Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
More in terms as to how much we would have to provide resources.
Soil, space, light and water.
Soil, space, light and water.
What is contained in a Bridge?
- Thread starter vegascat
- Start date
Getting back to the OP... I decided to brush off some old canon deckplans and see what could be gleaned from them. First I studied at the 100 dt Type S.
By the RAW, it is a simple design with only a few elements:
40 dt fuel
20 dt bridge
16 dt staterooms
15 dt drives (AAA)
4 dt air raft
3 dt cargo
1 dt computer
1 dt hard point
100 dt total
Now, I wanted to look at the 2 canon deck plans, Snapshot and S7, and see if they helped differentiate between bridge and stateroom areas. To that end, here is a listing of identified areas in those two deckplans excluding fuel, drives, air raft, cargo, computer, and hardpoint - in other words, everything left that has to be part of bridge and staterooms. I find:
Of note is that both deck plans have A LOT more area drawn than the 36 dt allocated to staterooms and bridge. The extra dtons make it hard to draw many firm conclusions about which features belong to which category because no allocation will tie out to 20 or 16 dt target volumes. Nevertheless, here are a few claims we can make
1) it is clear in both plans that the bridge area must include some storage or access area, as the "obvious" bridge components (avionics plus either sensors in S7 or drive room in SS) don't sum to 20 dt.
2) Visually, there is an implication on the SS deck plan that the ship's locker is part of bridge volume - it is attached to the bridge. This is less compelling in the S7 plan visually, but the math of the volumes that need to be allocated still argues for it.
3) What most every poster here already asserted, it is clear from the deckplans that the "bridge proper" is just a small fraction of the bridge 20 dt volume.
Full disclosure, not on my list but drawn on the S7 deck plan is some landing gear. It is not accessible area, so it isn't part of the grid, but eyeballing it they are clearly 2x <2dt.
I'll try to analyze another deck plan later.
EDIT: Oh, I almost forgot, there was a tidbit in S7 that I had long forgotten. I quote: "The major fault of the type S scoutlcourier is its air system. Although of respectable quality for life support, it begins to smell after about three weeks of use... The problem can be corrected by flushing the air system, which operation costs Cr1,000 for parts and components. Temporary respite may be obtained (for about a week) by replacing the system's air filters (at Cr200). Both these processes also require a plentiful supply of breathable air. Instead, the entire air system may be replaced with a better model; it costs Cr70,000 and requires sacrificing one ton of cargo space."
Conclusion: the atmosphere component of life support takes 1 dt and costs Cr70K. It is possible this is a fixed component of the bridge, or it is 0.25 dt per stateroom and Cr17,555 of the per stateroom cost.
EDIT AGAIN: I should point out that the S7 deck plan does not have a computer room, so somewhere in the list above the computer must also find a home.
By the RAW, it is a simple design with only a few elements:
40 dt fuel
20 dt bridge
16 dt staterooms
15 dt drives (AAA)
4 dt air raft
3 dt cargo
1 dt computer
1 dt hard point
100 dt total
Now, I wanted to look at the 2 canon deck plans, Snapshot and S7, and see if they helped differentiate between bridge and stateroom areas. To that end, here is a listing of identified areas in those two deckplans excluding fuel, drives, air raft, cargo, computer, and hardpoint - in other words, everything left that has to be part of bridge and staterooms. I find:
| feature | SS dt | S7 dt |
| bridge proper | 3 | 2 |
| avionics | 8 | 1 |
| staterooms | 15 | 12 |
| commons | 14 | 10 |
| access & corridors | 4.5 | 9.5 |
| multi-use | 6.5 | |
| unspecified | 1 | |
| storage | 10.5 | |
| sensors | 3 | |
| ship's locker | 2 | |
| air locks | 2 | |
| drive room | 4.5 | |
| Total | 53 | 55.5 |
1) it is clear in both plans that the bridge area must include some storage or access area, as the "obvious" bridge components (avionics plus either sensors in S7 or drive room in SS) don't sum to 20 dt.
2) Visually, there is an implication on the SS deck plan that the ship's locker is part of bridge volume - it is attached to the bridge. This is less compelling in the S7 plan visually, but the math of the volumes that need to be allocated still argues for it.
3) What most every poster here already asserted, it is clear from the deckplans that the "bridge proper" is just a small fraction of the bridge 20 dt volume.
