• 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.

What is the size in cubic meters of an air/raft

Badenov

SOC-12
So, my copy of MgT1 says an air/raft requires 4 dTon, noting "The tonnage and cost covers minimal hangar space, indicating the vehicle is either carried on the outer hull or in a formfitting compartment on board."

High Guard says "Normally, when a small craft is included in the design of a larger one, it is installed into a form–fitting enclosure in the hull of the mother vessel. The scout’s air/raft, for example, is carried in a small compartment in the forward section, with barely enough room for passengers to scramble on board. Most repairs and maintenance require the air/raft to be launched first." A Hangar is then described at requiring 30% space above and beyond the hangared craft.

Book 6 Military Vehicles converts dtons to m^3, and tells us that the external dimensions convert at 10m^3/dton, so a 4-dton enclosure should hold 40m^3 of Book 6 vehicles (or 30.7m^3 in a hangar).

Book 6 gives us two sample "G/Carriers" at 32 and 33m^3, (a bit larger than 5mx3mx2m) which would both fit in the 40m^3 enclosures with room to spare. The air/rafts I have seen posted here as minis seem to represent vehicles much smaller than that, so I was wondering is there a canonical size for an air/raft? If so, what is it? Has this all been fixed in MgT2?

I have worked numbers to make a sort-of book-faithful air/raft though the cost was a bit off, only 225,408Cr. I'm sure the 275,000Cr in Mg1 includes a dealer mark-up. Top Speed 400kph, driver+3 passengers, grav drive were my core matchups, but it's only 5 m^3, which at 3m x 2m x 83cm does track better with the minis. If I juggle the numbers a bit, I can get a 249K vehicle at 6m^3, so 2x3x1, but that's still 5 air/rafts in a 4dT hangar.


The other thing that no one notes is that while you need a spacesuit to get into orbit, you need an oxygen supply above about 3300m. So my vehicle includes basic life support supplied to the crews' helmets. I also include basic sensors as required by Book 6 for Grav vehicles, presumably something like T2CAS (https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worl...ation/terrain-and-traffic-collision-avoidance) in RL. I put in a radio also, so the crew could call up anyone around. The source material doesn't make clear whether they mostly get used in exploration or on inhabited planet in a Jetsons sort of 'just a commuter vehicle' way, so they could be calling their host ship with reports about scouting or calling up ATC for landing clearance.

Interestingly, even the Jetsons realized that they should be enclosed if you're not wearing a spacesuit.
 
I don't think there is a canonical answer, except that it needs a 4 Dt garage.

MT had open at 27 m³, closed at 54 m³:
Skärmavbild 2024-11-01 kl. 17.16.png
Skärmavbild 2024-11-01 kl. 17.16 1.png

TNE had it at 28 m³:
Skärmavbild 2024-11-01 kl. 17.17.png


As the future version of a 4-tonne truck, it is perhaps not all that small:
640px-Diamond_T_truck_of_the_Royal_Dutch_Army.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_T_4-ton_6×6_truck

Perhaps something like 2.5 m × 6 m × 1.5 m, or 2.5 m × 6 m × 2.5 m for the enclosed version? Fits snugly in a 2 × 4 square garage?
 
Hull configuration would figure in.

Placement of the gravitational modules, could allow a rectangular boxed light delivery van, with the driver and controls directly in front, and remaining cargo immediately behind, which should shorten the chassis.


7-5-tonne-Box-Van-with-Tail-Lift-Hire-550x413.jpg
 
I don't think there is a canonical answer, except that it needs a 4 Dt garage.

MT had open at 27 m³, closed at 54 m³:
If the enclosed air/raft is 54m³, that's certainly 4 dTons (ignoring the 10m³/dT thing), and it makes sense that the open-top version, though smaller, still needs headroom in the bay so people can get in, so still needs a 4dT space. But then that begs the question "How big is a G/Carrier?" and "How do I now interpret Book 6?" Is it simply out-of-canon/no longer referenceable?
 
If the enclosed air/raft is 54m³, that's certainly 4 dTons (ignoring the 10m³/dT thing), and it makes sense that the open-top version, though smaller, still needs headroom in the bay so people can get in, so still needs a 4dT space.
In MgT2 an air/raft is only specified in terms of garage space needed. Any discussion of real mass or size is carefully avoided.
Skärmavbild 2024-11-02 kl. 10.54.png
It has a shipping size of 4 Dt and needs a 5 Dt (= 4 × 110%, round up) garage.
Note that Shipping size is in Dton and cargo is in tonnes, both labeled "tons" (just like LBB1-3).


