Useful fighters
- Thread starter vegascat
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
This depends on the rule-set you're playing.
CT does have some sensor rules which were greatly expanded upon by DGP, later to play a very important part of MT ship combat.
HG is so abstract that when you convert the ranges to Mayday/B2 the sensors/weapons can "see" and obtain weapon locks over absurd distances.
TNE/Brilliant Lances has superb sensor rules IMHO, but then they were borrowed from T2300
.
T4 has quite a good simple system and even T20's sensor rules make ship combat into a potential sub-hunt.
My personal bias is towards the T2300 system. Simple, elegant and easily ported to B2/Mayday combat.
CT does have some sensor rules which were greatly expanded upon by DGP, later to play a very important part of MT ship combat.
HG is so abstract that when you convert the ranges to Mayday/B2 the sensors/weapons can "see" and obtain weapon locks over absurd distances.
TNE/Brilliant Lances has superb sensor rules IMHO, but then they were borrowed from T2300
.T4 has quite a good simple system and even T20's sensor rules make ship combat into a potential sub-hunt.
My personal bias is towards the T2300 system. Simple, elegant and easily ported to B2/Mayday combat.
Sigg Oddra wrote:
"Where are the capital ship class tenders that act as motherships to squadrons of torpedo boats in the modern Navy ?"
Mr. Oddra,
You'd be shocked to learn that capital ships toting torpedo boats was an idea briefly tried in the late Pre-Dreadnaught Era. Along with anti-torpedo nettting you deployed while steaming.
"The destroyer proved so effective that the torpedo boat concept went away."
Not exactly. Destroyers not only trumped torpedo boats, they became torpedo boats!
"Modern coastguards sometimes employ fast cutters to intercept merchant ships and smugglers but I don't know of any purely military versions ( that's not to say there aren't any, I just don't know about them)."
Many modern navies are little more than coastguards and most have some version of a 'fast cutter'. Norway, IIRC, has missile armed PBs (patrol boats) operating out of bunkers hewn into the fjord's granite cliffsides. Sweden has several PB types too, as does France. The USN has a handful of hydrofoil PHMs that usually operate out of Key West. Some may have been deployed to the Persian Gulf.
Like many other roles, the 'fast cutter' role has been nearly taken over by aircraft.
Sincerely,
Larsen
"Where are the capital ship class tenders that act as motherships to squadrons of torpedo boats in the modern Navy
?"Mr. Oddra,
You'd be shocked to learn that capital ships toting torpedo boats was an idea briefly tried in the late Pre-Dreadnaught Era. Along with anti-torpedo nettting you deployed while steaming.
"The destroyer proved so effective that the torpedo boat concept went away."
Not exactly. Destroyers not only trumped torpedo boats, they became torpedo boats!
"Modern coastguards sometimes employ fast cutters to intercept merchant ships and smugglers but I don't know of any purely military versions ( that's not to say there aren't any, I just don't know about them)."
Many modern navies are little more than coastguards and most have some version of a 'fast cutter'. Norway, IIRC, has missile armed PBs (patrol boats) operating out of bunkers hewn into the fjord's granite cliffsides. Sweden has several PB types too, as does France. The USN has a handful of hydrofoil PHMs that usually operate out of Key West. Some may have been deployed to the Persian Gulf.
Like many other roles, the 'fast cutter' role has been nearly taken over by aircraft.
Sincerely,
Larsen
robject wrote:
"You-all have brought up a point I keep forgetting: that Traveller space combat is more like submarine warfare than Top Gun dogfights."
Sir,
Which version of Traveller space combat?
"Way back in CT, ships would use planetary bodies to mask their signal, or would 'run silent' without maneuver drives to sneak by enemies. This is very much like submarine warfare: ships that keep a high profile tend to attract fire, and ships aren't really capable of outrunning missiles."
That's a version of CT I am not familiar with. LBB:2 has sensor locks and weapon ranges measured in light-seconds, as does Mayday. Using the canonical HG2 range band to Mayday hex conversion leaves you with weapon ranges that allow a vessel to shoot at ships in Earth orbit from beyond Earth's 100D limit.