Full disclosure, not on my list but drawn on the S7 deck plan is some landing gear. It is not accessible area, so it isn't part of the grid, but eyeballing it they are clearly 2x <2dt.
I'll try to analyze another deck plan later.
EDIT: Oh, I almost forgot, there was a tidbit in S7 that I had long forgotten. I quote: "The major fault of the type S scoutlcourier is its air system. Although of respectable quality for life support, it begins to smell after about three weeks of use... The problem can be corrected by flushing the air system, which operation costs Cr1,000 for parts and components. Temporary respite may be obtained (for about a week) by replacing the system's air filters (at Cr200). Both these processes also require a plentiful supply of breathable air. Instead, the entire air system may be replaced with a better model; it costs Cr70,000 and requires sacrificing one ton of cargo space."
Conclusion: the atmosphere component of life support takes 1 dt and costs Cr70K. It is possible this is a fixed component of the bridge, or it is 0.25 dt per stateroom and Cr17,555 of the per stateroom cost.
EDIT AGAIN: I should point out that the S7 deck plan does not have a computer room, so somewhere in the list above the computer must also find a home.
Last edited:
Proneutron
SOC-13
Yeah, you are right. None of the other deck plans are adequately labeled or consistent enough to attempt a detailed analysis. Nevertheless, this entire exercise has lead me to the following conclusions:
The bridge proper should be small, in the ~2 dt range.
I am now comfortable that ship's lockers are part of the bridge and they should frequently be attached to the bridge proper.
While drive rooms are rare, in these plans, I think adding one makes sense and helps absorb some of the required bridge volume. I'd probably throw in an electronics/mechanical work bench too. All essential for the proper operation of the ship.
Also AD made me think harder about some small craft house rules so they are more consistent with ships. To wit:
Small craft with only couches have short-range passive detection only; the bridge adds ship-level performance scanners & sensors. Small craft are not fitted with internal gravity nor have inertial compensation. (hat tip AD!).
Only small craft with bridges may operate for more than 24 hours (12 hours combat) as the bridge equipment inlcudes more extensive life support. Nevertheless, as small craft are intended for short-duration missions, even with a bridge, air quality becomes poor in 1-3 weeks and intolerable in 3-6 (thanks CT:S7 Type S!)
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Rereading the thread, I had another thought.
IIRC, in LBB5, there was the option of additional bridges (or only one?)--mostly for military use in emergencies due to combat damage. They were identical to the first, which has some interesting consequences.
If the bridge includes basic life support, and you needed more (say, to carry extra passengers/refugees in the cargo hold) could you fire up the emergency bridge to provide for them? How many could it support, for how long?
Would the emer bridge provide more airlock(s), ship locker, avionics and sensors and communication? Again, if it does, would that allow it to be crewed for a bonus in one or more such areas?
Does the Emer bridge work like the second computer: unusable unless the main bridge is turned off or damaged?
IIRC, in LBB5, there was the option of additional bridges (or only one?)--mostly for military use in emergencies due to combat damage. They were identical to the first, which has some interesting consequences.
If the bridge includes basic life support, and you needed more (say, to carry extra passengers/refugees in the cargo hold) could you fire up the emergency bridge to provide for them? How many could it support, for how long?
Would the emer bridge provide more airlock(s), ship locker, avionics and sensors and communication? Again, if it does, would that allow it to be crewed for a bonus in one or more such areas?
Does the Emer bridge work like the second computer: unusable unless the main bridge is turned off or damaged?
Back ups don't seem to work like that in Traveller. You can have back up computers and drives, but only one is operating. They don't tile up. Personally I'd rule the same for back up bridges. The only benefit from having 2 is robustness, not function.
I think the reason for that is just design simplicity. It gets too complicated to do it otherwise.
I think the reason for that is just design simplicity. It gets too complicated to do it otherwise.
That's what I'd suspect the default is too. As it is in StarFleet Battles also--while bridge boxes count for defending the ship vs. boarding parties, otherwise one bridge is the same as six or eight boxes of three or four different types.
Still, it's fun to speculate how to use it in a scenario or adventure: ship on a planet engaging in routine (or ot-so-routine) trade when there's a revolution, or a catastrophe, and suddenly eleventy-six locals want to head next door ASAP. . . .
