• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

What are the dimensions for a standard turret?

Micah461

Micah461

SOC-9
I'm making an intermediate Fuel Tanker based on the PingPong model I got from the Games Workshop store in the outskirts of London, back in 1982. Modeling it in OnShape (because I know Solidworks ). I'm trying to incorporate logic in the development and the pot metal model is pretty liberal in design features. Right now the fuel capacity is 36K at a ship tonnage of roughly 3500 tons. Jump 5 and M-1, to be a fuel source for Chandler Station between Tonnurad/Cerebin/Chander Station. Visualize a 100 meter sphere, a 10m tube though, and dual bridges at the large spheres at either end. Power plant and drives aft, Berths in the tube through. Fuel cutters to load it. I welcome comments and criticisms.Tanker.jpg
 
According to the LBB S7 deck plans, the internal (habitable) volume of any turret is 2 squares of deck space ... an acceleration couch in 1 square and an access hatch in the square behind the couch. So this would be 1.5x3m of floor space, with a ceiling height of perhaps 2m in there.

A lot of turrets are externally depicted as less than hemisphere domes, with 1, 2 or 3 barrels protruding from the blister dome.

Trav-Suleiman-Scout-Caswell_26-April-2019a.jpg
 
It's allocated fourteen cubic metres.

Presumably like Universal Serial Bus, standards have been universally accepted, so dimensions should be the same everywhere.

The assumption on my part is half the volume is allocated to the workstation.
 
It depends on the rule paradigm.
CT
The hardpoint requires no tonnage.
The turret itself requires no tonnage.
The fire control system requires 1 ton.

This has caused a lot of consternation over the years.

Move to the HG80 paradigm and turrets now require 1, 2, or 3 tons of internal space depending on type.
 
Yes, it depends on the rule set you use.

CT LBB2 allocates no mass or space for the turrets, but 1 Dt for fire control.

All other rule sets I know of, from CT HG'79 to T5 allocates space (and if applicable mass) for the turrets.
 
Something that's been mulling around in my mind for a while.

Allocating armour for turrets and bays.

Differing factors, materials and bulkanization changes the volume involved.
 
mike wightman said:
Move to the HG80 paradigm and turrets now require 1, 2, or 3 tons of internal space depending on type.
Click to expand...
The turret proper itself remains unchanged.
What changes is the quantity of supporting fire control/engineering needed inside the hull to "feed" the higher end energy weapons (plasma/fusion guns, particle accelerators, etc.).

That way the turret itself can remain a standard size (yes, even the particle accelerator barbettes at 5 tons each) as an external feature protruding from the hull. What changes is the amount of additional internal displacement needs to be allocated to the weapon(s) interior to the hull.

Lasers, Missiles and Sandcasters require minimal/negligible additional interior weapon engineering support, so everything basically fits into the external turret.

Plasma and Fusion Guns require additional weapon engineering support above and beyond what can be fitted into the standard turret, so there's 1 ton "in" the turret plus 1 ton inside the hull (total, 2 tons displacement to allocate in construction rules) for additional equipment. Think stuff like plasma ready chamber/holding tank which does all the pre-heating and readiness work before passing a "live" bolt of plasma into the turret to be held until fired. So the extra 1 ton inside the hull is basically the magazine for the shots, while the final weapon system assembly is "in" the external turret itself.

Same deal for Particle Accelerator Turrets, except now you need 2-4 tons additional weapon engineering support external to the turret. Think ring accelerator and storage systems for isolating and preparing the particles to be fired out of the weapon at relativistic velocity. Sort of a SpinLaunch "yeeting" kind of arrangement, except the "barrel" of the weapon in the turret is simply the directional control for being able to "point" the particle stream downrange in a "this points towards enemy" kind of way. The actual main accelerator ring would be inside the hull and would contain the particle stream zooming around the cyclotron until the button is pushed by the gunner to release the particle stream towards the enemy as a "shot" attempt.
 
Depends on edition.

The other default turret like weapon platform is the five tonne barbette, which to ensure game balance has differing capacities for firmpoints and hardpoints.

However, tweaking the weapon systems is possible in the MongoVerse, so either can be enlarged or shrunk.
 
In TNE & T4, the turret can includes the weapon... within the socket volume.
 
That's the interesting thing about turrets and hardpoints, and sockets: you can allocate the tonnage, but if a turret isn't actually occupying the allocated volume, would it still be counted?

We do have the specific case of pop up turrets, which implies there's a difference in total volume in popped and unpopped state, as opposed to bay weapon platforms, where it would be implied that the business end is covered or uncovered.
 
Condottiere said:
but if a turret isn't actually occupying the allocated volume, would it still be counted?
Click to expand...
Yes.
The engineering for the turret is still reserved/set aside so you don't have to "rebalance everything" later if a turret does get installed.

It's what the whole "reserved X tons for fire control" is all about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top