MT, TNE (which has the best sensor rules, IMHO), and T4 all have sensor rules that allow Traveller space combat to mimic submarine warfare to some extent. However, CT most certainly does not.
Sincerely,
Larsen
"You-all have brought up a point I keep forgetting: that Traveller space combat is more like submarine warfare than Top Gun dogfights."
Sir,
Which version of Traveller space combat?
"Way back in CT, ships would use planetary bodies to mask their signal, or would 'run silent' without maneuver drives to sneak by enemies. This is very much like submarine warfare: ships that keep a high profile tend to attract fire, and ships aren't really capable of outrunning missiles."
That's a version of CT I am not familiar with. LBB:2 has sensor locks and weapon ranges measured in light-seconds, as does Mayday. Using the canonical HG2 range band to Mayday hex conversion leaves you with weapon ranges that allow a vessel to shoot at ships in Earth orbit from beyond Earth's 100D limit.
MT, TNE (which has the best sensor rules, IMHO), and T4 all have sensor rules that allow Traveller space combat to mimic submarine warfare to some extent. However, CT most certainly does not.
Sincerely,
Larsen
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Mr. Whipsnade,
I have to agree with you regarding the TNE sensor rules, definitely the best for Traveller.
Also, many thanks for the info on the pre-Dreadnaught era. I'm going to do a bit more research on Naval warfare 1800-1910 to see what else could be adapted to Traveller.
Your point about Destroyers becoming the torpedo boats carries over into Traveller nicely, IMHO, since a destroyer squadron in Traveller can probably put up quite a good fight against light to medium cruisers depending on the "ship size" in YTU.
My preference has always been the "small ship" OTU, pre High Guard, although TNE allowing spinal mounts in 1-5kt ships is another thing in its favour.
As an aside, which most of this post is, did you know that with 1st edition High Guard ship building rules (no energy points) it is possible to fit the 1-2.5kt spinal mounts in ships as small as 3000t?
Anyway, back to the point of this reply.
Re-read the rules for detection on page 33 of LBB2 1st edition or page 32 of 2nd edition (there are slight differences due to the scale changes between editions) and compare with the hex scale used in Mayday of 1 light second per hex. A ship that is silent running can only be detected at a range of one hex by military sensors. The sub-hunt scenario is back on the cards. If you maneuver or actively scan you are a target, otherwise it's back to "hide and seek with bazookas" (I love that quote).
Cheers,
Mike
I have to agree with you regarding the TNE sensor rules, definitely the best for Traveller.
Also, many thanks for the info on the pre-Dreadnaught era. I'm going to do a bit more research on Naval warfare 1800-1910 to see what else could be adapted to Traveller.
Your point about Destroyers becoming the torpedo boats carries over into Traveller nicely, IMHO, since a destroyer squadron in Traveller can probably put up quite a good fight against light to medium cruisers depending on the "ship size" in YTU.
My preference has always been the "small ship" OTU, pre High Guard, although TNE allowing spinal mounts in 1-5kt ships is another thing in its favour.
As an aside, which most of this post is, did you know that with 1st edition High Guard ship building rules (no energy points) it is possible to fit the 1-2.5kt spinal mounts in ships as small as 3000t?
Anyway, back to the point of this reply.
Re-read the rules for detection on page 33 of LBB2 1st edition or page 32 of 2nd edition (there are slight differences due to the scale changes between editions) and compare with the hex scale used in Mayday of 1 light second per hex. A ship that is silent running can only be detected at a range of one hex by military sensors. The sub-hunt scenario is back on the cards. If you maneuver or actively scan you are a target, otherwise it's back to "hide and seek with bazookas" (I love that quote).
Cheers,
Mike
Sigg Oddra wrote:
"Also, many thanks for the info on the pre-Dreadnaught era. I'm going to do a bit more research on Naval warfare 1800-1910 to see what else could be adapted to Traveller."
Mr. Oddra,
Pre-Dreadnaught is my favorite naval era and my minis group plays in it quite a bit - either 'A Hotter Fire' (mostly ACW) or GDW's 'IaEF' (everything else). Be prepared to be shocked and amazed, the designs and ideas you'll find are wild, wacky, and wonderful! Didya know that at the turn of the last century the RN's cruisers were larger than its battleships? Just wait 'til you read a reciprocating engines too!