Still, it's fun to speculate how to use it in a scenario or adventure: ship on a planet engaging in routine (or ot-so-routine) trade when there's a revolution, or a catastrophe, and suddenly eleventy-six locals want to head next door ASAP. . . .
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
The stated life support limit is still two (presumably human-sized) people per stateroom in CT.
MgT2 allows more...
True. But, in emergency, could someone add (or activate) extra life support to carry more people at least temporarily? (Epecially as a plot device/hook?)
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
It wouldn't be very difficult, I guess.
Rack up some bunkbeds, improvise some heads, carry some extra oxygen, water, and CO2 scrubbers.
Pack in people, say, 5 per Dton cargo?
It would not be comfortable, but possible in an emergency, for just a week.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Yes, if you checkout the old CT Alien realms adventure you will find this:
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Mongoose has quite a wide range of options, that you could extrapolate from.
While not explicitly stated, no bridge has additional life support, except for detachable ones.
While not explicitly stated, no bridge has additional life support, except for detachable ones.
What is in a Bridge
94 posts in a month, lots of opinions and references, Excellent debate.
The basic difference I see between a 100 Dton starship bridge and a 99 DTon small ship bridge would be the difference similar to between a wet navy ships bridge and an aircraft cockpit or even a speedboats controls. The ocean going ship needs solidly mounted equipment for navigation and control. An aircraft needs a place for 2 people to sit at the available controls with electronic avionics including a computer, sensors, internal and external communication equipment, and external flaps and other attitude adjustment devices.
An ocean going ship needs walking around room for shift change and access to multiple control devices. A starship would require walking around room for shift change and access to multiple control devices as well. The avionics is not just electronics, but would include external devices placed in multiple areas on the exterior skin of the ship for attitude adjustment, as jets, flaps, grav thruster plates, or whatever the tech allows. The sensors would have to be sensitive enough to give very exact orientation of the ship for jump initiation or "you could fly right through the heart of a star or a supernova that would ruin your day real quick."
A small craft would need similar avionics, but of a much reduced nature as the pilot can change course whenever he wants. Shift change would probably be needed only on patrol missions or interplanetary hops. I would definitely want a fresher and a secure place to snooze, then something to allow snacking between emergencies. The drives should not need to be physically accessed in flight as in a starship and all other control inputs should be reachable from the cockpit seats as in an airliner.
Does anyone have data for what percentage of the U.S. Space Shuttle used for attitude adjustment control? It used attitude control jets along with flaps for atmospheric flight.
As for the extra equipment for life support, decks are 3 meters/ 10 feet high with 1/4 of that between the ceiling and next deck to contain the plumbing needed for electronics, air, water and waste recycling so logically that would be part of the stateroom volume. Standard ceiling height in US homes is 8 feet.
Please don't forget about the passengers electronic needs. They will need communication with the steward and multiple places to plug in their hair dryer, toenail trimmers, E-pad, and many other devices. All these devices will have power needs of volts, hertz, and plug configurations different than where you are from. Ever travelled to different continents? Adapters and transformers are a fact of life for travelers on this planet, thinking the next world over would be compatible would be magical thinking.
You want to mess with your players, let them land in Vargr space with a failing power plant on their beautiful flying bucket of bolts ship. Let them try to find a power supply to mate with their ship to jump start the newly fixed ship power plant. Just how much will that Vargr Broker be willing to part with his Great Grandfathers pull start Honda 1 Mw hydrogen powered generator? Maybe you could cannibalize your laser rifle power pack to get it going? 100 Cr for the laser rifle, 5,000 Cr for the power pack if you can find one back in Imperial space.
The idea of where different subsystems are located and how they can go wrong or be messed with by the passengers 12 year old kid who wants to see how it operates by application of screw driver, wrench and hammer are never to be overlooked for adventure opportunities.
94 posts in a month, lots of opinions and references, Excellent debate.
The basic difference I see between a 100 Dton starship bridge and a 99 DTon small ship bridge would be the difference similar to between a wet navy ships bridge and an aircraft cockpit or even a speedboats controls. The ocean going ship needs solidly mounted equipment for navigation and control. An aircraft needs a place for 2 people to sit at the available controls with electronic avionics including a computer, sensors, internal and external communication equipment, and external flaps and other attitude adjustment devices.