But then that begs the question "How big is a G/Carrier?" and "How do I now interpret Book 6?" Is it simply out-of-canon/no longer referenceable?
Sorry, despite meddling in this thread I have nothing to do with Mongoose and cannot offer any authoritative answers to anything.

MgT1 Book 6 is presumably as canon as any other book, at least in the context of MgT1.
MgT2 has the Vehicle Handbook that avoids any real size or mass.
 
The problem with giving "actual dimensions" for stuff is that as soon as you do that, everything you put into the cargo hold(s) (or equivalent spaces) turns into a game of TETRIS, where packing losses can eat up a significant fraction of your available volume (in effect, wasting it).

For a reality simulator (especially a 3D one) this is a very important consideration, since everything is about being able to make stuff "fit" into places without conflicting with other stuff nearby. Viva la Dirt League did a wonderful demonstration of this in the context of survival games a week ago that highlights the 3D spatial issue (in as funny a way as can be managed, because this is how 3D games ACTUALLY BEHAVE).


But for a tabletop roleplaying game, particularly a "snappy, fast paced and fun" one ... playing TETRIS to "make everything fit" is really more hassle than it's worth. 😖
Hence why this level of detail down to the Actual Dimensions™ is left vague enough such that you only have to worry about displacement tons without needing to muck around dealing with length x width x height details.

Which is a long winded way of saying you're probably not going to be able to find a definitive answer to the question that is (Traveller) universal, with no variations whatsoever. For one thing, there are thousands of mainworlds capable of manufacturing these things locally using local tech. There's going to be SOME variations in how they're dimensioned ... kind of like how not all cars on the road have exactly the same dimensions, but garage sizes to put them into are "relatively standardized" in order to fit MOST ground cars that consumers can buy. Some cars are smaller, some cars are bigger, but they all fit into the same Basic Garage Space™ built into most homes that have a car garage for storing the vehicle indoors. And what Traveller cares about at the starship design on spreadsheet stage of things is tonnage displacement for the vehicle berth, not the literal dimensions of the vehicle that needs to fit inside of that berth.
 
The CT air/raft had a mass of 4,000kg and could be loaded up with 4,000kg and 4 people. it fits in a 3m by 4.5m deck, I estimate a height of 1.5m.
So it's volume is ~1.5 displacement tons.
 
The CT air/raft had a mass of 4,000kg and could be loaded up with 4,000kg and 4 people. it fits in a 3m by 4.5m deck, I estimate a height of 1.5m.
So it's volume is ~1.5 displacement tons.
Heh, by LBB2 standards 4000kg is 4dtons. That early days simplification may be the source of the discrepancy.

I would look at stowing it on its side against a cargo wall if I were trying to game the space issue. Of course it would be a hassle to deploy- unless you mounted it on the entrance ramp/hstch.
 
It's clear to me I have no grasp of how big an air/raft is. Always saw it with 4 seats, figured it was about the size of a Camry.

Never though it was 4000kg in mass. Mind, some of the modern electric trucks are silly heavy too. So, there's that. But I see 4000kg and think "pretty big" since vehicle are mostly "empty boxes".
 
An Air/Raft is not larger than a G/Carrier.
Except that if you accept the Book 6 G/Carrier at 33m3 (copied below) and the referenced Air/Rafts at 40m3, then it is.
1730577903713.png
The ref (clipped for space) from
Somehow the math is not matching the visual nor the original entries. Someone, somewhere is changing the math somehow.
makes clear that MgT1 ingored CT when it designed Book 6 vehicles. I think I will just have to consider the Book 6 designs as mislabelled.
 
Except that if you accept the Book 6 G/Carrier at 33m3 (copied below) and the referenced Air/Rafts at 40m3, then it is.
...
makes clear that MgT1 ingored CT when it designed Book 6 vehicles. I think I will just have to consider the Book 6 designs as mislabelled.
Book 6 seems closer to CT Striker and MT, than CT LBB3. Not exactly unprecedented...
 
Back
Top