"Your point about Destroyers becoming the torpedo boats carries over into Traveller nicely, IMHO, since a destroyer squadron in Traveller can probably put up quite a good fight against light to medium cruisers depending on the "ship size" in YTU."
Oh yes! I also like to fiddle with tech levels as well as ship size. At TLs below 13 or so, fighters are quite deadly thanks to nucs, fusion guns, and agility. Before dampers arrive and before powerplants get too beefy, you can build and fight some nicely odd HG2 designs.
"My preference has always been the "small ship" OTU, pre High Guard, although TNE allowing spinal mounts in 1-5kt ships is another thing in its favour."
True. FF&S let the GM build all sorts of nasty things! I preferred a small ship OTU too, the PCs fit in better. In a big budget, big ship OTU the PCs become mice in the wainscotting.
"As an aside, which most of this post is, did you know that with 1st edition High Guard ship building rules (no energy points) it is possible to fit the 1-2.5kt spinal mounts in ships as small as 3000t?"
Nice! Sadly, I've never seen a copy of HG1 and only know those bits that have been generally bandied about on various Traveller fora; i.e. m-drives used a weapons, all weapons on a ship summed into one attack factors, etc.
"Anyway, back to the point of this reply."
(snip of a kind correction to a dopey old fat man)
Drat and double drat! I hate bum-doping folks! Drat!
"If you maneuver or actively scan you are a target, otherwise it's back to "hide and seek with bazookas" (I love that quote)."
Now, that makes it all better! Great quote, btw. I first came across it in 2300AD's Star Cruiser and it fit combat there VERY well!
Sincerely,
Larsen
"Also, many thanks for the info on the pre-Dreadnaught era. I'm going to do a bit more research on Naval warfare 1800-1910 to see what else could be adapted to Traveller."
Mr. Oddra,
Pre-Dreadnaught is my favorite naval era and my minis group plays in it quite a bit - either 'A Hotter Fire' (mostly ACW) or GDW's 'IaEF' (everything else). Be prepared to be shocked and amazed, the designs and ideas you'll find are wild, wacky, and wonderful! Didya know that at the turn of the last century the RN's cruisers were larger than its battleships? Just wait 'til you read a reciprocating engines too!
"Your point about Destroyers becoming the torpedo boats carries over into Traveller nicely, IMHO, since a destroyer squadron in Traveller can probably put up quite a good fight against light to medium cruisers depending on the "ship size" in YTU."
Oh yes! I also like to fiddle with tech levels as well as ship size. At TLs below 13 or so, fighters are quite deadly thanks to nucs, fusion guns, and agility. Before dampers arrive and before powerplants get too beefy, you can build and fight some nicely odd HG2 designs.
"My preference has always been the "small ship" OTU, pre High Guard, although TNE allowing spinal mounts in 1-5kt ships is another thing in its favour."
True. FF&S let the GM build all sorts of nasty things! I preferred a small ship OTU too, the PCs fit in better. In a big budget, big ship OTU the PCs become mice in the wainscotting.
"As an aside, which most of this post is, did you know that with 1st edition High Guard ship building rules (no energy points) it is possible to fit the 1-2.5kt spinal mounts in ships as small as 3000t?"
Nice! Sadly, I've never seen a copy of HG1 and only know those bits that have been generally bandied about on various Traveller fora; i.e. m-drives used a weapons, all weapons on a ship summed into one attack factors, etc.
"Anyway, back to the point of this reply."
(snip of a kind correction to a dopey old fat man)
Drat and double drat! I hate bum-doping folks! Drat!
"If you maneuver or actively scan you are a target, otherwise it's back to "hide and seek with bazookas" (I love that quote)."
Now, that makes it all better! Great quote, btw. I first came across it in 2300AD's Star Cruiser and it fit combat there VERY well!
