Why wouldanyone want a Type-Y?

[Grav_Moped]

...
Since the Expanse has no artificial grav plate tech, everything is a tailsitter, even this yacht.

You say that like it's a bad thing?

 

[Grav_Moped]

1. With Expansionist ship performance, for me it's less the lack of artificial gravity, which can be duplicated with constant acceleration, and is probably the principal reason for the high rise deck lay out, but getting there in a hurry.

2. Altering volume is more an issue when it changes requirements, like the border between jump worthy and bridge size.

LBB2 cares deeply about tonnage break-points. Add a 1Td drop tank to a Type S and it's only J1/1G -- and the power plant fuel burn rate gets cut in half. Delete one turret from a Type A and it no longer needs an engineer since it's 199.5Td (yeah, that's a referee call, but the rules specifically say 200 tons or more...)

The drive performance and fuel burn rate are artifacts of the construction rule system, but they're explicitly stated. The turret thing? Referee decision, since there's no rule about how much of a turret is supposed to stick out of the hull.

 

[robject]

LBB2 cares deeply about tonnage break-points. Add a 1Td drop tank to a Type S and it's only J1/1G -- and the power plant fuel burn rate gets cut in half. Delete one turret from a Type A and it no longer needs an engineer since it's 199.5Td (yeah, that's a referee call, but the rules specifically say 200 tons or more...)

That's true -- the rules are explicit and clear on starship size boundaries.

On the other hand, CT deckplans are quite fluid. T5's Book 2 rules reflect those sensibilities, perhaps.

 

[Grav_Moped]

You say that like it's a bad thing?

Back in the late '70s and early '80s, it wasn't just movie and television SF spaceships that were belly-landers -- the cutting-edge Space Shuttle was too.

Now, the most advanced real-world spaceships (Space-X) are tailsitters (as well as those in The Expanse).

Maybe it's time to rethink our imaginary starships?

 

[Grav_Moped]

That's true -- the rules are explicit and clear on starship size boundaries.

On the other hand, CT deckplans are quite fluid. T5's Book 2 rules reflect those sensibilities, perhaps.

Possibly so. I think there's a slight conceptual difference between a 1-2Td pop-up turret and a 10Td extensible lounge. The latter puts you on a slippery slope to collapsible external tanks which will seriously screw up the assumptions underlying Traveller.

On the other hand, size the drives for it and it's fine -- or use a rules set with a mass-based maneuver drive instead of a volume-based one.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Delete one turret from a Type A and it no longer needs an engineer since it's 199.5Td (yeah, that's a referee call, but the rules specifically say 200 tons or more...)

No not at all. Turrets takes no space, so adding or deleting one does not affect ship tonnage either way.

Only the necessary fire control equipment takes up a Dt inside the hull.

 

[Grav_Moped]

And I'm sort of gravitating to the idea of sending the yacht on ahead, then taking a fast-mover to meet it at the destination. The basic version of this is to take a Type S, ditch the air/raft and add 1.5 staterooms leaving 1Td cargo. Carries 4 high passengers; the crew of pilot, steward, and gunner are in double occupancy. Lower-status members of the entourage take the slow ride out on the yacht, or you put all passengers on Medical Fast Drug so they don't notice the overcrowding when they're double-bunked.

Getting J3/3G in 199Td (LBB2 '81) still leaves a fair amount of passenger space, assuming you're willing to go with a custom hull.

J4/2G in the same hull gets a bit more cozy and requires bending (breaking) fuel rules (30Td instead of 40Td PP fuel: this exploits the narrow Yacht Loophole interpretation, further justified by amortizing the TCS power-down rule).

Rationales:

Spoiler:

The Yacht Loophole is based on the fact that the Type Y can do 2 jumps on its 4-week power plant fuel allocation (plus jump fuel, of course).

Broad interpretation: The two jumps are at the standard 2-week cadence (1 week in jump, one week on-world); thus, it legally can jump with only two weeks of fuel on board for the second jump. Therefore, starships only really need two weeks of power plant fuel, not four. (This isn't being used here.)

Narrow interpretation: The two jumps are only ever back-to-back jumps (2J1 substituting for 1J2); thus, the minimum power plant fuel requirement is for two weeks plus time spent in jump. Therefore, ships that can only jump once only need three weeks of fuel, not four. (This is what's being exploited here.)

The power-down rule found in Trillion Credit Squadron and Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society #14 allows ships to reduce their power plant output, thereby consuming fuel at the lower Pn rate rather than the rate corresponding to full output. As written, this requires powering down for an entire month to get the lower fuel burn rate. The amortized interpretation of this would allow dividing that into weeks, so each week's fuel burn is at the highest Pn used during that week. In the case of a J4/2G ship, it would only need Pn=4 for the week duration of Jump, and be at Pn=2 for the rest of any voyage. Under LBB2 power plant fuel rules, that'd be 10Td fuel burned during a J4, and 5Td per week (Pn=2) outside of jump. A 30Td allocation would then last 5 weeks. (This is additional justification for being allowed to use the narrow Yacht Loophole; or, taken on its own, would allow having only 25Td power plant fuel.)

You don't have to like it. It's ok. And if you don't, the J3/3G version works just fine.