An ocean going ship needs walking around room for shift change and access to multiple control devices. A starship would require walking around room for shift change and access to multiple control devices as well. The avionics is not just electronics, but would include external devices placed in multiple areas on the exterior skin of the ship for attitude adjustment, as jets, flaps, grav thruster plates, or whatever the tech allows. The sensors would have to be sensitive enough to give very exact orientation of the ship for jump initiation or "you could fly right through the heart of a star or a supernova that would ruin your day real quick."
A small craft would need similar avionics, but of a much reduced nature as the pilot can change course whenever he wants. Shift change would probably be needed only on patrol missions or interplanetary hops. I would definitely want a fresher and a secure place to snooze, then something to allow snacking between emergencies. The drives should not need to be physically accessed in flight as in a starship and all other control inputs should be reachable from the cockpit seats as in an airliner.
Does anyone have data for what percentage of the U.S. Space Shuttle used for attitude adjustment control? It used attitude control jets along with flaps for atmospheric flight.
As for the extra equipment for life support, decks are 3 meters/ 10 feet high with 1/4 of that between the ceiling and next deck to contain the plumbing needed for electronics, air, water and waste recycling so logically that would be part of the stateroom volume. Standard ceiling height in US homes is 8 feet.
Please don't forget about the passengers electronic needs. They will need communication with the steward and multiple places to plug in their hair dryer, toenail trimmers, E-pad, and many other devices. All these devices will have power needs of volts, hertz, and plug configurations different than where you are from. Ever travelled to different continents? Adapters and transformers are a fact of life for travelers on this planet, thinking the next world over would be compatible would be magical thinking.
You want to mess with your players, let them land in Vargr space with a failing power plant on their beautiful flying bucket of bolts ship. Let them try to find a power supply to mate with their ship to jump start the newly fixed ship power plant. Just how much will that Vargr Broker be willing to part with his Great Grandfathers pull start Honda 1 Mw hydrogen powered generator? Maybe you could cannibalize your laser rifle power pack to get it going? 100 Cr for the laser rifle, 5,000 Cr for the power pack if you can find one back in Imperial space.
The idea of where different subsystems are located and how they can go wrong or be messed with by the passengers 12 year old kid who wants to see how it operates by application of screw driver, wrench and hammer are never to be overlooked for adventure opportunities.
Proneutron
SOC-13
They operate in the same environment (Jump space isn't turbulent) so the requirements along those lines would be identical. Moreover, a small craft is MORE likely to be used in atmosphere where it would encounter harsher environment vis-a-vis needing "solidly mounted equipment for navigation and control"
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
A 99t smallcarft bridge is the same size - 20t - as the bridge of a 100-1000t ship.
Smallcraft are not like aircraft vs ships, too many people use an aircraft mental image for smallcraft. Small craft are small ships. Think coastguard cutter vs navy destroyer...
A smallcraft without a bridge may fit the cockpit controls image.
Smallcraft are not like aircraft vs ships, too many people use an aircraft mental image for smallcraft. Small craft are small ships. Think coastguard cutter vs navy destroyer...
A smallcraft without a bridge may fit the cockpit controls image.
Last edited:
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
It really depends on which edition you're using.
It's a little tight, and you are penalized for control activities carried out within there, but a six tonne small bridge can still activate the jump drive on a two hundred starship.
Classic place a minimum of two percent volume for capital sized spaceship bridges, while the current edition declares sixty tonnes sufficiently comprehensive to run the Death Star.
It's a little tight, and you are penalized for control activities carried out within there, but a six tonne small bridge can still activate the jump drive on a two hundred starship.
Classic place a minimum of two percent volume for capital sized spaceship bridges, while the current edition declares sixty tonnes sufficiently comprehensive to run the Death Star.
Proneutron
SOC-13
It makes more sense to break out sensors, life support and similar from the Bridge size. Then you size the bridge on how many people need to be working there. For smaller starships this is 3. Pilot/helm, astrogator/navigator & possibly Owner/Master if that isn't one of the first two.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Another new option are sub command centres, that allow a bonus to specific weapon types or ship systems, sized and priced as small bridges.
Full bridge variants can also, at a penalty, control the ship as a whole.
Full bridge variants can also, at a penalty, control the ship as a whole.