Sincerely,
Larsen
marginaleye
SOC-12
This whole emphasis on sensor rules and "hide and seek" seems a trifle far-fetched to me. Starships with fusion reactors ought to be producing fantastic quantities of infrared radiation. Starships using HEPlaR maneuver drives should be producing gigantic plumes of energetic plasma that should just scream out "Hey! I'm over here! Shoot me!" Even if you turn off your fusion reactor, just keeping the interior of the ship tolerably warm for the crew is still going to produce a lot of waste heat, leaking through the hull, isn't it? Perhaps I'm missing something important (as the old saying goes, space is big, after all), but I just don't see many opportunities for stealth (apart from obvious things, like hiding behind planets, and perhaps staying directly between your opponent and the local sun, to dazzle sensors). A sudden-death duel fought with bazookas, on a nearly perfectly flat and featureless plain, I'd say.
marginaleye
SOC-12
I forgot to add:
...with everyone involved wearing glow-in-the-dark clothing.
...with everyone involved wearing glow-in-the-dark clothing.
The one game system not mentioned by Sigg is GURPS TRAVELLER. In it, a Missile with enough velocity slamming into a ship can be the ship killing missle system not unlike the way things are now. Furthermore, GURPS STARSHIPS makes a point of including an optional rule that limits the damage a missile can do - because it invalidates the conversions of ships built using CT into GURPS TRAVELLER ships.
One of my favorite "tactics" using GURPS TRAVELLER and MAYDAY style rules - is for a launching ship to get up to speed and launch missiles from out of sensor range of its target. The missiles coast towards the unsuspecting target, and are acquired by "fighters" which had previously spotted their target and fed the data back to a missile launching ship. Fighters do the final course corrections and pilot the missile into the target. MASSIVE damage is done by the missile if it gets past any kind of point defense system.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
That's because I only got it to complete my collection and for background; because I haven't played it I didn't want to comment on it.
In the Missiles Special Supplement for CT missiles also cause extra damage depending on their final velocity with respect to the target.
I like it
I would like to suggest using the smallest, quietest, sensor drone to provide the final sensor hand off to save on lives lost. It could go active at the last instant to preserve stealth and avoid distruction long enough to provide that vital last minute data.
You might like this last bit even more then
According to GURPS TRAVELLER, the light speed time delay it takes to make course corrections via remote control (think of it as wire guided TOWS) gets worse the further away from the target you are. Those fighters aren't there as sensor platforms per se. Those fighters are there to shorten the time between sensing the target's motion and correcting for it.
Lets say you have a ship that is 96 hexes away (a hex is 10,000 miles) from a target. Its fighters have played point dog against the enemy vict, er target. So the missile launching ship fires away at his target and then lets the missiles float in on a ballistic trajectory based on the information fed to it by the fighers (who are still hidden). They are only 18 hexes away from their target (roughly 1 light second away). The Launching ship is roughly 5 light seconds away. If the launching ship were to be guiding the missile, it would need 5 seconds for the signal of the sensors to show that the target had moved out of the incoming path of a missile - and another 5 seconds to relay the course correction against a target plot that is now 5 seconds old. Remember, distance = 1/2 Acelleration x Time Squared. In 5 seconds, a 4 G ship can displace itself by 1,608 feet away from where the "launcher" thinks it should be. In 10 seconds, that ship could have moved 6432 feet in ANY direction. Easily enough for a missile to miss by
Now, take that fighter that is only 1 second away from the targeted ship. It can only dodge by 64.32 feet in any one direction against the fighter controlling the missile.
Now if GURPS were to go by the concept that each missile has its own homing head (which can be designed using the GURPS VEHICLES rules) - you don't need gunners in THAT traveller universe. Fire and forget. The missiles float on a ballistic trajectory until the inertial guidance computer tells it "hey, turn your sensors on stupid" and acquaire a target.
THOSE tactics would very easily simulate the long distance sniping of submarine warfare. NOW those fighters are really useful in the campaign because the smaller signatures make it harder for them to be spotted. The sad fact is however, that the fighters can't carry significant sensors on it. The GOOD news is that larger ships can be spotted further away in the GURPS Traveller Universe.
Be aware however that there is just one minor nitpick here. GURPS TRAVELLER is not the TRAVELLER that CT fans love and adore. Missles were NOT horrendous weapons - spinal mounts were. Also be aware that the official GURPS TRAVELLER rules (please, put your drink down now. Don't have any food in your mouth - this is no joke, this is for your own safety) has one little problem...