Long story short, maximizing either the Yacht Loophole or the Amortized TCS Powerdown Loophole alone would allow even less than the 30Td of power plant fuel. I'm not going all the way there because it's not necessary. The design works as desired with only 10Td rules-lawyered into existence; I don't need the other 5-10Td that pushing for the most extreme interpretations would provide.

And yeah, it'd be ridiculously easy using High Guard. I'm deliberately choosing not to use it.

 

[Grav_Moped]

No not at all. Turrets takes no space, so adding or deleting one does not affect ship tonnage either way.

Only the necessary fire control equipment takes up a Dt inside the hull.

Canonical deck plans show otherwise.

EDIT: I consider this a referee decision, which can go either way depending on the needs of the campaign.

EDIT 2: For example, a single player running a Type A Free Trader with one player character (as the pilot single-handed), sure, I'll let it be 199.5Td unarmed or with a single turret (but only if it's sandcasters -- anything else needs to be aimed by a gunner)*. I wouldn't give the same deal to a party with several PCs who just don't feel like paying for an engineer's salary.

EDIT 3: *Another way to do this is to provide an NPC engineer. This also provides an in-universe way to communicate with the PC (that is, instead of the referee talking to the player, he/she can use the NPC to talk to the PC in character so as to not break immersion).

 

[robject]

And I'm sort of gravitating to the idea of sending the yacht on ahead, then taking a fast-mover to meet it at the destination.

I would TOTALLY do this. I mean, there's no reason NOT to.


SETUP: Sharik and Rejnaldi decide to visit Vland. They make plans to head out next quarter. Rejnaldi buys them passage aboard a Clipper, direct from Regina to Vland (SHAMELESS PLUG: Xboat No. 3, page 9, Feature: Clipper Ship Service by Marc Miller). Clippers move very fast without long layovers and no transfers, so their trip was luxurious and (relatively speaking) quick.



Sharik: "Hey, that's your yacht, isn't it?"

Rejnaldi: "Yep, the Screaming Valour, ready to go."

Sharik: "But... when did it get here? Uh, did it get here AHEAD OF US?"

Rejnaldi (chuckling): "Yeah, I sent it ahead as priority cargo via Imperiallines freighter."

Sharik: "That must have cost a lot of money."

Rejnaldi: "Dunno. I guess."



WHY NOT RENT A YACHT WHEN YOU GET THERE?

Because you're missing the point of a Yacht: to a noble, it's not a ship, it's (almost like) equipment that you carry with you.

 

[Grav_Moped]

...
WHY NOT RENT A YACHT WHEN YOU GET THERE?

Because you're missing the point of a Yacht: to a noble, it's not a ship, it's (almost like) equipment that you carry with you.

It's a mobile castle.

And if you rent one, there's no telling what surveillance equipment and/or malicious software the rental company or previous renters put on board.

Your ship -- you own it, you control it, you can vet the crew and maintenance personnel. If you're renting it, you may as well just get a hotel suite.

If it's worth traveling light-years to do, it's worth the expense to do it securely.

You could have a luxuriously-appointed 95Td shuttle and just have it shipped around to wherever you were going. It'd serve most of the purpose, but the thing it doesn't do is allow you to leave without having to ask anyone for a ride home.

 

[kilemall]

You say that like it's a bad thing?

You should know better since I had been working on the limited grav plate thing prior to the Expanse coming out. IMTU there is artificial grav but it's limited and so initially tailsitting 1-G is the ONLY grav, later on we get the classic bellysitters (so I can use the classic ship plans if nothing else). If you want full possible G, it's gonna HURT.



Just could be a shock to some brought up on regular old Traveller and decades of Star Trek ship plans.

 

[kilemall]

It's a mobile castle.

And if you rent one, there's no telling what surveillance equipment and/or malicious software the rental company or previous renters put on board.

Your ship -- you own it, you control it, you can vet the crew and maintenance personnel. If you're renting it, you may as well just get a hotel suite.

If it's worth traveling light-years to do, it's worth the expense to do it securely.

You could have a luxuriously-appointed 95Td shuttle and just have it shipped around to wherever you were going. It'd serve most of the purpose, but the thing it doesn't do is allow you to leave without having to ask anyone for a ride home.

That's pretty much the Dune universe, with the Guild acting as gatekeepers to any given world.


They probably don't actually deny transit, they just quote rates that will bankrupt the unfortunates.

 

[Grav_Moped]

You should know better since I had been working on the limited grav plate thing prior to the Expanse coming out. IMTU there is artificial grav but it's limited and so initially tailsitting 1-G is the ONLY grav, later on we get the classic bellysitters (so I can use the classic ship plans if nothing else). If you want full possible G, it's gonna HURT.



Just could be a shock to some brought up on regular old Traveller and decades of Star Trek ship plans.

I'm sort of leaning toward that as the reason for limiting Traveller ship/small craft acceleration. It's not how much thrust you can generate, but how strong an artificial gravity field you can maintain. Doesn't explain why missiles are stuck at 6G though...

And yeah, everybody takes artificial gravity for granted. Give it another decade or two, after enough space tourism for movies and TV to film in free-fall, and visual-format SF from the 1960s to the present will start to feel really dated.