, giving the x-boat tender a triangular cross section.

The cubic bay is not big enough for box volume of 4 x-boats.

The funny (maybe not the right word) thing about this is that the X-Boat, not being designed to EVER enter an atmosphere, should have been designed as a cube/rectangle. I know that gets rid of the "kewl" factor. However, I am a firm believer in the school of thought supporting the idea that form FOLLOWS function...