If you do not use the Mayday rules for missiles with GURPS TRAVELLER, the original rules specify that your missile must be guided *exactly* to hit its target. That is to say:
The last movement of the missile must coincide with the ship it is hitting. Lets say, because of previous speed vectors, that a missile is moving at a speed of 11, has a 6G burn left to it still, and the ship it is going to hit is 4 hexes away. 11 -6 = 5. This is the slowest the missile can be travelling. By moving 5, it can move into the same hex as the target, and then has to move one more hex beyond the target (it does after all have to move 5 hexes remember?). GURPS TRAVELLER rules state that it must END its move in the same hex - not move through it, otherwise it is an automatic miss.
That is why I went to MAYDAY rules myself. Last position, current position, and future position. In order to determine if a missile can hit a target or not, I use the triangle method. Current location of missile, future position of missile *IF* it doesn't change its course in any way - and the final third point of the triangle is the movement that it can change its future position by (ie the G burn of the missile). If the target ship is within the triangle formed by those three points - it can hit the target.
Since all movement is supposed to be simaltaneous, you can find yourself in a situation where a ship can start inside that triangle and moved out of it. That is when you use the good old fashioned standby from STAR FLEET BATTLES. A missile moving 20 hexes this turn versus a target that is moving only 5 hexes this turn has a 4:1 ratio. That is, move the missile four hexes, then move the target 1 hex. Move missile its 8th movement, move ship its second movement. It becomes easy to determine if the missile would hit the ship before it escapes outside the triangle, or misses it entirely with a narrow miss.
Ah well, I digress - time to hit the sack.
According to GURPS TRAVELLER, the light speed time delay it takes to make course corrections via remote control (think of it as wire guided TOWS) gets worse the further away from the target you are. Those fighters aren't there as sensor platforms per se. Those fighters are there to shorten the time between sensing the target's motion and correcting for it.
Lets say you have a ship that is 96 hexes away (a hex is 10,000 miles) from a target. Its fighters have played point dog against the enemy vict, er target. So the missile launching ship fires away at his target and then lets the missiles float in on a ballistic trajectory based on the information fed to it by the fighers (who are still hidden). They are only 18 hexes away from their target (roughly 1 light second away). The Launching ship is roughly 5 light seconds away. If the launching ship were to be guiding the missile, it would need 5 seconds for the signal of the sensors to show that the target had moved out of the incoming path of a missile - and another 5 seconds to relay the course correction against a target plot that is now 5 seconds old. Remember, distance = 1/2 Acelleration x Time Squared. In 5 seconds, a 4 G ship can displace itself by 1,608 feet away from where the "launcher" thinks it should be. In 10 seconds, that ship could have moved 6432 feet in ANY direction. Easily enough for a missile to miss by
Now, take that fighter that is only 1 second away from the targeted ship. It can only dodge by 64.32 feet in any one direction against the fighter controlling the missile.
Now if GURPS were to go by the concept that each missile has its own homing head (which can be designed using the GURPS VEHICLES rules) - you don't need gunners in THAT traveller universe. Fire and forget. The missiles float on a ballistic trajectory until the inertial guidance computer tells it "hey, turn your sensors on stupid" and acquaire a target.
THOSE tactics would very easily simulate the long distance sniping of submarine warfare. NOW those fighters are really useful in the campaign because the smaller signatures make it harder for them to be spotted. The sad fact is however, that the fighters can't carry significant sensors on it. The GOOD news is
that larger ships can be spotted further away in the GURPS Traveller Universe.Be aware however that there is just one minor nitpick here. GURPS TRAVELLER is not the TRAVELLER that CT fans love and adore. Missles were NOT horrendous weapons - spinal mounts were. Also be aware that the official GURPS TRAVELLER rules (please, put your drink down now. Don't have any food in your mouth - this is no joke, this is for your own safety) has one little problem...
If you do not use the Mayday rules for missiles with GURPS TRAVELLER, the original rules specify that your missile must be guided *exactly* to hit its target. That is to say:
The last movement of the missile must coincide with the ship it is hitting. Lets say, because of previous speed vectors, that a missile is moving at a speed of 11, has a 6G burn left to it still, and the ship it is going to hit is 4 hexes away. 11 -6 = 5. This is the slowest the missile can be travelling. By moving 5, it can move into the same hex as the target, and then has to move one more hex beyond the target (it does after all have to move 5 hexes remember?). GURPS TRAVELLER rules state that it must END its move in the same hex - not move through it, otherwise it is an automatic miss.
That is why I went to MAYDAY rules myself. Last position, current position, and future position. In order to determine if a missile can hit a target or not, I use the triangle method. Current location of missile, future position of missile *IF* it doesn't change its course in any way - and the final third point of the triangle is the movement that it can change its future position by (ie the G burn of the missile). If the target ship is within the triangle formed by those three points - it can hit the target.
Since all movement is supposed to be simaltaneous, you can find yourself in a situation where a ship can start inside that triangle and moved out of it. That is when you use the good old fashioned standby from STAR FLEET BATTLES. A missile moving 20 hexes this turn versus a target that is moving only 5 hexes this turn has a 4:1 ratio. That is, move the missile four hexes, then move the target 1 hex. Move missile its 8th movement, move ship its second movement. It becomes easy to determine if the missile would hit the ship before it escapes outside the triangle, or misses it entirely with a narrow miss.
Ah well, I digress - time to hit the sack.
marginaleye wrote:
"This whole emphasis on sensor rules and "hide and seek" seems a trifle far-fetched to me."
Mr. Eye,
Yes it is. It also makes for a more interesting game and that's what Traveller is, a game.
"Even if you turn off your fusion reactor, just keeping the interior of the ship tolerably warm for the crew is still going to produce a lot of waste heat, leaking through the hull, isn't it?"
No. The real trouble is going be in keeping your crew COOL. All that waste heat is leaking through the hull? Answer this, leaking to 'what'? Space is a vacuum, as in 'vacuum bottle'. Cooling is the real difficulty. All that waste heat can build up faster than you can radiate it.
"Perhaps I'm missing something important (as the old saying goes, space is big, after all), but I just don't see many opportunities for stealth..."
Neither do I unless a great big heap of handwavium is applied some how. 'Seeing' and 'hitting' are two very different things, but most 'stealth' techniques may involve active ECM tricks of one kind or another. That plus lots of handwavium.
Sincerely,
Larsen
"This whole emphasis on sensor rules and "hide and seek" seems a trifle far-fetched to me."
Mr. Eye,
Yes it is. It also makes for a more interesting game and that's what Traveller is, a game.
"Even if you turn off your fusion reactor, just keeping the interior of the ship tolerably warm for the crew is still going to produce a lot of waste heat, leaking through the hull, isn't it?"
No. The real trouble is going be in keeping your crew COOL. All that waste heat is leaking through the hull? Answer this, leaking to 'what'? Space is a vacuum, as in 'vacuum bottle'. Cooling is the real difficulty. All that waste heat can build up faster than you can radiate it.
"Perhaps I'm missing something important (as the old saying goes, space is big, after all), but I just don't see many opportunities for stealth..."
Neither do I unless a great big heap of handwavium is applied some how. 'Seeing' and 'hitting' are two very different things, but most 'stealth' techniques may involve active ECM tricks of one kind or another. That plus lots of handwavium.
Sincerely,
Larsen
RainOfSteel
SOC-14 1K
It depends on your ship. Surface area, thermal conductivity, etc., versus what is generated by the people inside. However, armor would seem to have high thermal conductivity as an optimum property as a defense against lasers, although there is no such rating given for the handwavium futuristic armor of the TU, so I can only guess.
However, heat leakage is mostly through infrared radiation, and by way of example, Apollo 13 took quite a few hours (over a day) before it started to cool down, and it was still liveable (though not by much) by the time they reached Earth. They hardly had any insulation at all in the Odyssey LEM.
IMTU, navy personnel wear "shipsuits", TL-15 all-in one jumpsuit with gloves, boots, and helmet. It's a low-endurance vacc-suit (including heat support) with some minimal radiation shieding agaisnt stellar exposure and shipboard accidents. But its a major defense against loss of pressure (as long as you aren't subject to the decompression itself, which in battle is likely to be violent).
RainOfSteel wrote:
"It depends on your ship. Surface area, thermal conductivity, etc., versus what is generated by the people inside."
Mr. Steel,
Versus what is generated by the people AND the equipment inside. As you note, surface area, thermal conductivity, orbital location, distance from a star, and many others will effect a vessel's thermal radiation ability.
"However, armor would seem to have high thermal conductivity as an optimum property as a defense against lasers, although there is no such rating given for the handwavium futuristic armor of the TU, so I can only guess."
I'd guess the same. Thermal conductivity is a major requirement of laser strike resistance.
"However, heat leakage is mostly through infrared radiation, and by way of example, Apollo 13 took quite a few hours (over a day) before it started to cool down, and it was still liveable (though not by much) by the time they reached Earth. They hardly had any insulation at all in the Odyssey LEM."
True, but how much waste heat was being produced aboard Appollo 13? I'd think that the three astronauts were the major producers as most of the spacecraft's equipment was secured. Most of the waste heat created abaord Apollo 13 came from the astronaut's armpits.
Now let's look at our mythical 57th Century space craft; megawatt rated powerplants, grav plating, lighting, coffee makers, computers, megawatt rated lasers, maneuver drives, the list is endless. How much waste heat does all that stuff produce?
"IMTU, navy personnel wear "shipsuits", TL-15 all-in one jumpsuit with gloves, boots, and helmut. It's a low-endurance vacc-suit (including heat support) with some minimal radiation shieding agaisnt stellar exposure and shipboard accidents. But its a major defense against loss of pressure (as long as you aren't subject to the decompression itself, which in battle is likely to be violent)."
Much like MTU. If you're working or on watch, you're in a shipsuit. Off watch or in your berthing area, you still carry a rescue ball in a fanny pack. Shipsuits are low endurance vacc suits with gloves and a head-hugging hood tucked into the wrists and neck. Masks can be attached and breathing air can either be provided by a small, flat, HP, belt pack or from a breathing air main. All of this is merely to buy you time to either be relieved by fully vacc suited personnel or move to a sheltered location. Overalls and/or jumpers are required wear over the shipsuit, they prevent damage to the suit beneath.
Sincerely,
Larsen
"It depends on your ship. Surface area, thermal conductivity, etc., versus what is generated by the people inside."
Mr. Steel,
Versus what is generated by the people AND the equipment inside. As you note, surface area, thermal conductivity, orbital location, distance from a star, and many others will effect a vessel's thermal radiation ability.
"However, armor would seem to have high thermal conductivity as an optimum property as a defense against lasers, although there is no such rating given for the handwavium futuristic armor of the TU, so I can only guess."
I'd guess the same. Thermal conductivity is a major requirement of laser strike resistance.
"However, heat leakage is mostly through infrared radiation, and by way of example, Apollo 13 took quite a few hours (over a day) before it started to cool down, and it was still liveable (though not by much) by the time they reached Earth. They hardly had any insulation at all in the Odyssey LEM."
True, but how much waste heat was being produced aboard Appollo 13? I'd think that the three astronauts were the major producers as most of the spacecraft's equipment was secured. Most of the waste heat created abaord Apollo 13 came from the astronaut's armpits.
Now let's look at our mythical 57th Century space craft; megawatt rated powerplants, grav plating, lighting, coffee makers, computers, megawatt rated lasers, maneuver drives, the list is endless. How much waste heat does all that stuff produce?
"IMTU, navy personnel wear "shipsuits", TL-15 all-in one jumpsuit with gloves, boots, and helmut. It's a low-endurance vacc-suit (including heat support) with some minimal radiation shieding agaisnt stellar exposure and shipboard accidents. But its a major defense against loss of pressure (as long as you aren't subject to the decompression itself, which in battle is likely to be violent)."
Much like MTU. If you're working or on watch, you're in a shipsuit. Off watch or in your berthing area, you still carry a rescue ball in a fanny pack. Shipsuits are low endurance vacc suits with gloves and a head-hugging hood tucked into the wrists and neck. Masks can be attached and breathing air can either be provided by a small, flat, HP, belt pack or from a breathing air main. All of this is merely to buy you time to either be relieved by fully vacc suited personnel or move to a sheltered location. Overalls and/or jumpers are required wear over the shipsuit, they prevent damage to the suit beneath.
Sincerely,
Larsen
marginaleye
SOC-12
Agreed.
But at the risk of suggesting something very heretical, why not just call the proverbial spade a spade, and administer the "handwavium" in overtly, in the form of deflector shields or force fields of some kind? The canonical Traveller universe already has (1) rapid interstellar travel, (2) reactionless thrusters, (3) anti-gravity, and (4) "meson guns" (whose sub-atomic projectiles are only vaguely reminiscent of actual mesons). Adding "deflector shields" wouldn't exactly strip the canonical universe of any legitimate claims of being "hard science fiction."
Deflector shields could, furthermore, be a prefect excuse for big spacegoing battleships. Consider: a deflector shield's protective value would depend upon the "output" of its generator, divided by the surface area of the shield-bubble required. The shield generator's output would depend upon its volume. As things bigger, their volumes increases faster than their surface areas, so providing battle-worthy shielding for a big ship should be considerably easier than providing equal shielding for a small one. At some point, obscenely big battleships would be able to shrug off the spinal-mount weapons of smaller cruisers and battle-riders.
Adding deflector shields would make combat feel a little bit more like 18th- and 19th-century naval warfare: you can spot your target long before you can fire at him, there isn't that much complicated maneuvering involved, and whoever has the sturdier bulkheads, and can "throw a greater weight of metal" with each broadside, is likely to win.
Tell it to Nelson.
On deflector shields... I have no objection to Trek Tech in an appropriate environment. I have no objection to using Traveller rules to run Trekkish games. I have no objection to not looking too hard at the implications and logic of "Science!" The OTU, however, has been established for a long time, and doesn't work that way...
Alan B
i rather feel that traveller and trek don't well at all. many of the technologies inhert in trek completely supercede classic traveller (3rd Imperium) techs. why go galavanting off into space after rare resources when your antimatter-powered replicator spits out whatever your heart desires within seconds? visit the relatives? no spaceship needed, just beam on over. unlimited everything, pretty much...
imo, scarcity of "stuff", whatever it is, adds interest to the game, because it gives players goals to acheive by getting "stuff".
imo, scarcity of "stuff", whatever it is, adds interest to the game, because it gives players goals to acheive by getting "stuff".
Trek Tech doesn't _necessarily_ imply unlimited everything.
First of all, it isn't necessary to go poking around the back alleys of the logic. Touring factories is rarely what RPGs are about.
Second, it's easy enough to stick a spoke in the wheels of your runaway Santa Claus machines: say they have limits.
It's your universe, it works the way _you_ want it to. Any SF universe will have at least some nonsensical magitech. The TU is full of absurd assumptions. You can swap them around to your heart's content.
In any case, different universes are better for different sorts of games. Guess what kind of games Trek Tech is good for? No, not interstellar shopkeepers...
Of course, you probably don't really want to mix your assumptions. The OTU is the OTU, and not the Trek Universe, nor the one in Babylon 5, or...
Anyway, it isn't actually necessary to adopt the full nonsense of a Trek universe if you want to head off some way in that direction. After all, in an RPG, you have the special effects budget you deserve. You don't need transporters to handwave cutaway scene changes! You don't need replicators, either.
Incidentally, IMTU, I assume that nanotech exists and is used routinely. And you know what? It makes no difference. It's how factories and other black boxes work. It's completely irrelevant other than as colour text. It's not a Santa Claus machine - it's just how your toaster was made.
Finally, there are more motivations than scarcity for doing stuff. Even if they don't apply, your Santa Claus machines aren't going to keep going eternally. Sooner or later, you will need more resources... They aren't perpetual motion machines.
Alan B
marginaleye
SOC-12
Hello? Did you even bother to read the message I posted, or did you just reflexively stop cold as soon as you got to the words deflector shields?
I mentioned neither antimatter reactors, nor replicators. Nor did I mention the justly-infamous transporter. Nor am I suggesting arming player characters with implausible hand-held energy weapons (since gunpowder gets the job done perfectly well). All I suggested was deflector shields. I don't see why such an item has to be incompatible with the general level of technology portrayed in the canonical Traveller universe, either. Adding deflector shields would certainly change spaceborne combat, but it wouldn't an effect upon the basic economics of the Imperium.
